Published: March 16, 2023 | Speaker: Dr. Chuck Hartman | Series: The Epistle of James - Part 7 | Scripture: James 1:19-20; 3:8-12, 4:11, 5:9
Transcript
View Full Transcript →
0:02
meaning that there are times to be jealous particularly for God's honor God's glory God's glory there are times to hate to hate there are times
0:13
to be angry there are times there are times not to be joyful
0:27
um love the sinner hate the sin I can't say anything um that's a good generic statement I think it's a bit too
0:37
um but I do think that we're talking about an emotion an emotion we think okay anger jealousy hatred well you know we're falling then we shouldn't even go there because you know righteous ignatian well
0:50
who are we to say we have righteous indignation what about joy and peace how many times did our joy purely circumstantial how many times what we call Peace simply
1:03
the absence of struggle and opposition okay is any better you know to say that Joy that's good everybody has Joy well if it's not the
1:14
right Joy right Joy then that's just as false as a false right but it's more palatable isn't it
1:24
okay the point is that all of our emotions
1:46
yes and it also makes a it creates an eye that out it also it also uh it also treats sis if it's it's it's personified that's its own power that maybe Has Come Over The Sinner no
1:58
it's it's a sinner who's sinning okay and we're not giving any scriptural warrant it's you know God in the judgment is not going to push sin
2:08
and cast sin into that like a fire he's gonna cast sinners okay so you know I I hope you've never heard that said here that that phrase I think it's probably
2:21
not very edifying
2:33
right who do it yeah and and there are those I mean I do think that the purpose of that phrase what's behind that phrase if we take it
2:43
with with greatest Grace is is a truth and that is the we're not the the final
2:54
judge but I also think that they're a sufficient scriptural example of men who have gone past the line okay uh met for example that God tells
3:07
Jeremiah don't even pray for these people because I will not hear you know at that point yeah we have I think we do have to recognize that there are
3:18
we encounter in our life people who are as far as we can tell in veteran enemies God enemies God but I think that everyone in Jerusalem after Pentecost
3:31
would have considered Saul of Tarsus to be just such a man it wasn't it wasn't because God had known him from his mother's womb he just didn't know it yet so we do have to in all of this we have
3:43
to be self-critical and not just those emotions that are socially unpalatable but really not all of our emotions but also all of our
3:57
reasoning okay it all should be brought into subjection to the word of God and the realization and in US dwells no good thing you know that the residual uh impact of
4:09
sin within us Mars our thinking Mars our Ambitions Mars our emotions that's simply living out the doctrine of Total Property
4:21
now I'm not advocating an introspection and a morbidity I'm not saying that I'm simply saying that as Paul says in Corinthians examine yourself that a self-critical attitude
4:36
toward emotions and tour you know we think something seems reasonable but we have to realize that our rational faculty has not yet been perfected
4:47
and something that we think is reasonable may not be reasonable at all and it has to be held up to the light of scripture so what what James is doing here is he's holding up an emotion
5:01
anger and he's asking us to take a look at it and as I said many will simply not look at it at all and say all anger is sin because we are
5:11
Fallen we are not capable of righteous indication we're not capable of being angry in a Godly way
5:21
and the reality is most of the time that's true but I'm going what I'm saying is that's also true most of the time that we're
5:33
joyful and most of the time they were at peace and most of the time that we think ourselves logical and rational there's something wrong in all those times does that make sense
5:44
we're not seeing something perfect because we're not yet perfect we see us in a mirrored Imlay and and I'm simply saying that we need to be let's be fair within ourselves to ourselves and that
5:56
means let's be critical not just of one set of emotions but really all of them
6:17
he says anger ought to be read from the people of God but he also says in Ephesians 4 being angry but still not quoting psalm No actually
6:27
that's the frustration here there's no it's or gay and there is you'd love to that'd be great oh good different word yes no it's
6:37
not and and so this is the problem
6:53
regarding anger and to that there are two answers one not much not much and two what it does teach is not equivocal so we look at the Old Testament now I'm
7:04
not talking about times when it certainly teaches that God has anger okay we we see that we and we know that he has Wrath
7:15
but we know because of his nature his wrath is fully justified in his anger is Holy we accept accept that we have trouble with is
7:27
making any room for that in ourselves in ourselves okay so when we look at scripture there's an interesting article that that I found I found um but I think I think she's an Oxford
7:39
scholar human anger in biblical literature now literature now not not at least but this is this is purely looking at people they're kind of dismissing the
7:52
fact that God gets angry saying that's evident it's in the scriptures but frankly that doesn't help us in the sense of our own anger but looking in the scripture as to men
8:04
