3 65-94 C5 & 6.pdf

when it happens and will be better prepared to deal with it calmly. Getting angry is a natural human emotion that need not lead us into sin - if we remember that God is a God of justice and we use our anger in a way that honors him (Zavada, 2017). Chap...

when it happens and will be better prepared to deal with it calmly. Getting angry is a natural human emotion that need not lead us into sin - if we remember that God is a God of justice and we use our anger in a way that honors him (Zavada, 2017). Chapters Chapter Outline: This section is a more detailed version of how anger affects society. This includes how it might affect your children, spouse, co-workers, neighbors, etc... There will be examples and how to deal with these problems in this chapter. Effect of Anger on Families Family ties are one of the strongest contributors to individual character development. Many ofus spend years trying to understand, erase, or copy the influence of our family unit. When anger is part of a family's tradition, it spreads itself much like a virus to future generations. The wider the spread, the more difficult the anger is to contain. The effect of anger in families is usually apparent in the way that members relate with one another. Our earliest experiences communicating and relating to others occurs within the family. Patterns of anger in relationships are then taken and recreated in later relationships outside the family. Thankfully, a committed, well-designed treatment plan can repair the damage of having been raised in an angry family system (Bertoch, 2019).  Anger in Relationships Anger is one of the most common negative patterns in relationships. Couples sometimes report that it is their anger that makes the relationship feel alive. Anger takes root in insecure relationships where open communication is absent and the emotion of love is buried beneath years of resentment. There is typically hopelessness in the present and doubt about the future in these relationships. The good news is that individuals committed to improving their relationships through the hard work of therapy are generally rewarded with a renewed sense of hope (Bertoch, 2019). Here are some tips on how to limit anger producing interactions in your relationships: 1. When you have anger toward another person, start with an internal check of your own emotional state. Ask yourself why you feel the way you do. 2. Before feeling attacked or hurt, make an attempt to give others the benefit of the doubt, especially if you have nothing; to lose by doing so. 3. Ask yourself if you have legitimate assumptions about the intentions of others. 4. Keep the lines of communication open. When you feel resentment building, see if you can journal your feelings and then share your thoughts with a loved one. 5. Explore your participation in relationships that repeatedly bring out the worst in you. 6. Always consider individual or family therapy in instances where your anger feels out of control and/or mysterious. 65  How Do I Know If My Family or Loved One Has an Anger Problem? Angry individuals are, in most instances, very aware of their problems in controlling anger. Unfortunately, too many come to accept their anger as an unchangeable part of who they are and feel hopeless to change (Bertoch, 2019). If you feel that you or a loved one may have an anger disorder, look for several of the following symptoms happening in your life on a regular basis: Becoming angrier than is appropriate in regard to mild frustration or irritation. Having feelings of guilt or regret over something that you have said or done in a fit of anger. Repeated social conflict as a result of anger outbursts (law suits, fights, property damage, school suspensions, etc.) Family and/or friends approach you with the concern that you need help managing your anger. Having chronic physical symptoms such as high blood pressure, gastrointestinal, difficulties, or anxiety. Where to Get Help for My Anger Fortunately, the mental health profession has been responsive to individuals seeking 66 treatment for help with anger. Referrals to treiltment programs and services are often available and mandated for those individuals suffering moderate to severe social conflict. Many chronically angry individuals feel shame and guilt about their anger. There may be times when a friend or loved one may need to request help or plan an intervention for the angry individual. In such instances, it is critical to take advantage of mental health professionals with a background in anger management training (Bertoch, 2019). What Kind of Help Will I Get for My Anger? An effective anger management plan can include individual or family therapies, which are some of the more common ways people attempt to deal with chronic anger (Bertoch, 2019). Individual therapy, which explores the root of angry feelings and behavior, is traditionally a safer, more secure option to working with the entire angry family at once. Treatment with individuals helps facilitate a thorough focus on the most important emotions beneath the individual's anger. Family therapy is a powerful way of repairing the damaging effect of long-term anger interactions. Over time, chronic anger drives a wedge between family members, resulting in the members becoming disconnected from one another, or overly involved with one another in an unhealthy manner. Therapy would consider each member's role in the anger interactions, versus assuming any single member is responsible for the family's anger. 