Did Paul Disagree With Jesus About Anger?


#41

As God Jesus has rights and prerogatives that His creatures don’t. There are ways we are like God and ways we are not. For example, God (Jesus) says "Vengeance is Mine I will repay. Rather, love your enemy. When I let go and trust God in surrender my frustrations and anger melt away. I use to get angry but I’ve learned to let things go. I have faith in the God who promises to work all my frustrating circumstances together for my good. I’ve surrendered under God’s mighty hand by letting Him have control. I let go and let God. By meditating on who God is letting go comes naturally. As they tell us in A.A. “We will intuitively know how to handle situations that use to baffle us.” There’s more serenity, peace, and love over here. The Bible says when you get angry don’t sin. But we are not to let the sun go down on our wrath. We are to let it go and trust God. Indeed, the beautiful fruits of the Spirit are:

Love, joy, peace, patience, gentleness, kindness, goodness, and self-control.

We love God because He first loved us. God opens up the eyes of our hearts to see and behold His beauty and be transformed by it. When I get angry I turn it over to God. The power to love is the confidence that God will take care of my future.

If we were to live we had to be free of anger. The grouch and the brainstorm were not for us. They may be the dubious luxury of normal men, but for alcoholics these things are poison. - Bill Wilson of Alcoholics Anonymous.

I recommend Richard Beck’s article:

Self-Esteem as violence

experimentaltheology.blogspot.com/2013/09/self-esteem-as-violence.html


#42

Thanks Bob. The issue of anger vs self defacement is of interest. In the today world, Can we be angry and demand certain things while being what the denominational Christians would call being humble?


#43

… man’s anger does not bring about the righteous life that God desires. (James 1:20 NIV)

This is the passage that helped me to put away anger from my life.


#44

But Don, what about the inherent fallibility of the man, God Made man what he is, and I say that God through his Son Christ, took care of that stuff…

Come on man.


#45

No, Chad, God made man what he was, when He created Adam and Eve. Through their own choice, Adam and Eve departed from what they were at their creation, and so all of mankind has departed from what God desires them to be. Anger and other self-serving emotions and choices will not bring about the righteous life that God desires.


#46

Don, you are a pillion of literal bible belief. The Adam and Eve story is simply a story God wanted to prevail to the world to show how He has dealt with creation. I believe Adam as the first person in the story of Israel, and you can go from there.


#47

I think most here might happily agree that anger can be natural and normal, sometimes justifies and probably plenty of times not… but the main thrust for those more aware of God’s grace is to NOT overstep the mark when / if anger arises, i.e., practice self-restraint.


#48

Chad by the same argument, maybe you’re a literalist about the “Jesus story.” Maybe it’s “simply a story God wanted to prevail to the world” to show what kind of people He wanted us to be.


#49

You are being a little unfair, Paidion. Although I, too, accept the Genesis record of man’s and creation’s origins as factual, I see a difference between what had been given to its author in some form of revelation and the accounts provided by eyewitnesses in the gospels of Jesus’ birth, life, death and resurrection.


#50

Well, if my belief in a literal Adam and Ever is correct, there couldn’t have been any eyewitnesses since those two were the only people in existence at the time.


#51

I did not say there were eyewitnesses. I am not that stupid. :brain:


#52

Quote by Paidion:

Chad by the same argument, maybe you’re a literalist about the “Jesus story.” Maybe it’s “simply a story God wanted to prevail to the world” to show what kind of people He wanted us to be.

That could be true. Maybe Jesus did ‘take away the sins of the world’ and that God was a loving Creator, that loved his creation so much that he sent HIS SON… The arguments are many and heated… So maybe God is love… AND LOVE DOES NOT DICTATE YOU TO DO SOMETHING BUT AT SOME POINT IN YOUR LIFE YOU WILL UNDERSTAND that God Loves you and is with you.


#53

Sorry Norm, there was no way I could get around your post without mucking it. Sorry Bro.


#54

Well, first of all, are you saying that is your belief, and second, No one thinks that they where the only ones out there… So if you believe and think that, then Katie bar the door. But it will be fun to wrangle about on this subject. :wink:


#55

I’m not interested in wrangling. I’m interested in facts.

I pointed out that those who believe Adam and Eve didn’t exist as historical personages, could argue on the same basis that Jesus didn’t exist as a historical person.

Invernessian indicated that the two were not equivalent since:

I see a difference between what had been given to its author in some form of revelation and the accounts provided by eyewitnesses in the gospels of Jesus’ birth, life, death and resurrection.

I then indicated that it would be impossible for the two to be logically equivalent since there were no other persons to be eyewitnesses of Adam and Eve. By stating this, Invernessian, I was in no way implying that you are stupid.


#56

One obvious difference – most historians (of the period) believe Jesus really existed as a historical person. The same historical consensus doesn’t exist with Adam and Eve.

If we look at the basics of the Jesus story – there was an itinerant Jewish religious teacher, who taught messianism/apocalypticism, in the process offending the Jewish and Roman authorities, and as a result of that the Romans executed him – it is all very believable, there is nothing even out of the ordinary about the story up to that point. That same basic story was no doubt repeated on many occasions. Of course, then we get to the quite amazing and historically unique part, in which his disciples claim to have seen him alive after his execution. But, even most non-Christian biblical scholars, who don’t believe Jesus actually rose from the dead, still believe his disciples honestly thought that he did – they just attribute that to some other cause (mass hallucination or whatever) instead. There are of course some people who insist Jesus never existed (Christ myth theory), but that isn’t a mainstream theory in ancient history, it is largely a fringe theory, and with few exceptions its proponents are amateurs rather than professionally trained ancient historians.

By contrast, the literal existence of Adam and Eve isn’t a mainstream theory in academic history, it is a fringe theory. So I’d say the historical evidence for the existence of Jesus is a lot lot stronger than the historical evidence for the literal existence of Adam and Eve.


#57

That is a realistic though somewhat skewed view… Adam and Eve where totally necessary to the Genesis account Just as Christ was a necessary and vital part of the Gospel account. You always view scripture as a literal and or some time in the future happening, and then you tie it to those of us living today. Thanks but I see it different.

Christ did in his coming and death and resurrection AND RETURNING, in fact put each and every one of us in a favorite position with the Father.

Now you can argue that fact but what I have put forth still remains a fact.


#58

I think there is scope for viewing Adam as one views King Arthur… there is a grey area between where legend and literality might meet and depart and yet no one knows where exactly that might be. Apart from this, with regards to this story/account, it can in itself be seen as the micro story of Israel, i.e., Adam is Israel. Thus Adam becomes the One chosen (created) out of humanity to represent humanity before God (and vice versa) as priest.

Thus all those in Adam (Israel) were affected by Adam’s error… and so to the degree Adam remained in error to that degree the rest of the world from among whom Adam/Israel was called (created) to minister, remained in darkness as to who their God really was.

IF there were “others” in existence from among whom Adam was taken it then makes sense that Adam would have understood exactly what… “a man shall leave his parents and cling to his wife” actually meant — IOW, how was Adam to understand that apart from his own pre-existing parental context?

Further… HOW was Adam to understand PHYSICAL death IF physical death wasn’t ALREADY a part of his reality?

Again consider, with regards to childbirth… God greatly increases Eve’s pain and sorrow — it is impossible to increase what doesn’t ALREADY exist, i.e., pain and sorrow AND childbirth.


#59

Great points davo.


#60

But were those words spoken to Adam? Are they not the writer’s comments?

Further… HOW was Adam to understand PHYSICAL death IF physical death wasn’t ALREADY a part of his reality?

That seems to make sense. Yet, might Adam not have become aware of physical animal death?