Is anger always a sin?

[~Anastasia~]

I was referring to what is written in God's Word. I agree that capricious moods are not of God. They are sin, and symptoms of a "fallen" nature.

I was asking about Jesus' anger.

I was asking if His anger was "sinful".

Which of course leads right back to the question in the title of this thread:

Is anger always a sin?

Another question might be:

Is there such a thing as "Holy anger"?

Sorry Brinny, maybe we are talking past each other.

I think I've answered several times so I think we are missing something in each other's posts. Forgive me.

But that's the simple answer. Jesus got angry at the money changers. Jesus never sinned. So anger itself is not inherently sinful.

We know that Christ is God revealed to us. We can be assured of what He said and did while among us. Some of the understandings of God in the OT are more nebulous. If we can't see Jesus doing such a thing, then we need to realize that our interpretations may be wrong, because God is not capricious nor reactionary on a whim, etc.

But simple answer, no, anger is not and cannot be sinful in its own, because Jesus was angry.

The root of our anger, it's cause, and what we do with it CAN be sin. But anger is an emotion, neither denied nor required by God.

 

[brinny]

Sorry Brinny, maybe we are talking past each other.

I think I've answered several times so I think we are missing something in each other's posts. Forgive me.

But that's the simple answer. Jesus got angry at the money changers. Jesus never sinned. So anger itself is not inherently sinful.

We know that Christ is God revealed to us. We can be assured of what He said and did while among us. Some of the understandings of God in the OT are more nebulous. If we can't see Jesus doing such a thing, then we need to realize that our interpretations may be wrong, because God is not capricious nor reactionary on a whim, etc.

But simple answer, no, anger is not and cannot be sinful in its own, because Jesus was angry.

The root of our anger, it's cause, and what we do with it CAN be sin. But anger is an emotion, neither denied nor required by God.

i was seeking a bottom line response to the question in the title of this thread.

And that is because the living God has been deemed "evil" by some, especially by those of Gnostic-leanings, which also denies the deity of Jesus Christ, and states the serpent in the Garden of Eden was "good" and attempting to "save" Eve and Adam from the "evil" God, Who "lied" to Adam and Eve. They tie in God's "wrath" with a demonstration with how "evil" God is.

That is why i pressed the issue here in this thread.

Thank you for your response.

 

[~Anastasia~]

i was seeking a bottom line response to the question in the title of this thread.

And that is because the living God has been deemed "evil" by some, especially by those of Gnostic-leanings, which also denies the deity of Jesus Christ, and states the serpent in the Garden of Eden was "good" and attempting to "save" Eve and Adam from the "evil" God, Who "lied" to Adam and Eve. They tie in God's "wrath" with a demonstration with how "evil" God is.

That is why i pressed the issue here in this thread.

Thank you for your response.

Ah I see. Thank you for explaining.

Well you probably can guess my response to all of that.

Gnosticism (which encompasses a very great deal) was deemed a heresy by the early Christians, and rightly so. Especially when pressed to such limits that it undermines everything about the foundation of all beliefs.

Simpler enough to realize, but perhaps hard to admit - that we are wrong about how we understand some things, rather than concocting such elaborate fantasies to sidestep the whole issue.

God be with you.

 

[brinny]

Ah I see. Thank you for explaining.

Well you probably can guess my response to all of that.

Gnosticism (which encompasses a very great deal) was deemed a heresy by the early Christians, and rightly so. Especially when pressed to such limits that it undermines everything about the foundation of all beliefs.

Simpler enough to realize, but perhaps hard to admit - that we are wrong about how we understand some things, rather than concocting such elaborate fantasies to sidestep the whole issue.

God be with you.

Thank you.

God bless you too.

 

[Dave-W]

Is there ever a time when not getting angry would be a "sin"?

I don't think so. One could still mete out corrective action when needed with out the emotion.

 

[com7fy8]

What ties right in to Jesus reaction to the money changers is a Holy Wrath, which links to the "wrath of God" and this verse:

"It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God." ~Hebrews 10:31

And those verses that begin with "Woe to those...."

It's linked to the holiness of the living God.