67  How Marriage and Family Therapy Helps Control Anger More often than not, chronic anger has a lengthy, definable history. Marriage and family therapists are trained experts in identifying anger patterns that pass from one generation to the next. Identifying these patterns helps to explore individuals' learned perceptions about the appropriateness of anger expression and suppression. Encouraging a parent to share how emotions were expressed in his or her immediate family allows other family members to understand the family's inherited concepts about anger (Bertoch, 2019). Chapter 6 Chapter Outline: 'I'his is another chapter pertaining to questions, targeting questions like, "Does God get angry with us?, What if I get angry with God?, etc... " Many people in this world may experience anger and find that the only solution is it being "God's fault". Saying that it is his job to make all things "right" and "good". Question: "Is it wrong to be angry with God?" Answer: Being angry at God is something that many people, both believers and unbelievers, have wrestled with throughout time. When something tragic happens in our lives, we ask God the question, "Why?" because it is our natural response. What we are really asking Him, though, is not so much "Why, God?" as "Why 68  me, God?" This response indicates two flaws in our thinking. First, as believers we operate under the impression that life should be easy, and that God should prevent tragedy from happening to us. When He does not, we get angry with Him. Second, when we do not understand the extent of God's sovereignty, we lose confidence in His ability to control circumstances, other people, and the way they affect us. Then we get angry with God because He seems to have lost control of the universe and especially control of our lives. When we lose faith in God's sovereignty, it is because our frail human flesh is grappling with our own frustration and our lack of control over events. When good things happen, we all too often attribute it to our own achievements and success. When bad things happen, however, we are quick to blame God, and we get angry with Him for not preventing it, which indicates the first flaw in our thinking-that we deserve to be immune to unpleasant circumstances (Is it Wrong to be Angry with God, 2019). Tragedies bring home the awful truth that we are not in charge. All ofus think at one time or another that we can control the outcomes of situations, but in reality it is God who is in charge of all of His creation. Everything that happens is either caused by or allowed by God. Not a sparrow falls to the ground nor a hair from our head without God knowing about it (Matthew 10:29-31). We can complain, get angry, and blame God for what is happening. Yet if we will trust Him and yield our bitterness and pain to Him, acknowledging the prideful sin of trying to force our own will over His, He can and will grant us His peace and strength to get us through any difficult situation (1 Corinthians 10:13). Many believers in Jesus Christ can testify to that very fact. We can be angry with God for many reasons, so we all have to accept at some point that there are things we cannot control or even understand with our finite minds (Is it 69 Wrong to be Angry with God, 2019). Our understanding of the sovereignty of God in all circumstances must be accompanied by our understanding of His other attributes: love, mercy, kindness, goodness, righteousness, justice, and holiness. When we see our difficulties through the truth of God's Word-which tells us that our loving and holy God works all things together for our good (Romans 8:28), and that He has a perfect plan and purpose for us which cannot be thwarted (Isaiah 14:24, 46:9-10) - we begin to see our problems in a different light. We also know from Scripture that this life will never be one of continual joy and happiness. Rather, Job reminds us that "man is born to trouble as surely as sparks fly upward" (Job 5:7), and that life is short and "full of trouble" (Job 14:1). Just because we come to Christ for salvation from sin does not mean we are guaranteed a life free from problems. In fact, Jesus said, "In this world you will have trouble," but that He has "overcome the world" (John 16:33), enabling us to have peace within, in spite of the storms that rage around us (John 14:27) (Is it Wrong to be Angry with God, 2019). One thing is certain: inappropriate anger is sin (Galatians 5:20; Ephesians 4:26-27, 31; Colossians 3:8). Ungodly anger is self-defeating, gives the devil a foothold in our lives, and can destroy our joy and peace ifwe hang on to it. Holding on to our anger will allow bitterness and resentment to spring up in our hearts. We must confess it to the Lord, and then in His forgiveness, we can release those feelings to Him. We must go before the Lord in prayer often in our grief, anger, and pain. The Bible tells us in 2 Samuel 12:15-23 that David went before the throne of grace on behalf of his sick baby, fasting, weeping, and praying for him to survive. When the baby passed away, David got up and worshipped the Lord and then told his servants that he knew where his baby was and that he would someday be with him in God's presence. David cried out to God during the baby's illness, and afterward he qowed before Him in 70 worship. That is a wonderful testimony. God knows our hearts, and it is pointless to try to hide how we really feel, so talking to Him about it is one of the best ways to handle our grief. If we do so humbly, pouring out our hearts to Him, He will work through us, and in the process, will make us more like Him (Is it Wrong to be Angry with God, 2019). The bottom line is can we trust God with everything, our very lives· and the lives of our loved ones? Of course we can! Our God is compassionate, full of grace and love, and as disciples of Christ we can trust Him with all things. When tragedies happen to us, we know God can use them to bring us closer to Him and to strengthen our faith, bringing us to maturity and completeness (Psalm 34:18; James 1:2-4). Then, we can be a comforting testimony to others (2 Corinthians 1:3-5). That is easier said than done, however. It requires a daily surrendering of our own will to His, a faithful study of His attributes as seen in God's Word, much prayer, and then applying what we learn to our own situation. By doing so, our faith will progressively grow and mature, making it easier to trust Him to get us through the next tragedy that most certainly will take place (Is it Wrong to be Angry with God, 2019). So, to answer the question directly, yes, it is wrong to be angry at God. Anger at God is a result of an inability or unwillingness to trust God even when we do not understand what He is doing. Anger at God is essentially telling God that He has done something wrong, which He never does. Does God understand when we are angry, frustrated, or disappointed with Him? Yes, He knows our hearts and He knows how difficult and painful life in this world can be. Does that make it right to be angry with God? Absolutely not. Instead of being angry with God, we should pour out our hearts to God in prayer and then trust that He is in control and that His plan is perfect (Is it Wrong to be Angry with God, 2019). Question: Is It a Sin to Be Angry with God? 71  Ask 10 Christians if it is a sin