Righteous Anger

[otseng]

This is spawned from The Origin of Good and Evil.

Not "evil", but a source of evil, as the love of money is. Anger, in any form, whether it be righteous or not, is a destructive emotion. Did the anger against your friends and family ever further the love you have for them? Did it ever contribute anything to the relationship? If so, could that same result be achieved through other means?

Can anger ever be good? Is all anger bad? What about righteous anger?

[Corvus]

I believe that anger, by itself, is neither good nor bad. It is neutral. What is good or bad is what follows from the anger.

If, as a result of anger, someone becomes unforgiving and revengeful, that is bad.

However, I believe there are cases in which anger can cause results which are good.

Just a small illustration from a personal example. I brought my kids and my father-in-law to a nearby playground several years ago. As we were all playing, we were speaking in Chinese (with the limited Chinese that I have). Then one black teenager walked by and looked at us and said something along the lines of "Ching chong chu", obviously making fun of us speaking Chinese. I ignored it. Then he came back and did it again. There were two teenagers goading each other to make fun of us. And they did it a third time. By this time, I was getting mad. As we were leaving the park, I calmly walked up to the kids and said (in perfect english) "I know you kids are playing around, but saying things like that isn't a good thing to do. You shouldn't talk like that to other people. Just play it cool, alright?" They didn't really say much after that, but I think they learned their lesson. So, hopefully this was one case in which anger helped to reduce racism.

In this case the anger served as a motivation, as I suggested earlier. As a motivation, there are more noble emotions. I passion for enlightening others, for example, which sounds saccharine, but, welll, it's one.

[Guy Trudel]

Who does not get angry?

It appears we were given license to be angry because of God's wrath. If He can be angry, so can we.

Yet if God is angry at His Creation, why?

If He is a perfect Creator, then is not His Creation Perfect? If so, there is nothing to be angry at.

If God - a Perfect Creator, created something corruptible, could that creation be considered perfect? That would be true only if corruptibility were a part of Perfection!

Can Perfection include corruption? How so?

Anger only proves something has gone wrong - my peace is lost. Can God create something that destroys His Perfect Peace which "passeth understanding?"

Can God create beings totally unlike Himself?

Even the Bible says this cannot be: John 3:5-6 “Verily I say unto thee, except a man be born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the Kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is Spirit.”

According to this, if we are not Spirit, then we are not children of God.

But what about this - John 3:13 “And no man has ascended unto Heaven, but he that has descended out of Heaven, even the son of man, who is in heaven.”

If we descended out of Heaven - as Jesus did - we must have been Spirits!

Is it possible we are each the prodigal son, squandering our inheritance as Eternal Spirit Beings and going on a journey into flesh in becoming Adam who fell asleep? (nowhere does the Bible say Adam woke up)

Is it not possible that God creates only Perfect Immortal Beings - in His Image and Likeness - and we wanted to "descend" into form to experience being separate individuals rather than being One?

Perhaps we BE perfect in Truth but dream as Adam of dividing into billions of mortal beings.

What is the "Truth" that sets us free - God created something wrong invoking His wrath - enough to be the world's greatest mass murderer?

Or is the "Truth" Jesus teaches that we ARE Perfect in Reality but threw away what we were given in our creation to embark on a journey away from our Father's House?

Is all that is required to simply respond to our Father's call and to return to where we believe we left to a feast of celebration and reclaim our inheritance we never really lost?

The Truth must be that either God withheld His gifts from us when He created us or that He gave us Everything He has and Is. Which do we prefer to believe? Which suit us best?

Matt 5:48 “Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father which is in Heaven is perfect.”

[cookiesusedunderprotest]

But I can't think of why [God] should get angry. Anger is the result of strong dissatisfaction with a circumstance or outcome. It is usually the result of failed hopes or expectations. That God could be angry as a response to something he has always known about seems strange to me.

Well, this borders on a sovereign will of God versus free will of man debate, but the Bible indicates that God has emotions in response to the choices we make. Though not a perfect analogy, perhaps it would help to think of it this way: Any parent knows that at one point or another, regardless of the time, place, or circumstances, someone will commit an injustice against their child; it may not be severe, but it'll happen notetheless. Yet when it happens, a parent wouldn't be expected to be apathetic because they expected it. Rather the parent would be expected to be sympathetic toward the child and indignant toward whoever committed the injustice.

Expected? I'm not entirely sure I understand. That they are expected to do something implies that it's mainly for appearances that they are doing it.

Sorry if I was unclear. By expected, I meant what I would think you or I, if we were observing the parent, would expect. Since I was trying to provide an understanding, to a very limited degree of course, of God's reactions, I was trying to present the analogy from the point of our understanding of the parents' reactions. I didn't mean to imply that a parent should react to such a situation merely based on the expectations or opinions of others around them.

If this is not what you mean, and by "expected" you mean "should naturally react", then I would say if the action to which they are reacting was entirely known, they would be resigned to its outcome.