who are said to be angry and in the article there are 27 named individuals
8:33
angry people okay 27 instances where someone is had to be angry they get on a train at five o'clock heading east
8:49
yeah this is a Saxon Math problem uh there's a homeschool joke for you all right of the 27 now I'm taking this from the article I did go through and count them myself so
8:59
there's the disclaimer 21 are either Kings leaders or the heads of households so the vast majority of biblical
9:11
examples are people in a position to do something about it that's kind of the issue here so of the 27 21 are leaders
9:31
do something about their anger like kill the person the person or have their head shot off okay most of us don't have that kind of outlet for our anger actually none of us do
9:42
um she does make a very interesting point that there is a an almost airtight distinction between when the offending party is
9:55
family and when he is not when his family there is never retribution
10:09
when he is not there is so I don't know what that means but me it's it's it it's indicative of the negative path of anger
10:20
that we're not judging with righteous judgment because so when the offender
10:31
the offender is family
10:45
from the one who can and should exact punishment it is not done two most famous examples are Jacob are Jacob when his daughter
10:57
is violated
11:09
and then David when his daughter Tamar is violated by amnon Okay so
11:24
both cases now this is just two examples there's a whole bunch of them in this article but these are two that we're very familiar with and and I know that when and I don't know about you all but when I've read it I'm like come on Jacob
11:43
okay so they these crimes are called outrages the same phrase is used in both passage and outrage in Israel and it ought not be allowed
11:56
okay same same phrasing one's in Genesis the other the other um is in uh second Samuel and you know it's in phrasing so okay that's that's an indication that's that's a clue
12:08
any cases there is Revenge but it's exacted by the brothers
12:18
in this case uh Levi and Simeon in this case Absalom case Absalom so the leader the father does not do what is incumbent upon him
12:31
do in this outrage but Vengeance and Justice are then meted out by the brother of the victim
12:42
they're Brothers of the victim the author points out that even though the leader of the clan does not act upon his anger
12:58
because others do it leads to either a breakdown or a further breakdown of his authority and the family actually begins to
13:10
disintegrate which is an indirect way of saying that he should have done something right because what we're dealing with here is as Jesus says do not love father
13:22
mother brother sister more than me these are these are outrages and yet love for the child
13:33
or even concerned for the succession you know we don't we don't really read David's mind okay but Jacob not avenging duh was not a male
13:47
chauvinist thing like she's just a daughter that's not the issue the issue is he was abdicating his role as the head of the Clan
13:58
wouldn't it matter it would be the same way in any other clan of that day in that era that area is it would it's encumbent upon patriarch to avenge the
14:10
outrage he failed to do so in fact he even rebuked his sons for doing so they may have been a bit excessive
14:23
um but made their point and you know it's hard when you're reading those reading those because later on in in Genesis 49 when Jacob gives the blessings to his sons he maintains his bitterness towards or
14:35
towards Simeon and Levi and he says my spirit does not go with them and so you think well they must have been wrong but they really you think now how they have been wrong but Jacob wasn't
14:48
right if you just put it out we were both wrong but the point is that he did not act upon what would have been reich's anger and therefore in abdicating that
14:59
responsibility he really abdicated his role and you will see as you read The Narrative less and less than Jacob it becomes more and more essentially a ward of his sons
15:11
until eventually it's Joseph who arranges for him to you know bring daddy down to Egypt but he's no longer the man who's in control of his destiny
15:22
not only not in a in a human way I mean he no longer seeking God and acting out he's really just now a player and the story moves on to Judah and then to
15:33
Joseph you know the story moves past him and look at David of course amnon's death was the second of the four
15:44
that he was promised for doing what he did with Bathsheba and Kili Uriah he would pay back his own his own prophecy when he told Nathan
15:55
about the little ulam he must pay me back fourfold well he lost the child with Bathsheba then amnon then Absalom and then um
16:08
tabija after his death but nonetheless he he brought up the rear they were four Sons he was going to lose and Eminem was the second and so oh well it had to be it was fate no that's stoicism
16:18
no he was wrong for not punishing I'm not in fact we can't say this any in any way dogmatically but
16:28
dogmatically but had he punished amnon at amnon should have been punished he might have turned the wrath of God away from his family but what he did was he increased it
16:39
and he increased hatred within his family there's so much else that goes on there because keep in mind that all these men were half Brothers you know they weren't all from the same
16:50
so there's a whole bunch going on there a lot of lessons in there but in looking at the anger here we have two classic examples a situation that you know when you read them don't don't you think when
