Anger - A sin or a justified response

[Ariel82]

Lol.

If anyone gets the mistaken idea that I do not stand against sin, they have a problem with reading comprehension.

Now I would like to figure out how I can both be accused as a hyper legalist and a supporter of people staying in the sin by the same man?

I doubt I will ever understand that. So instead I will state what I DO BELIEVE:

The Holy Spirit convicts people of sin and shows HOW TO STOP and walk in GOD'S WAYS and not the way of the world.

The world is for evil speaking.

God is for taming the tongue.

 

[PeterJens]

adelphos: a brother
Original Word: ἀδελφός, οῦ, ὁ
Part of Speech: Noun, Masculine
Transliteration: adelphos
Phonetic Spelling: (ad-el-fos')
Short Definition: a brother
Definition: a brother, member of the same religious community, especially a fellow-Christian.

The term against whom anger should not be applied is adelphos or brother.

Now the context is complicated, but it makes sense if Jesus meant a fellow
believer because calling a fellow believer a fool it judging God and His intentions.

Many non-believers are fools and could rightly be described as such.

If one links this all to Jesus's love for his followers, extending anger to be
similar to murder when applied to loving fellow believers makes sense.

Outside this context of knowing God, less so, as the circumstances vary
so very widely.

If I was to talk about anger what about irritation, or annoyance.
And then there is rage. And rage is very dangerous, anger alive and
kicking.

Now I do not have any absolute positions, I just wanted real discussion on this
because for some it is something the condemn themselves about as sinful behaviour
daily, when actually the problem is repressed anger and hyper sensitivity to annoyance.

 

[PeterJens]

As a side point, observations are not accusations.
Breaking down an issue to its implications throws out lots of different issues.

If people take this personally, they are mistaken. The only personal thing about
my comments are the point I am trying to understand from scripture.
How you apply to it your own life is your own affair.

 

[PeterJens]

You assume the crowd was filled with only believers.
.it was not.

It had folks who followed Jesus for various reasons: curiousity, to get healed, steal money (Judas Iscariot), etc.

Let us get real about the gospels. They are a summary which the writer is extracting
from Jesus's statements. So matthew is putting emphasis on believers and anger
for a reason, which we may be reluctant to acknowledge but it is there.

Now I am happy to say anger is wrong, but I am asking is this true?
And when I say anger is wrong, I am talking in specific contexts.

A soldier about to kill another soldier has to be truly angry, but this
is not sinful behaviour, it is what anger is truly for, conflict and survival.

 

[PeterJens]

I have a very bad habit.
I poke fun at certain reactions, and how pompous we can be.

For instance asking a simple question, becomes you mean .... by asking this
because all this ... is happening so .... this is why and this is the real content ....

No. It is a simple question. The rest is reading in. I stopped reading in a long
time ago because it is mostly wrong and pointless. If you find yourself doing this
take a chill pill, go and pray, spend time with God and Christ and know He does love
us all beyond compare, Amen.

By the way, after dealing with diagnosed mentally ill people, for them the intonation
of saying hello means lots of things, which is unfortunately part of their condition and
really nuts. If I was doing DIY a hammer left out was a threat of violence, a chisel
so other terrible thing. You learn quickly to put things away when they are around, lol.

 

[Ariel82]

A solider killing another solider could be filled with sorrow and compassion but doing it to protect a squad mate.they don't have to be killing out of anger.

A policeman faced with the decision to shoot a teenager holding a gun to a classroom filled with people, doesn't need to be angry to pull the trigger.

Nor is anger always wrong. Just giving examples that judging people's inner emotions by outward action isn't accurate,
.emotions are better judged by what a person speaks and their actions combined over time.

 

[Ariel82]

In what context were you "dealing with diagnosed mentally ill people, "

Were you treating them? Being treated? Visiting? Sharing the Gospel?

Where and when did you get all this knowledge about the mentally ill and their behaviors?

 

[Yahweh_is_gracious]

Really I don't chose my emotions.

Just how I respond to them.

Sometimes I don't understand why I feel a certain way because my mind acknowledges it's irrational except it could be hormones. When I was pregnant my emotions were often extremely irrational.

I suppose I can see the reasoning behind your statement. I happen to disagree, but I can see your point.

 

[JohnTalmid]

See that you use grace through and don't bring contentious behavior. At its root is anger. Scripture​says that this causes many to be defiled.

 

[MadebyHim]

A solider killing another solider could be filled with sorrow and compassion but doing it to protect a squad mate.they don't have to be killing out of anger.

A policeman faced with the decision to shoot a teenager holding a gun to a classroom filled with people, doesn't need to be angry to pull the trigger.

Nor is anger always wrong. Just giving examples that judging people's inner emotions by outward action isn't accurate,
.emotions are better judged by what a person speaks and their actions combined over time.

Sounds more like fear than anger. Seems like fear of something arouses anger sometimes.

 

[NoobSaibot]

This is an old post. Yet I needed an opinion regarding my anger. This sums it up nicely for me. Not as an excuse for my sometimes behavior but that I can use this advice. Very good thank you.

 

[Nehemiah6]

In the king james it says angry at a brother without a cause. Makes much more sense.

Jesus got angry, therefore anger cannot be a sin

Right. There is righteous anger and then there is unrighteous or sinful anger. However, all emotions can be controlled, and all emotions arising from "the flesh" can and should be controlled, and replaced with the fruit of the Spirit. But we can be angry and also not sin.

 

[Alertandawake]

I just did a comparison of Mat 5.22 with various translations (this is where bible software apps really come in handy), and am amazed how some translations leave out "without a cause/without cause". Just to note, without cause can also be expressed as without reason, going by strongs concordance, G1500 eike.

 

[PeterJens]

I just did a comparison of Mat 5.22 with various translations (this is where bible software apps really come in handy), and am amazed how some translations leave out "without a cause/without cause". Just to note, without cause can also be expressed as without reason, going by strongs concordance, G1500 eike.

The problem here is the difference in manuscripts which include "without a cause" and those
that do not. They are interpreting the "without a cause" is a scribes addition.

If you take sin as an issue, then surely that would be a justifiable cause, especially if they
refused to repent and resolve the issue.

The problem with anger is the difference between irritation and anger. People often go from
being irritated to being angry without any real justification in between.

 

[Alertandawake]

Leaving aside the differences between some translations, when one has a valid reason, getting angry is a normal emotional response. Another area that can be confusing is the difference between one getting angry and one getting frustrated.

 

[MarcR]

God becomes angry. God does not Sin!

You have your answer.