to be angry with God, and you'll probably get 10 different answers. There are plenty of people in the Bible who were angry with God. Some of them were so blindly angry they brought about God's wrath. Others expressed their anger and God listened. So, the question may not be if it is a sin to be angry with God, but is it a sin to hold onto that anger so tight that it jeopardizes your relationship with God. Answer: Asking God Why. Being angry with God happens. Most of us don't lived charmed lives where everything that happens is wonderful. Each one ofus will find ourselves in the center of some tragedy from time to time. It is not so uncommon to ask God why these things happen. Sometimes our anger at the situation can turn to being angry with God. Why does God let these things happen? Why did it happen to me? What did I do wrong? What did I do to deserve this? These are all common questions we ask when bad things happen. Yet, it is how we deal with these questions that makes the difference regarding sin and not sin (ls it Wrong to be Angry with God, 2019). When Anger at God Leads to Better Things Can being angry with God be good? Well, shaking your fist at God and holding onto anger is not, but asking the right questions and allowing yourself to find comfort in God's answers can lead to a stronger relationship with Him. It comes from your expectations (Meyer). Throughout the Psalms, David expresses his anger and frustration with God from time to time, but he doesn't let his anger get in the way of his relationship with God. And just as much as he 72 had angry questions for God, he also found his greatest comfort in God. So, ask the questions. Get on your knees and pray for guidance and comfort. Instead ofletting your anger block God, use your anger to let God in. Tell Him everything. Confide in Him your deepest, darkest fears and concerns. He knows them anyhow. He knows your sorrows and counts your tears. You may never get all the answers, but you may just get the comfort you need (Meyer). When Anger at God is Bad Anger with God can lead to a closer relationship with Him if you allow it. Yet, some of us have a hard time letting go of anger. If you find yourself holding a grudge against God, it can lead you to walk away from Him. Yes, bad things happen. They aren't always from God. Yes, he allows bad things to happen...look at Job who suffered horrors while God watched. Yet, look at what happened in the end. Job was rewarded for his faith in the face of suffering, and the Enemy was defeated (Fairchild, 2018). The tragedies in our lives are horrible, but they happen. We don't have all of God's answers. He may not give us the answers, but He always has a reason and a plan. No, that isn't always the thing we want to hear, but you have to ask yourself, how strong is your faith if you walk away because something bad happens. Life isn't perfect, and God never says it is going to be. While we have to work through our pain, we have to remember that God does have a plan, even if we don't always understand, He is always there for us when we need someone to turn to (Fairchild, 2018). 73  It Is Never Right to be Angry with God Recently I said those words to a group of several hundred people: "It is never, ever, ever, right to be angry with God." As I looked out on the people there was an incredulous look on many faces. This was not landing well. Clearly many did not agree. This was confirmed in a question-and-answer time, when one person asked from a microphone, "Would you say something more about not being angry with God? Did you mean to say that it is never right to be angry with God?" (Piper, 2000). My answer was, "Yes, that is what I said. But perhaps you are stumbling over something you think I said which I didn't say. So let me add this: If you are angry with God, it is never right not to tell him so." This made some people scratch their heads again and look more puzzled. It puzzled me that they were puzzled. So I said it again another way: "If you are sinning by being angry with God, don't compound the sin by hypocrisy." The perplexity stayed on many faces. So I said it again: "If you sin by being angry with God, don't add to it the sin of trying to conceal it from him. That would double the offense." (Piper, 2000). Some were obviously tracking with me, but others looked balled. At that point, I left it and went on to another question. But I have been thinking about those balled looks ever since. Why was this so difficult to grasp? What assumptions were out there that made two simple statements so balling? "It's never right to be angry with God." And: "It's never right to hide your anger from him, if you feel it." To me nothing could be more obvious. Why is this so non- controversial to me and so balling to others (Piper, 2000). Here are two possible assumptions that may be common in many heads today, which would make them balk at what I said. First, many assume that feelings are not right or wrong, 74 they are neutral. So to say that anger (whether at God or anybody else) is "not right" is like saying sneezing is not right. You just don't apply the labels right and wrong to sneezing. It just happens to you. That is the way many people think about feelings: they just happen to you. Therefore, they are not moral or immoral; they are neutral. So for me to say that it is never right to be angry with God is to put the feeling of anger in a category where it doesn't belong, the category of morality (Piper, 2000). This kind of thinking about feelings is one of the reasons there is so much shallow Christianity. We think the only things that have moral significance in the world are acts of volition. And we think feelings like desire and delight and frustration and anger are not acts of volition, but waves that break on the shore of our souls with no moral significance. Small wonder that many people do not earnestly seek to be transformed at the level of feelings, but only of "choices." That makes for a very superficial saint (at best). This assumption is contrary to what the Bible teaches. In the Bible, many feelings are treated as morally good and many as morally bad. What makes them good or bad is how they relate to God. If they show that God is true and valuable, they are good, and if they suggest that God is false or foolish or evil, they are bad. For example, delight in the Lord is not neutral, it is commanded (Psalm 37:4). Therefore it is good. But