But I'm not sure that our actions are "entirely" known by God in the way that we would think about it. (Just don't tell any Inquisitors that I said that ) Don't get me wrong; I certainly believe that God is omniscient. However, I think that we tend to think of knowledge as a dichotomy: you either know something or you don't. But I think that God's knowledge is more complex than that; I believe He has the ability to know something and yet still not foresee it emotionally. After all, why else would choose to do create mankind when He knew we would rebel against Him? The Bible also talks about God "changing His mind", seemingly indicating that there is some flexibility in what can happen in the future, even from God's perspective.

I say all that to say that while an event never takes God by suprise intellectually, He is still fully affected emotionally by our thoughts and actions. And when an injustice is committed, God, who is righteous, feels anger. I think anger is the natural emotional response to injustice. But I think that God's anger is directed more towards the sin that was committed than toward those who did the sinning. Furthermore, I think that anger, at least human anger, towards a person breeds hate.

[Corvus]

But I can't think of why [God] should get angry. Anger is the result of strong dissatisfaction with a circumstance or outcome. It is usually the result of failed hopes or expectations. That God could be angry as a response to something he has always known about seems strange to me.

Well, this borders on a sovereign will of God versus free will of man debate, but the Bible indicates that God has emotions in response to the choices we make. Though not a perfect analogy, perhaps it would help to think of it this way: Any parent knows that at one point or another, regardless of the time, place, or circumstances, someone will commit an injustice against their child; it may not be severe, but it'll happen notetheless. Yet when it happens, a parent wouldn't be expected to be apathetic because they expected it. Rather the parent would be expected to be sympathetic toward the child and indignant toward whoever committed the injustice.

Expected? I'm not entirely sure I understand. That they are expected to do something implies that it's mainly for appearances that they are doing it.

Sorry if I was unclear. By expected, I meant what I would think you or I, if we were observing the parent, would expect. Since I was trying to provide an understanding, to a very limited degree of course, of God's reactions, I was trying to present the analogy from the point of our understanding of the parents' reactions. I didn't mean to imply that a parent should react to such a situation merely based on the expectations or opinions of others around them.

I see, and I didn't really think you did. But with the example given, I really couldn't understand the motives of the parents.

If this is not what you mean, and by "expected" you mean "should naturally react", then I would say if the action to which they are reacting was entirely known, they would be resigned to its outcome.

But I'm not sure that our actions are "entirely" known by God in the way that we would think about it. (Just don't tell any Inquisitors that I said that )

Scout's honour.

Don't get me wrong; I certainly believe that God is omniscient. However, I think that we tend to think of knowledge as a dichotomy: you either know something or you don't. But I think that God's knowledge is more complex than that; I believe He has the ability to know something and yet still not foresee it emotionally. After all, why else would choose to do create mankind when He knew we would rebel against Him? The Bible also talks about God "changing His mind", seemingly indicating that there is some flexibility in what can happen in the future, even from God's perspective.

Something I too have noticed. But is it really a conflict of factual knowledge with... er...emotional experience? I have to express my doubts (from an agnostic, that's hardly suprising, is it?). It would mean the "God outside time" theory would be wrong, since if he were outside time, he should not be subject to these clear examples of cause and effect and experiencing the emotions after an event.

That one is capable of having everything except emotional foresight strikes me as a little... imperfect?

I say all that to say that while an event never takes God by suprise intellectually, He is still fully affected emotionally by our thoughts and actions. And when an injustice is committed, God, who is righteous, feels anger. I think anger is the natural emotional response to injustice.

Just a digression: I think it is the natural emotional response only if the person experiencing the injustice is one to whom we can relate. I need not say that slavery has been a part of western - and near eastern - culture for centuries. From de Nerval's book I gathered that, at least in the region he visited, Islam forbid the taking of "white" slaves. When we can relate to the victim, we express anger that the injustice may be made towards us or people like us because we can empathise with them. Or perhaps it's less selfish, and more of a protection and preservation of the tribe thing.

But I think that God's anger is directed more towards the sin that was committed than toward those who did the sinning.

Furthermore, I think that anger, at least human anger, towards a person breeds hate.

Yes, I agree. Unless it serves as a motivating factor for a good deed. To which I then must ask, how do we judge a person, by their intent, or by their deeds? Good things can come accidently from evil intentions, bad things from good ones. I say it's a combination of both, but that's for a separate topic.

[NuclearTBag]

Everyone has the inaliable right to be pissed off at what ever they want to be pissed at. Anger is not a bad things, if you kill someone out of anger, is the anger the bad guy or the murder? There is plenty of good people that get pissed off daily. Anger is not a bad thing, neither is malcontempt. Wanting to kill someone is a bad thing. Hatered is not a bad thing either, not liking someone does not make you a bad person

[Amadeus]

Anger can lead to action. When anger is diracted in the right direction, many GOOD things can come out of it.

[BALLS2WALL]

I don't know if anyone mentioned this because I am to tired to read but remember when Jesus got angry in the temple and flipped the tables and what not?

[Amadeus]

Yep. I thought that was a pretty cool scene!

[ST88]

This would be a good time to bring up the rule about one-liners:

9. No unconstructive one-liners posts are allowed in debates (Do not simply say "Ditto" or "I disagree" in a post. Such posts add little value to debates).
Please use PM for such posts.

[Amadeus]

Sorry