I ran across this idea today and whats interesting is that most people hold to a double standard between us and Christ.
Matthew 3:7
Pretty harsh coming from Christ right? But what about these verses?
1 Peter 3:15-16
I think these are responding to different situations. For whatever reasons it seems the Pharisees were a certain thorn or representation of someone who uses God to deny others Christ the true way to God. So it deserves more condemnation. The hearts of the Pharisees was already hardened and there was not reasoning.
Whereas I think Peter is speaking about a different disposition. Rather than the Pharisees having a hardened heart a person coming to you or someone you encounter in a situation who may be open to God and struggling. Or that the situation is that the truth can be told or should be told.
That it be as it should be done when reasonable people come together and are at least open to the truth. Otherwise by being angry in the wrong context may blemish that message or reproving.
This seems to relate to Pauls qualifications for an Elder. So I am wondering of this sheds any light. The teachings that seem to be about correcting or telling others is perhaps to Christians or maybe God fearers who were interested but not comitted. Still searching.
I do think much was about other Christians or new Christians when it says be gentle and to be of good standing to be able to help and teach others. THis is really a life truth principle that to be able to have respect and be believed we have to first be the example.
I think this primarily goes back to the idea of being a servant in Christ and despite being the greatest teacher was also a servant and humbled himself that He may be the example of goodness and obedience.
Peter mentions something along these lines when he speaks about servants and in general Christians obeying masters and rulers. Even if they are unjust. Not to seek revenge or fight fire with fire in cultural wars. But the good example of obedience and purity of behaviour is what turns people towards God without any words said.
By the simple and radical example of not being the same as everyone else in the political and culture wars. But a good example that can be unblemished or held accountable for such behaviour. When you consider how the culture wars usually end up with people shouting past each other claiming they hold the truth. Christ example is probably the only shining light that causes people to stop and think.
Now we know we're allowed to be angry.
I really think there is rightous anger. Like Christ if you begin to understand how humans can be so evil and deny the truth and actual goodness that God offers. It can be frustrating and I think in certain circumstances like a parent gets upset when their child does something dangerous and you realise. Its sort of a natural reaction. The difference is I think its tempered or grounded in the love of Christ. Its more an anger from love.
But as with most natural things they can get blown out of proportion and exaggerated. Or rather used for selfish or ideological motives. Which then distort the lens and bring in all sorts of subjective feelings and beliefs.
That being said I am not condoning aggression or anger and really its something I think only someone with all the other qualities and control and disposition of Christs example that Paul mentions about Elders being above reproach and living Christs example.
Obviously as anger can easily cause harm part of recognising this is when we overstep the mark and need to make amends. This is probably the greatest way we can humble ourselves and learn to be more Christlike when it comes to anger. And this is really once again a truth principle of life and good relationships.
Soooooo the question is, can you be angry and repeat what Christ did against the pharisees and it be okay when dealing with other Christians? Because it seems like people hold a double standard that it was okay for Christ to do it, but we are never allowed to because "its wrong". But if it was wrong, then Jesus would have been wrong because either something is wrong or something is right and there is no double standard in Gods rules. Specially since we are supposed to imitate Christ.
My thought is that the verses talking about conduct is a general teaching. Not necessarily an all or nothing idea. Because if its all or nothing you would have to say then that Christ was in the wrong by just raising his voice and calling them vipers. So in general, here is the behavior but be slow to anger (James 1:19-20) and if angry, do not sin.
What do you guys think?
I don't think those verses are double standards but rather about specific situations that may require or cause a different reaction or response. Which are going to be based on the lived reality of those situations.
An interesting aspect for Christian beliefs and behaviour as opposed to say mainstream society may see anger from a psychological or sociological lens. Is that as Christians we incoporate the spiritual aspect.
The bible mentions this often. That there is a spiritual battle going on where there will be conflicts between the world and Christian belief. That there will be anger and hatred towards Christians standing with Christ. I think this aspect is unrevalued as a factor in addressing anger.
Its not just biological or emotional or psychological. But also spiritual and I do think that this can cause reactions and sometimes its a spiritual anger so to speak. It may stem from the spiritual but be manifest in emotion or ideological beliefs that are really about a spiritual conflict between Christ truth and the worlds rebellion against God.
Paul and early church fathers were always going on about 'one mind and spirit'. Being unified in mind and spirit. That division was the beginning of sin. That alternative ideas and beliefs would divide and cause conflicts. But being one one mind and spirit would mean less anger and conflict. Not just in a common belief. But as part of that belief in Christ was serving and forgiving others like Christ.