to "take pleasure in wickedness" is wrong (2 Thessalonians 2:12), because it signifies that sin is more desirable than God, which is not true (Piper, 2000). It's the same with anger. Anger at sin is good (Mark 3:5), but anger at goodness is sin. That is why it is never right to be angry with God. He is always and only good, no matter how strange and painful his ways with us. Anger toward God signifies that he is bad or weak or cruel or foolish. None of those is true, and all of them dishonor him. Therefore it is never right to be angry at God. When Jonah and Job were angry with God, Jonah was rebuked by God 75 (Jonah 4:9) and Job repented in dust and ashes (Job 42:6) (Piper, 2000). Does God Get Angry? By: Tim Crosby How does this relate to God's character? "By the time of Christ some philosophers had come to the conclusion that God, in His absolute perfection, is not subject to human passions and emotions. He knows no distress, excitement, love, or anger. Philo, a Hellenistic Jew who lived at the same time as Christ, wrote: "Some... assume that the Existent feels wrath and anger, whereas He is not susceptible to any emotion at all. For anxiety is peculiar to human weakness."[!] We know better, for we know that Jesus experienced very human emotions. And He said, "Anyone who has seen me has seen the Father" (John 14:9). Scripture teaches that God suffers with His children: "In all their distress he too was distressed" (Isaiah 63:9). God's tender love exceeds that of the most devoted mother: "'Is not Ephraim-my dear son, the child in whom I delight? Though I often speak against him, I still remember him. Therefore my heart yearns for him; I have great compassion for him,' declares the Lord" (Jeremiah 31:20). However, a strangely seductive variation of the idea that God has no emotion is gaining ground today and is widely accepted among Christians. It is the belief that God does not get angry. Modem theology tends to emphasize God's love at the expense of His holiness. It overemphasizes the fact that His love is unconditional (ignoring passages such as John 76 15:10-14: "If you obey my commands, you wpl remain in my love....... You are my friends if you do what I command") and tends to depersonalize the concept of retribution. The universe, it is said, is like a live wire that automatically burns those who get into the wrong relationship to it. But, as C. S. Lewis pointed out, those who substitute the picture of a live wire for that of an offended Deity do not realize that they have deprived us of all hope, for an offended Deity can forgive, but a live wire cannot (Crosby). There is, in fact, a great deal of truth in the "live wire" idea. Scripture teaches that evil brings its own reward (Hosea 13:9; Jeremiah 6:19; Proverbs 26:27; 28:6, 10; Psalm 34:21; 37:14, 15). God's punishmen! of the wicked often consists in abandoning them to their wickedness (Romans 1:24-28; Psalm 81:12; Acts 7:42) to reap its terrible results. Even when the Bible speaks of God destroying, the destruction often is actually the work of alien armies or evil men (Jeremiah 33: 4, 5). In l Chronicles 10:14 we are told that because of Saul's transgression, the Lord "slew him" (RSV), yet verse 4 says that Saul "took his own sword, and fell upon it" (RSV). The idea of retribution as a natural process might be further supported from those texts that speak of sowing and reaping (Proverbs 22:8; Hosea 10:13; Galatians 6:7-9; Job 4:8). But these texts hardly imply that damnation is a natural result of our evil deeds any more than they imply that salvation is a natural result of our good works. Although God's retribution is often indirect, there is also overwhelming scriptural testimony to God's active, direct vengean_ce. Those fundamental Old Testament passages that define God's character affirm that He is both extremely kind, loving, and forgiving, and extremely zealous in punishing and avenging (Exodus 20:5; 34:6, 7; Deuteronomy 7:9, 10). The authors of Scripture see no difficulty in this at all, nor do they shrink from presenting God's vengeance as a salient aspect of His character (Deuteronomy 32: 41-43; Psalm 94:1; 77 Isaiah 1:24; Ezekiel 7:8, 9; Micah5:15; Nahum 1:2fl). Ah, but this is the Old Testament! Don't we find a different picture in the New? No. The same dual emphasis is repeated in the New Testament: God saves and destroys (James 4:12). We are told to consider both "the kindness and the severity of God" (Romans 11:22, RSV). One of the most intense pictures of God's vengeance is found in Revelation 19:11-21 and this is a portrayal of the Son! The same Testament that says "God is love" also says "God is a consuming fire." He is the avenger (Romans 12:19; Hebrews 10:30). Even Jesus got angry (Mark 3:5; compare Revelation 6:16). He destroyed the fig tree and threw the robbers out of the Temple (Mark 11:12-17). Jesus also spoke of the wrath of God (John 3:36); and portrayed God as a king who relentlessly punished and destroyed the impenitent (Matthew 18:34, 35; 22:7; Luke 12:46; 19:27). Thus the divine wrath is as clearly taught in the New Testament as in the Old (Crosby). Righteous Indignation Of course, human anger is all too often fueled y wounded pride; we become petulant and vindictive; we lose control. God's anger is not like this. But there is a righteous indignation that is not only legitimate but essential. Imagine two individuals who observe a group of thugs tormenting a helpless victim. One of the observers shrugs his shoulders and walks away, while the other becomes angry and forcefully intervenes. Which of them is righteous: the calm one or the angry one? Wrath is the emotion a just man feels when confronted with injustice (see Judges 9:30; 2 Samuel 12:5; Nehemiah 5:6; Exodus 32:19; Acts 17:16). To love the good is to hate the evil 78 that is antagonistic to it (Hebrews I :9); therefore anger and love are two different sides of the same coin. Perhaps this is why it is John, the apostle oflove, who wrote the most graphic portrayal of God's wrath in the New Testament - the book of Revelation (Crosby). The antithesis of love is not wrath but apathy. And God is anything but apathetic. The second commandment says that God is a "jealous" God. "Jealous" might also be translated "zealous," or even "impassioned." In other words, God cares-fiercely. Like any good parent, He gets upset when His children go astray. God is not lovey-dovey, namby-pamby, laidback, harmless, and