Getting Angry

[RedDuke50]

How you reached that conclusion is rather amazing, considering the responses you received.

I’m sorry. Sometimes I guess I can be pretty blind and unintelligent.

 

[JRKH]

Getting angry would not be considered a sin provided it’s just and constructive…I mean even Jesus got angry at the money changers in the temple. Booted those guys right out!
Jesus:nunchuk:
Money changer :stretcher:

Wrong.

Jesus action at the temple was not the result of anger but zeal. It was a carefully thought out action designed toward two specific goals. The fulfillment of prophecy and to elicit a response from the Jews and the Jewish leadership. This was not the action of an “angry” person.

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

The only thing I might respond with is that, in a fallen world where evil exists, anger, in the right context, properly motivated and properly expressed, may well be an act of love. The problem is that the anger we usually encounter or experience ourselves is generally rage, often senseless or at least with little reason behind it. I think the case could be made that it might be sinful to not be angry in certain situations-related to a sin of omission coming from complacency or fear, perhaps. JMO

I believe that in these discussions we may actually have differing ideas of what constitutes anger. Also, as we have seen there is a difference between being angry about something and being angry at someone.

I decided to look up Anger on Dictionary.com and found this definition:
a strong feeling of displeasure and belligerence aroused by a wrong; wrath; ire.
(Bolding mine)
To me it is this “and belligerence” (directed at another person) that “sticks in my craw” and I think that you hit on it when you speak of rage as what we most often experience (the acting out) from anger.
When we have a desire to strike out at another, an attitude of belligerence toward another, that is where sin lies, for no person would wish for his neighbor to be belligerent towards him (Do unto others…)

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

“Making a whip out of some cord, he drove them out of the Temple, cattle and sheep
as well, scattering the money changers’ coins, knocking their tables over, …” (Jn 2:15)

If an independent non christian was shown the above passage, and I asked them if this
man was angry, what do you think they would say?

Just a thought. What do you think?​

“A time for war, and a time for peace.” Old Testament

The non-christian, shown a single passage is very likely to understand it wrong.
If an independent non-Christian were shown the single passage saying that, “if your eye causes you to sin pluck it out”, and you asked them if this sounds like a good teaching, what would they say?

As I have said before, Jesus had been to the temple on a number of occasions. Why did He not deal with it until passion week?
I believe the answer is that He was not acting our of anger but by design. To fulfill prophecy and to elicit a response.

Peace
James

 

[fred_conty]

The non-christian, shown a single passage is very likely to understand it wrong.
If an independent non-Christian were shown the single passage saying that, “if your eye causes you to sin pluck it out”, and you asked them if this sounds like a good teaching, what would they say?

As I have said before, Jesus had been to the temple on a number of occasions. Why did He not deal with it until passion week?
I believe the answer is that He was not acting our of anger but by design. To fulfill prophecy and to elicit a response.

Peace
James

There is a difference between an actual human event and an annology. If this was explained to the non christian, I believe they would understand.
And then I would repeat the question I asked them before which you graciously dodged.

Just a thought. What do you think?

 

[fhansen]

I believe that in these discussions we may actually have differing ideas of what constitutes anger. Also, as we have seen there is a difference between being angry about something and being angry at someone.

I decided to look up Anger on Dictionary.com and found this definition:
a strong feeling of displeasure and belligerence aroused by a wrong; wrath; ire.
(Bolding mine)
To me it is this “and belligerence” (directed at another person) that “sticks in my craw” and I think that you hit on it when you speak of rage as what we most often experience (the acting out) from anger.
When we have a desire to strike out at another, an attitude of belligerence toward another, that is where sin lies, for no person would wish for his neighbor to be belligerent towards him (Do unto others…)

Peace
James

I agree-that makes sense. I think what I’m getting at is that things like righteous indignation or moral outrage are healthy reactions to injustices and aren’t necessarily the kind of anger we need to shy away from- these can be very powerful-and even positive and productive-emotions.

 

[Simpleton]

Wrong.

Jesus action at the temple was not the result of anger but zeal. It was a carefully thought out action designed toward two specific goals. The fulfillment of prophecy and to elicit a response from the Jews and the Jewish leadership. This was not the action of an “angry” person.

Peace
James

Wait so zeal can in no way be righteous anger? I find that odd since zeal can be righeous jealousy, Deuteronomy 6:15. Is all anger a sin JRKH?

 

[JRKH]

There is a difference between an actual human event and an analogy. If this was explained to the non christian, I believe they would understand.
And then I would repeat the question I asked them before which you graciously dodged.

Just a thought. What do you think?

I did not mean to dodge your question. The obvious answer from the independent non-Christian would be that the person was angry (or insane) and even enraged.

You say above that there is a difference between an event and an analogy and I agree, but if a passage is taken out of the full context of the Gospels it can be misunderstood and require additional explanation. We actually see this regularly here.

