Michelle wrote:
I appreciate your balanced and nuanced approach to this matter.
Matt, I agree with Michelle and appreciate your responses!
I would completely agree that all anger needs to be put away. But some of it needs to be put away in a positive sense and some in a negative sense. In other words, using the previously mentioned scenario, if I find out a great injustice has been done against a child, my natural (and wholesome) emotion will be anger. But I can 'put away' this anger by contacting the appropriate authorities!
Matt, I think what you’re saying here makes sense but I'm not sure if one could make a biblical case for it.
I said,
Matt, I've actually heard people say that if you don't experience righteous anger then you are spiritually deficient somehow.
you replied
I could understand a context in which that quote is correct. A lot of Christians are quite apathetic/indifferent to injustice around them and throughout the world. It is appropriate to be angry about injustice. The key, of course, is what we do with the emotion of anger.
I asked
Also, if righteous anger is well, righteous, why shouldn't it be encouraged?
you replied
If it is appropriate, it should be. But the encourager would have to be wise enough to lead those he's encouraging into a proper response to the appropriate emotion.
Other than following Jesus’ example (which I’ll get to) what biblical authority is there for us to encourage anger in such a fashion?
As I recall, Paul said some pretty nasty things to some of his adversaries as well (and I'm not just talking about the pre-Christian Paul either). "As for those agitators, I wish they would go the whole way and emasculate themselves!" You don't think that sounds like Paul is angry at the agitators?
Yes Matt, I would agree that a good case could be made that Paul was angry. Although, as I’m sure you’d agree, we don’t know the true emotional state of Paul at the time.
I've listened to the sermon now (finally!)
Thanks for taking the time Matt! I’m sure you’re a busy person.
1. Even he leaves room for appropriate anger (though not as much as I think is necessary). He stated, early on, that anger is an emotion of judgment and that WHEN IT IS UNFILTERED, it's an emotion that is inappropriate. He then went on to preach about that KIND of anger that is unfiltered. I completely agree with his rejection of the kind of anger he's talking about. I just think it'd be a bit more thorough to admit that he's only talking about that kind of anger. Later statements make this point even more confusing b/c he speaks in all inclusive terms 'anger is always a bad thing' and whatnot.
. He waffles a bit on the connection of anger to judgment. He makes statements that anger is always wrong and judgment is always wrong, but then he nuances the 'judgment' part by saying that there are times when it is appropriate to judge (in certain ways). He knows this is an important point so he goes back to it at least twice. I submit that he just didn't nuance 'anger' as well as he did 'judgment.'
I would tend to agree, but I will say that the distinction and nuance wasn’t missed by anyone in our discussion group. He could have been clearer though.
5. His response to the first text question is too dismissive. As I responded to Michelle, nobody is saying anger is the ONLY emotion that can motivate us to action in certain situations (nor was the texter saying that). We are just saying that anger is sometimes appropriately present and can be a motivator toward a good action. We are complex beings, we can experience anger, sadness, compassion at the same time over the same event. And we can respond appropriately to those emotions. It's sorta silly to pick out 1 of those emotions and say it is wrong. It's just an emotion. Anger may be more often mis-used, but that doesn't make it wrong as an emotion.
I see the question more as, is anger
needed as a motivation or is it something to be put away.
3. As Homer and I have said, it's not enough just to say that Jesus is God and so His anger is justified. Jesus is fully human and so his anger was fully human. What's more, people are Spirit filled and therefore sometimes (hopefully often) share in the very character of God.
Matt, I think this is your strongest case for a Christian to express righteous anger. Here’s my question though. If Jesus is our example in regards to anger, do you think we should be showing demonstrative anger in the same way Jesus did? I’m not aware of an example in the bible where a Christian is doing something akin to turning over tables. Is there a non-biblical scenario you could point to and say it was an example of righteous anger in a Christian?
6. His response to the 2nd question was too dismissive. Yes, there is a difference b/w the two covenants, but I hardly think it is appropriate to just sweep away any example of 'righteous anger' in the OT!
Yes, I think he was too dismissive as well. One thing you may want to know is he has addressed the distinction of OT and NT quite often. Since non-Christians can ask questions as well, he almost always gets asked things like “Well what about God in OT who encouraged killing etc etc…”. In other words he has covered his thoughts on the distinctions many times before.
That being said, I do think there is a distinction between the two covenants. I think we have, in a sense, “turned our swords into plowshares” and physical armour has now become spiritual armour. I do think there is a distinction in how we treat others now (under the new covenant).
Thanks again for listening and sharing Matt! I value your input.