jovial. If His children are naughty, He disciplines them (Hebrews 12:4-11), because He wants only the best for them (Crosby). God's hatred of evil is just as strong as His love of good. His holiness is benign toward right and malevolent toward sin, just as a fire may comfort or destroy. His glory is toxic to evil, just as oxygen, which is life-giving to humans, is toxic to certain types of bacteria. God is matter, and sin is anti-matter, and whenever matter encounters anti-matter there is a holocaust. In Scripture, the problem that perplexes the righteous is not "How can a merciful God destroy?" but just the opposite: "How can a just God allow evil to go unchecked?" (Psalm 73; 79: IO; 94:1-7; Habakkuk 1, 2; Revelation 6:10). Again, the scriptural testimony is not that God does not get angry, but that He is slow to anger, and does not stay angry (Psalm 30:5; Isaiah 54:7, 8; Psalm 78:38; Isaiah 12:1; Hosea 11:9; 14:1; Micah 7:18). The modern embarrassment with God's wrath is unknown to Scripture (Crosby). Anthropomorphism? Some have suggested that statements about God's wrath are just an anthropomorphism, 79 a concession to the times. But there is no reason to assume this, for it is impossible to find even a single text that says that God never kills or gets angry. If allusions to God's wrath are just culture-conditioned figures of speech, then perhaps assertions of His love are equally unreliable (Crosby). Some writers would go so far as to maintain that God does not kill; He merely allows Satan to take life whenever it suits His purposes. Not only is this viewpoint scripturally invalid; it is based on the illogical assumption that Satan is always willing to cooperate with God by destroying his own agents who are hindering God's will! And even if it were true, it would not protect God from responsibility for people's death. Although David did not personally take the life of Uriah, he is still accused of having "struck down Uriah the Hittite with the sword" (2 Samuel 12:9). Therefore, it does not help matters to say that God merely "allows" Satan to take life. If God wills for demons rather than angels to destroy, how does that make Him less responsible (Crosby). Another argument that those who deny that God kills raise is that what is wrong for us must be wrong for God, too. At first glance this seems reasonable. Surely God practices what He preaches, doesn't He? If the law is a transcript of His character, does He not keep it? The analogy of the child-parent relationship is helpful here. Many things that children are forbidden to do ("Don't torment the cat") are just as wrong for the parents. But some things ("Don't touch the car keys"; "Don't stay up past 9:00") are not wrong in themselves; they are forbidden only because the child is incapable of exercising adult responsibility. The same is true of God and us. God forbids us to do certain things that are perfectly legitimate for Him to do. For example, God demands praise (Jeremiah 31:7) and accepts worship, but it is wrong for a creature to do these things (Revelation 19:10). God asks us to rest 80 on the Sabbath, but He continues to work on this day (John 5:17) - as do His human agents (Matthew 12:5). God forbids us to take vengeance, but He does so (Romans 12:19)-as do His human agents, the civil authorities (Romans 13:1-5). Vengeance in itself is not wrong, but God knows that we cannot be trusted to carry it out fairly in our own case (Crosby). But what about the sixth commandment? Set aside for the moment the generally accepted scholarly position that this commandment should be translated "Thou shalt not murder" and does not forbid capital punishment or killing in war. Let us assume, for the sake of argument, that it forbids all killing. Even if this were true, would it mean that God Himself has no right to take life? No, because life belongs to Him. I have no right to burn down another man's barn (eighth commandment), but the owner has that right because it belongs to him. Likewise, God may take away the possessions of any of His children for His own reasons- something that would be called stealing if we did it-because all things belong to Him. A parent may teach his child not to steal from others and yet, without being inconsistent, take away from the child a toy that the child is misusing (Crosby). God and Genocide But does that justify what some would call genocide? Let us examine a worst-case example of the problem: the slaughter of Canaanites in the Old Testament. Here generations of skeptics have found ample ammunition in their case against God. How could God command His people to wipe out entire cities of men, women, and children simply because they happened to hold different beliefs? Consider the following thought experiment: Suppose that you were out walking one day 81 and heard agonizing screams coming from inside a house across the road. Upon entering, you saw a boy being held down on a table by several teenagers while a muscular man, his back toward you, was sawing through the boy's leg with a carpenter's saw. The boy was screaming in pain. What would you think of this man (Crosby). Suppose now that, upon inquiry, you discovered that the man was the boy's father; that he was also a physician; that he had just arrived at his home in this primitive and isolated village to find his son dying of acute septicemia of the leg; that no sedatives were available; and that tears were streaming down the father's face. Now, what do you think? A full knowledge of the situation makes quite a difference (Crosby)! In the case of Numbers 31, I suggest that ifwe knew all of the facts, that which at first seems a cruelty would be seen as a mercy, as in the case of the amputating physician. Consider the facts we know: If one accepts the premise of a literal hell and the Bible's evaluation of the apparently irremediable wickedness of the Canaanites-and archaeology has confirmed the moral bankruptcy of Canaanite culture-then God's authorization of their total destruction is justifiable, even merciful, in that it entailed the least possible amount of suffering for the smallest number of individuals when seen in the light of eternity. Had the Canaanites been allowed to live, they not only would have continued in sin, resulting in additional suffering in hell someday, but they would have begotten offspring who would have ended up in the same place. In addition, they would have corrupted the