If your non-Christian is shown the cleansing of the temple (deducing anger) and then shown the other teachings of Christ against anger and commanding Love, he would find himself confused and, just as you say about the analogy, would need additional explanation to understand that what appears on the surface as “anger” in the “cleansing” episode is actually not.

Peace
James

 

[Simpleton]

I did not mean to dodge your question. The obvious answer from the independent non-Christian would be that the person was angry (or insane) and even enraged.

You say above that there is a difference between an event and an analogy and I agree, but if a passage is taken out of the full context of the Gospels it can be misunderstood and require additional explanation. We actually see this regularly here.

If your non-Christian is shown the cleansing of the temple (deducing anger) and then shown the other teachings of Christ against anger and commanding Love, he would find himself confused and, just as you say about the analogy, would need additional explanation to understand that what appears on the surface as “anger” in the “cleansing” episode is actually not.

Peace
James

Could you show me where Jesus says anger is a sin?

 

[fred_conty]

I did not mean to dodge your question. The obvious answer from the independent non-Christian would be that the person was angry (or insane) and even enraged.

You say above that there is a difference between an event and an analogy and I agree, but if a passage is taken out of the full context of the Gospels it can be misunderstood and require additional explanation. We actually see this regularly here.

If your non-Christian is shown the cleansing of the temple (deducing anger) and then shown the other teachings of Christ against anger and commanding Love, he would find himself confused and, just as you say about the analogy, would need additional explanation to understand that what appears on the surface as “anger” in the “cleansing” episode is actually not.

Peace
James

In fairness to the non-christian, I beleive he is having words put in his mouth.

If it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, and looks like a duck…

This of course is not about whether anger is right or wrong.
Just asking the question, what does it look like?

Just a thought. What do you think?

 

[JRKH]

I agree-that makes sense. I think what I’m getting at is that things like righteous indignation or moral outrage are healthy reactions to injustices and aren’t necessarily the kind of anger we need to shy away from- these can be very powerful-and even positive and productive-emotions.

Agreed. And “righteous indignation or moral outrage” are thing that are directed toward an object rather than a person, though personalities can become heavily tied up in these things. This is yet another reason to be careful about keeping anger under control so that we keep our focus on the real problem (the object).

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

Wait so zeal can in no way be righteous anger? I find that odd since zeal can be righeous jealousy, Deuteronomy 6:15. Is all anger a sin JRKH?

Just a note before we go on. I have a really hard time reading your posts because of the font you use.

In the course of this thread, we have determined that anger toward and object can be OK (righteous anger) since it can motivate one to seek redress for a wrong done (particularly toward others)
However, Anger towards persons is not OK. We find nothing in the Gospels that supports anger toward ones neighbor. In fact we find the opposite. We are to treat others as we wish to be treated. We are to forgive, pray for those who harm us, if pressed into service for one mile we are to go two miles and so on.
We are to Love our neighbor as our self for the Love of God.

You asked:
Could you show me where Jesus says anger is a sin?

I believe I did this very early in the thread it is contained in the Sermon on the Mount (Mt 5:21-22)
21 "You have heard that it was said to the men of old, ‘You shall not kill; and whoever kills shall be liable to judgment.’ 22 But I say to you that every one who is angry with his brother shall be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother shall be liable to the council, and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ shall be liable to the hell of fire.
Seems pretty clear to me.

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

In fairness to the non-christian, I beleive he is having words put in his mouth.

Well - until we have an actual "independent non-Christian to speak for himself, I guess we are stuck with putting words in his mouth……

If it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, and looks like a duck…

It may walk and quack and look like a duck is it an angry duck?

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTcltu7-_94QtCIrb6fQJfJzaMoY0h57DBYrLCUsadmSLOpSOaDxg

This of course is not about whether anger is right or wrong.
Just asking the question, what does it look like?

Just a thought. What do you think?

I think it is better not to judge by appearances. Especially when trying to determine the possible sin of another.

What do you think?

Peace
James

 

[John7]

However, Anger towards persons is not OK. We find nothing in the Gospels that supports anger toward ones neighbor.

Jesus got angry with some of his Jewish neighbors see post 34

Mark 3:5 And when he had looked round about on them with anger, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts…"

or doesn’t that count

 

[Jkimbo]

I see anger as twofold. Any one who says they do not get angry is a liar. We all get angry. The difference is what we do with that anger. Do we feed it, nourish it, or do we dispense it as quickly as possible and let it go?

We can get angry for different reasons too. Some good, some bad. For example, if your child runs in to the street and almost gets hit by a car, your emotions can get the best of you, and you might at the spur of the moment yell at your child and then quickly love him for being safe. A bad reason would be if some one cut you off on the highway and you cursed him in anger. Any one who can not see there is a difference in the types of anger and how we handle them is in serious trouble indeed! We need to look at this objectively, of course there will be times we get angry for understandable reasons. We simply must not harbor that feeling or allow it to take control of us.