Does that perhaps enter into why Jesus reacted to the money changers that way?

I think His anger about the money changers was more personal, and about how they were using the temple to make money . . . maybe being willing to profit off of people's sins, by selling sin sacrifice animals. This could have especially angered Jesus personally since He was about to, free of charge, sacrifice Himself for our sins.

Another question would be:

Does a Holy God have a "right" to a "Holy Wrath"?

I think His wrath is not a right but a fact

 

[brinny]

I think His anger about the money changers was more personal, and about how they were using the temple to make money . . . maybe being willing to profit off of people's sins, by selling sin sacrifice animals. This could have especially angered Jesus personally since He was about to, free of charge, sacrifice Himself for our sins.

I think His wrath is not a right but a fact

Jesus was clear on His anger with the money changers. It was regarding the abominable disregard of His Father's House and making it a den of thieves.

 

[com7fy8]

I think righteous anger will have us caring about the person.

When God has been angry, in the Bible, He always does what makes things better.

Yeah, like kill people!

You asked "Is God's "wrath" sinful?" If by "sin" you mean wrong, bad, evil, then when in his wrath the biblical god ordered his followers to exterminate a complete race of men women and children, yes, I would say his wrath was "sinful". Perhaps you don't consider genocide as being wrong.

There are cases when God ordered a group of people to be killed, but He had certain innocent ones spared, including how He spared Lot before torching Sodom and Gomorrah, and Rachel was spared during the conquest of Jericho.

 

[Galaxy Hunter]

There are cases when God ordered a group of people to be killed, but He had certain innocent ones spared, including how He spared Lot before torching Sodom and Gomorrah, and Rachel was spared during the conquest of Jericho.

This debate is an excellent example of the "advantage" atheists think they have. Christians have a very large Book they have to defend. Atheists have nothing to defend so they go into each debate thinking they have already won. They might call that an advantage but I really feel sorry for people who believe in nothing. I have hope. They have nothing. That's sad.

 

[Par5]

This debate is an excellent example of the "advantage" atheists think they have. Christians have a very large Book they have to defend. Atheists have nothing to defend so they go into each debate thinking they have already won. They might call that an advantage but I really feel sorry for people who believe in nothing. I have hope. They have nothing. That's sad.

Yes indeed, Christians do have a large book that they have to defend and many of the things they try to defend are more than gross. They have to defend things in that book that gives accounts of their god killing people or ordering his followers to slaughter men woman and children. Those sort of accounts alone are enough to make me want to have nothing to do with such a being.
You say atheists have nothing to defend. Well, atheists have to defend themselves against the lies that Christians like you make about them. Lies that you justify by using the contents of that book you so readily defend and don't be so condescending that you think you can feel sorry for me. I have a life that is full of wonderful things and I don't necessarily mean things material and another of your lies is that I believe in nothing. I do have things that I strongly believe in, but what you believe in is just not one of them.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

According to a Catholic book i have anger can often be virtuous, its when it turns into vengeance (inordinate anger basically ) that its a sin.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

I like the view of Saadia Gaon a Jewish thinker, God gave capacity for anger, love, desire, patience etc - all are good but only if used properly as they were created for.

 

[Galaxy Hunter]

Yes indeed, Christians do have a large book that they have to defend and many of the things they try to defend are more than gross. They have to defend things in that book that gives accounts of their god killing people or ordering his followers to slaughter men woman and children. Those sort of accounts alone are enough to make me want to have nothing to do with such a being.
You say atheists have nothing to defend. Well, atheists have to defend themselves against the lies that Christians like you make about them. Lies that you justify by using the contents of that book you so readily defend and don't be so condescending that you think you can feel sorry for me. I have a life that is full of wonderful things and I don't necessarily mean things material and another of your lies is that I believe in nothing. I do have things that I strongly believe in, but what you believe in is just not one of them.

I'm sorry if I upset you but I truly do feel sorry for people who think that there is nothing after physical death.it must be a terrifying thought. When I claim that atheists believe in nothing I mean that they don't believe in anything greater than humans....Why don't you head over to the thread "Is Atheism a Religion?" We're having a great discussion about this.