Israelites. God told His people to terminate the Canaanites' lives in order to prevent all of this. It was a case of less suffering now or greater suffering later (Crosby). Difficult times impose difficult questions upon us. In times of war, to end the conflict more quickly, even the defenders of liberty, justice, and righteousness have made decisions that 82 brought suffering or death to the innocent. lf great leaders and good men sometimes find it necessary to let the righteous die with the guilty for the achievement of a greater good in the end, then has the Creator Himself no right to discriminatingly (Genesis 18) destroy evil societies? Hell was originally intended only for the devil and his angels (Matthew 25:41), but those who have chosen to share Satan's character must share his punishment. It has been suggested that God will leave the wicked to destroy one another, but would a just God leave the weak at the mercy of the strong? How then could the degree of suffering be proportional to the amount oflight (Luke 12:46-48)? According to Matthew 10:28, human beings can "kill the body but cannot kill the soul"; only God can "destroy both soul and body in hell." Hell is a supernatural extinction of existence; it is God's retributive wrath against sin. The doctrine of hell can be understood only as a manifestation of God's retributive justice, in which the sinner is punished until he receives the exact amount of pain he deserves in the light of his crimes. Jesus warned those who failed to make things right with the judge that they would never get out of prison till they had "paid the last penny" (Matthew 5:26). The unforgiving servant was delivered to the tortures, "till he should pay all his debt" (Matthew 18:34). The severity of the punishment depends on the amount of light a person has had (Luke 12:47, 48) (Crosby). Reform or Punishment But the concept of equivalent punishment, or retributive justice, is currently under heavy attack. Why punish men in hell when there is no hope of reform? After all, giving the criminal 83 his deserts will not undo the crime he has committed. Is not the only legitimate reason for punishment to deter or to reform? Let us see what happens when we replace the "primitive" concept of imposing punishment to match the crime with a more "humanitarian" concept of evil as a sickness that needs to be "treated" until the patient is reformed. Under the humanitarian system, punishment would no longer be based on what is deserved (Crosby). It would not be measured (or limited) by any "barbaric" rule like "an eye for an eye," but would be administered only as long as it served to reform, or to deter others-as is done in some nations where dissenters are shut up in psychological wards until they are "cured." Uh-oh! Already our new theory of justice is headed for trouble. "That's unfair," you say. Not under the humanitarian system it isn't, for the offender is not really being punished at all; rather he is simply being "reformed, rehabilitated, and educated." Such a system no longer deals with categories of justice and injustice, of deserts and merits, but of sickness and cure. Surely rehabilitation is not unjust! Under the new theory the offender is not punished until the punishment is commensurate with the crime, but is treated until he is cured-which could last forever (Crosby). C. S. Lewis provides a trenchant analysis of the ultimate results of rejecting the concept of retributive justice: "According to the humanitarian theory, to punish a man because he deserves it, and as much as he deserves, is mere revenge, and, therefore, barbarous and immoral. It is maintained that the only legitimate motives for punishing are the desire to deter others by example or to mend the criminal.... "My contention is that this doctrine, merciful though it appears, really means that each one of us, from the moment he breaks the law, is deprived of the rights of a human being. The 84 reason is this. The humanitarian theory removes from punishment the concept of desert. But the concept of desert is the only connecting link between punishment and justice. It is only as deserved or undeserved that a sentence can be just or unjust. I do not here contend that the question 'Is it deserved?' is the only one we can reasonably ask about a punishment. We may very properly ask whether it is likely to deter others and to reform the criminal. But neither of these two last questions is a question about justice........ Thus when we cease to consider what the criminal deserves and consider only what will cure him or deter others, we have tacitly removed him from the sphere of justice altogether (Crosby). "Only the expert 'penologist' (let barbarous things have barbarous names), in the light of previous experiment, can tell us what is likely to deter; only the psychotherapist can tell us what is likely to cure (Crosby). It will be in vain for the rest ofus, speaking simply as men, to say, 'but this punishment is hideously unjust, hideously disproportionate to the criminal's deserts.' The experts with perfect with perfect logic will reply, 'but nobody was talking about deserts. No one was talking about punishment in your archaic, vindictive sense of the word. Here are the statistics proving that this treatment deters. Here are the statistics proving that this other treatment cures. What is your trouble?"' What Punishment? Why do sinners deserve punishment? For the same reason that God deserves praise. We should not praise God with a view of receiving some favor, but because He is what He is. The 85 purpose is not to change God; the praise is not offered as a cause to achieve some result; it is simply due. Likewise, Adolf Hitler, for example, deserves to suffer for the suffering he has caused others, not to change him, or to achieve any result, but simply because it is due. It is justice. If, in addition, his suffering has a deterrent effect, or if it cures him, all the better. But retribution is required apart from any deterrent or curative effect it may have. It is the moral analogy to the physical law "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction." Anyone who works deserves to receive the wages that he has earned, and the wages of sin is death (Crosby). Furthermore, the punishment must match the crime. This is the principle behind the law of lex talionis, "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth." I would argue that this principle