 

[fred_conty]

Well - until we have an actual "independent non-Christian to speak for himself, I guess we are stuck with putting words in his mouth……

It may walk and quack and look like a duck is it an angry duck?

http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTcltu7-_94QtCIrb6fQJfJzaMoY0h57DBYrLCUsadmSLOpSOaDxg

I think it is better not to judge by appearances. Especially when trying to determine the possible sin of another.

What do you think?

Peace
James

How is that judging the possible sin of another?
I said that this is not about right or wrong(sin).
I asked what this scene looked like to a non-christian to get an unbiased opinion.
Being human, is to know emotions.
This is about an opinion. Nothing more and nothing less.
This is not about morals.
And the question still stands, what do you think it looks like?

Just a thought. What do you think?

 

[JRKH]

Jesus got angry with some of his Jewish neighbors see post 34

Mark 3:5 And when he had looked round about on them with anger, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts…"

or doesn’t that count

Thank you for the references.
I shall consider them

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

I see anger as twofold. Any one who says they do not get angry is a liar. We all get angry. The difference is what we do with that anger. Do we feed it, nourish it, or do we dispense it as quickly as possible and let it go?

Well Put.

We can get angry for different reasons too. Some good, some bad. For example, if your child runs in to the street and almost gets hit by a car, your emotions can get the best of you, and you might at the spur of the moment yell at your child and then quickly love him for being safe. A bad reason would be if some one cut you off on the highway and you cursed him in anger. Any one who can not see there is a difference in the types of anger and how we handle them is in serious trouble indeed! We need to look at this objectively, of course there will be times we get angry for understandable reasons. We simply must not harbor that feeling or allow it to take control of us.

Agreed.

I think that the thing that bothers me about these discussions is how anger seems to be defended, when other emotions such as a lustful arousal are not.
Let’s consider how most of us respond to a person who asks a question about unbidden lustful thoughts or am emotional (even physical) reaction to some “sexy” (name removed by moderator)ut.
Every one of us will say, just as you do above, "The initial thought or reaction is not sinful but as soon as it moves from “unconscious reaction” into “conscious action” one needs to squelch the thoughts immediately.
So Why should anger be different.

Anger is listed as one of the seven deadly sins (Pride, Anger, Lust, Envy, Gluttony, Greed, Sloth). Yet I have never seen any of these other sins defended in the way that some try to defend Anger.

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

How is that judging the possible sin of another?
I said that this is not about right or wrong(sin).
I asked what this scene looked like to a non-christian to get an unbiased opinion.
Being human, is to know emotions.
This is about an opinion. Nothing more and nothing less.
This is not about morals.
And the question still stands, what do you think it looks like?

Just a thought. What do you think?

I have answered your question as to what it looks like. But what something looks like may not be what it actually is.

Consider an actor who displays anger for the purpose of the performance. he is not angry in his heart, but rather is displaying the externals of anger for the benefit of the play.
Consider a parent who is stern with their child, scolding and perhaps even spanking, or otherwise punishing. The child will see “anger” for the externals are there. Yet the parent is not truly angry and in a very short time will return to hug and kiss their child.

Thus, while the actions of our Lord might appear to others to be out of anger, the actual reason might be different.

Peace
James

 

[JRKH]

Jesus got angry with some of his Jewish neighbors see post 34

Mark 3:5 And when he had looked round about on them with anger, being grieved for the hardness of their hearts…"

or doesn’t that count

John,
I have given the passages you reference some prayerful consideration and must admit to being somewhat perplexed by the passage in Mark.

The thing that perplexes me is WHY Jesus looked upon them with anger…

(Mk 3:5) * And he looked around at them with anger, grieved at their hardness of heart… *

I just don’t normally associate “Anger” with being “Grieved”.

Perhaps, as different ones have pointed out, there are different aspect to anger and the ones that I think of are different from the ones that others think of.
When I hear the word Anger as in, “He was angry”, I think of hostility, belligerence, desire to lash out either verbally or physically and hurt another. In other words, anger makes me think of only negative aspects and outputs.

There are other things that may be parcel of this that I do not think of when I hear the word anger. For example I don’t think, “determination” or “grief”, or courage being associated with anger.

Lastly, in relation to the quote of St Paul’s from Ephesians (be angry but don’t let the sun go down on your anger…)
As I was looking up some more information on this matter I found This in Col 3:1-15.
The relevant gist being:
1 If then you have been raised with Christ…2 Set your minds on things that are above, not on things that are on earth…5 Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: fornication, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry…8…anger, wrath, malice, slander, and foul talk from your mouth…12 Put on then, as God’s chosen ones, holy and beloved, compassion, kindness, lowliness, meekness, and patience, 13 forbearing one another and, if one has a complaint against another, forgiving each other; as the Lord has forgiven you, so you also must forgive. 14 And above all these put on love, which binds everything together in perfect harmony. 15 And let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, to which indeed you were called in the one body. And be thankful.

So - Why does Paul give the Ephesians permission to be angry (but only till sunset, and yet tell the Colossians to but it away from them?

I think this is why I just stick to Love as the guiding principle…The rest is too hard to figure out and possibly stumble…

Peace
James