is the very essence-in fact, the definition-of justice. Unfortunately, a misinterpretation of the Sermon on the Mount has led some to regard this principle as an abandoned relic of a primitive mentality. Most scholars (e.g., Joachim Jeremias, David Martyn Lloyd-Jones, Arthur W. Pink) agree that Christ, in Matthew 5:38-48, is not setting aside the law oflex talionis as a judicial principle, but as a principle of personal vengeance. It is wrong for the individual to take the law into his own hands. Vengeance belongs to God (Hebrews 10:30) and to His delegated agents. Although Jesus warned His audience on the mount to "resist not evil" (Matthew 5:39, KJV), yet in Romans 13:4 the governing authority in the land is said to be a "minister of God, and avenger who brings wrath upon the one who practices evil" (NASB). Civil authorities have the right to avenge. But Jesus' audience on the mount had not such authority. The Old Testament law of lex talionis was given as part of the laws of the government of the nation of Israel; but the Sermon on the Mount is given to the Jews who have lost their sovereignty to the Romans (Crosby). 86  Therefore, "an eye for an eye" is still a valid principle of jurisprudence. Indeed, the lex talionis principle-punishment commensurate with the crime-is actually reaffirmed in the Sermon on the Mount in Matthew 7:1, 2; "Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you." The rest of the New Testament also indicates that God acts in accordance with the principle of lex talionis. "God is just," writes Paul. "He will pay back trouble to those who trouble you" (2 Thessalonians 1:6). Note that this "tit for tat" response is considered to be proof of God's justice. Hebrews 2:2, 3 makes the new dispensation an intensification of the old, where "every transgression or disobedience received a just retribution." Colossians 3:25 and Romans 2:5-11 speak of payment in kind for one's deeds. The parable of the unmerciful servant concludes with a retributive judgment that requires an amount of suffering equivalent to the crimes committed: "So angry was the master that he condemned the man to torture until he should pay the debt in full. And that is how my heavenly Father will deal with you, unless you each forgive your brother from your hearts" (Matthew 18:34, 35) (Crosby). Particularly revealing are the Apocalypse's indications of the behind-the-scenes reactions to God's judgments. The plea for blood vengeance on the part of the righteous dead in Revelation 6:9-11 is eventually answered in Revelation 19:2, where God avenges on Babylon the blood of his servants. After the first three angels have poured out their "bowls of God's wrath" upon the earth (Revelation 16:1-4), the angels praise God for His justice in requiting the wicked blood for blood (v. 5-7), exclaiming "They deserve it." Note that this punishment is purely retributive, not corrective, for at this point in history the wicked are beyond repentance (v. 9, 11); probation has closed. It is clear that God works on the principle of "an eye for an eye" and that the angels find this praiseworthy (Crosby). 87  One last point. The "no-wrath" position-robs even the biblical statements about God's love and mercy of all force, for without wrath, there is no mercy. When a parent serves a child a meal, this is not a mercy, but a duty. But if the child disobeys, and for punishment is sent to his room without supper, and then the parent relents and serves him a meal in his room, this is mercy, because only wrath is to be expected. Thus unless we take seriously the scriptural testimony about God's wrath, we can discover no need for His mercy (Crosby). It is easy to slip from the truth of"God is love" into its counterfeit: "God is nice." It seems much safer to serve a tame God, always gentle, ever the lamb, never the lion. But as long as the Bible remains our creed, this caricature of God must be rejected." Is God Angry Every Day? By: Gary Amirault "Godjudgeth the righteous, and GOD is angry with the wicked every day." (Psalm 7:11) "God is a righteous judge, and He is NOT angry at all times." (Psalm 7:11) Sometimes it pays to really compare Bible translations. Few ofus do. But ifwe did, we would discover there are major differences among leading translations. And the differences are sometimes very significant. One of the purposes of the "Bible Matters" email list is to point some of them out. Below is a portion of the book "Bible Threatenings Explained" by Dr. J.W. Hanson written in 1885. 88  Anger, as the word is ordinarily used, is not a noble emotion; it is altogether unworthy of God, and he is incapable of it. The wise man says "Anger resteth in the bosom of fools" (Ecclesiastes 7:9). Then God cannot be "angry every day," all the time. What is the meaning of these words? Dr. Adam Clarke, the well-known scholar and commentator, has examined the text with equal l_earning and candor, and he gives us the result of his investigation in the statement that a mistranslation of the language puts a false meaning on the words. He gives these as authorities: The Vulgate: "God is a judge, righteous, strong and patient. Will he be angry every day?" The Septuagint: "God is a righteous judge, strong and long-suffering; not bringing forth his anger every day." The Arabic is the same. The Genevan version, printed in 1615, "God judgeth the righteous, and him that contemneth God, every day;" marginal note: "he doth continually call the wicked to repentance by some signs of his judgments" (Amirault). Dr. Clarke says: "I have judged it of consequence to trace this verse through all the ancient versions in order to be able to ascertain what is the true reading, where the evidence on one side amounts to a positive affirmation, 'God is angry every day,' and, on the other side, to as positive a negation, 'He is not angry every day.' The mass of evidence supports the latter reading. The Chaldee first corrupted the text by making the addition, 'with the wicked,' which our translators have followed, though they have put the words into italics, as not being in the Hebrew text. Several of the versions have rendered it in this way: 'Godjudgeth the righteous, and is not angry every day." The true sense may be restored thus; el with the vowel tsere signifies God; el, the same letters with the point pathach, signifies not. Several of the versions have read in this way: 'Godjudgeth the righteous, and is not angry every day.' He is not always 89 chiding, nor is he daily punishing, notwithstanding the daily wickedness of man; hence the ideas of patience and long-suffering which several of the versions introduce" (Amirault). It will be seen that David expressly says that God is not angry every day, though those who quote the text as found in our version to prove God petulant, wrathful and passionate, do not seem to reflect that it is no proof of endless punishment, for the same author and others declare (Micah 7:18; Psalm 108:8, 9; 30:5) that "He retaineth not his anger forever." So that, if he were - as he is not - angry every day, the time would come when his anger would no longer exist (Amirault). It will enable the reader to understand the meaning of anger, as ascribed to God in the Scriptures, ifhe will consider how the word is used in the Bible. There are two kinds of anger. One is right, and is exhibited by God, good angels and good men, and the other is wrong and is an animal characteristic, of which God is incapable (Amirault). Abstract anger is a disposition to combat, destroy, and its legitimate use is to remove obstacles. Employed by the good it never harms, but used by the evil, its work is mischief and woe. The first sort is referred to in the passage we are considering, and is exercised by God, who is said to "hate all the workers of iniquity." And how does he exhibit his anger? Not against the sinner, but against the sin. Men, smarting under the penalties of sin, seeing only the stroke, and not realizing the love that impels it, say with Saul that God hates them, but it is Infinite Love that wields the rod, and that inflicts every stroke because it loves the sinner, and will destroy that in him that alienates him from his best friend, and ruins his best interests (Amirault). David says; "Thou shalt make the wicked as a fiery oven in the time of thy anger, the 90 Lord shall swallow them up in his wrath, and the fire shall devour them" (Psalm 21:9). The prophet declares: "The Lord reserveth wrath for his enemies" (Nahum 1:2, 3). Paul affirms; "The wrath of God cometh upon the children of disobedience." "The power and wrath of God is upon all them that forsake him" (Ephesians 5:6; Colossians 3:6). Jesus says: "The wrath of God abideth on him that believeth not the Son" (John 3:36). He also says: "God is kind to the unthankful and evil" (Luke 6:35). "He maketh his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sendeth his rain on the just and on the unjust" (Matthew 5:48) (Amirault). Now these are not contradictory statements. They are consistent with each other. What God is determined to destroy in the sinner is that which makes him a sinner, and he proceeds towards him as a good parent must, to eradicate it by punishment. An angry mother--a true mother--punishes her wayward boy, just as God punishes the wicked, because she loves him. The boy may call it anger, but it is that kind which will not harm a hair of his head. It is indeed the highest love; it is determined on the child's welfare, and so will not shrink from inflicting pain. But it is temporary. This is evident when we remember that men are told to be like God, and yet they must not let the sun go down upon their wrath. We must love our enemies that we may be children of the highest. If God were angry every day, and we were like him, we should be cross, petulant, wrathful, vindictive and hateful all the time. But we can only be like God as we "put off anger'' (Colossians 3:8) and "put away all wrath, anger and malice," (Ephesians 4:31) inasmuch "a fool's wrath is presently known," (Proverbi; 12:16) while "he that is slow to wrath is of great understanding" (Proverbs 14:29) (Amirault). "God is not angry with the wicked every day," is the correct reading of this passage, and it must be true of him who is Love, and who is unchangeable, that he never was, never is, and never 91 will be - for he never can be - angry with any human being in any other sense than that his righteous indignation burns towards those traits that cause his children to sin, and that it will continue to bum until it destroys those traits, and transforms his enemies into friends. "The man who destroyed his enemies" transformed them to friends. God's anger will destroy the enmity of his enemies. He will always be kind·to the unthankful and evil. He "is not angry with the wicked every day." - endquote from BTE. Many Bible translations (even some of the most well-known ones) mischaracterize the nature and character of our Creator. It pays to be diligent when it comes to Bible Study (Amirault). "Be diligent to present yourself approved to God as a workman who does not need to be ashamed, handling accurately the word of truth." (2 Timothy 2:15) Chapter7 Chapter Outline: This chapter includes how someone is to overcome anger. It provides helpful tips to do, people to go to, or maybe certain books to read. Everybody has to deal with anger from time to time. But what's the best way to handle it? To answer that question, we must first understand what anger really is. Anger is an emotion often characterized by feelings of great displeasure, indignation, hostility, wrath and vengeance. Many times, reacting in anger is how we express our dissatisfaction with life. It's defined in the Greek language as the strongest of all passions. Anger begins with a feeling that's often 92 expressed in words or actions. We feel something and it causes a reaction (How Can I Manage My Anger, 20W). Get to the Root of the Problem Anger is the fruit of rotten roots. One of the primary roots of anger stems from the family. Angry people come from angry families because they learn from their role models and carry on the same behavior in their own lives, eventually passing it on to their children. Other Roots of Anger Include... Injustice When people mistreat us but there's nothing we can do about it, we get angry because we feel it isn't fair. As much as we'd like to change the situation or the person who's treating us badly, we can't. People can't change people; only God can change people. So it's best to put our energy into praying for the offender. Strife Hidden, repressed anger, begins with judgment, gossip, backbiting and thinking too highly of yourself. Strife is often exhibited in arguing, bickering, heated disagreements and angry undercurrents. Impatience Often produces anger when we can't get what we want when we want it. When our 93