17:03
you read them that these crimes must be Avenged and not just glossed over and yet you think well this is Jacob and this is David
17:14
no they were wrong Aaron in them expressed curse and a law spoken on
17:27
es yeah this is an outrage in Israel is what it's called and and so it gives us what what does that phrase mean and what does it mean to us now because I would submit that it is it is not lost its meaning and that meaning is
17:38
integral to the idea of righteous thank
18:00
where is Adam in all this nowhere did it be found and I think that's I've been I've mentioned that many times that um I believe it's the picture he leaves the
18:10
story after the fall and really the the only spokesman for grace and the Covenant is Eve not I
18:21
don't know Okay so things like this are not to happen and when they do happen they ought to be Avenged for God's glory as well as the
18:33
cohesiveness of that family the society the church
18:48
oh no that um dinner is family they're not family but Ditta is family and yet her outrage her violation is not Avenged because Jacob so it's not quite
19:00
uh one to one because of course amnon is a son shakamites are not Sons it's just the the the point being that Jacob's
19:13
was not for dinner but for his own protection the protection of the family because he was afraid the shakamites would Rel or not so much to sacromise because Levi and Simeon took care of
19:25
them but those around the surrounding community so no it is not a it's not a direct situation the family situation is that members of the family Avenged it
19:37
and the head of the family did not support them in this um so the the idea here regarding the Old Testament teaching about Sin again it's
19:48
it's not it's not it's opaque it's it's not clear but it's rich in terminology like an outrage Israel
19:59
outrage Israel and the idea of avenging butt or avenging that outrage and the principle of not avenging leading to a dissolution of one's position and Authority
20:11
so okay so okay these are principles that are displayed in the lives of these Old Testament characters and Families
20:21
that are all orbiting around the concept of anger of anger okay true Levi and Simeon probably displayed over exuberance of anger
20:35
but they at least acted upon their anger and Avenged the outrage which their father would not do and did not do so again we we go into the New Testament
20:46
we really don't have any such examples in the New Testament and and even the the narrative in the in the New Testament that seem to indicate a an occasion
20:59
where tempers were at least warm the word anger is not used so we have this uh this passage in
21:27
it's quote from psalm 4. but it's not an exact quote even in a Septuagint even the Greek it's Modified by Paul a little bit and so when you look at Psalm 4 it doesn't
21:38
necessarily immediately shed light on Ephesians 4. many commentators have taken Paul to mean
21:56
be angry at your own sin
22:07
this is a this is a very popular way of of looking at this verse and saying okay what what Paul is saying is that you are to be angry at your yourself because of your sin you should loathe and decide
22:18
your sinfulness your sinfulness yeah oh um the problem with this is what he goes on to say and that is do not let the sun go
22:29
down on your anger
22:44
just before we go to bed now some have said okay that means do you you don't go to bed until you've confessed all your sins to the Lord
22:55
you know again this is this is also very popular among some of the monastic orders you'll see that kind of teaching and interpretation it's that we're to
23:06
we're to be angry at our own sin but we're to deal with it and confess it and repent of it and whatever dependence needs to be done you do it before bedtime or you just don't go to sleep until you've done it
23:18
that doesn't fit the context of Ephesians 4 Ephesians 4 which is dealing with interpersonal relationships within the church and it also just isn't a natural interpretation of do not let sun go down
23:31
your anger your anger so I don't think that an appropriate uh I think the fact that I think it's a bit of invasion of invasion it is interesting that in the text being
23:43
angry is in the imperative
24:06
again that's going a step too far for many commentators but it is that's that's voice it's the imperative be angry
24:17
two fairly contemporary 20th century commentators have some things to say about that John sought and um David Martin Lloyd Jones who were
24:29
associated with each other for a long time before Lloyd Jones's demise but demise but um Scott writes this form of words is a Hebrew idiom
24:40
Hebrew idiom which permits and then restricts anger rather than actually commanding it nevertheless the verse recognizes there is such a thing as Christian Egger
24:51
and Scott's view is that too few Christians either feel or express it indeed he says when we fail to do so we deny God damage ourselves and encourage
25:03
the spread of evil Lloyd Jones Goes even farther he says clearly and obviously this is a positive command
25:14
it is not some concession that is made to a weakness he says that it is our duty to be angry in certain respects but that we must never be angry in a
25:24
single Manner and never in a temper well I think they're both they both have a very valid
25:34
point whether we take this as a positive command that's really what start is going on to say when he says that when we are not angry when we should be we
25:46
sin and when we do Dishonored to God and dissolution to our the situation
26:13
are not the the texts are are a little bit modified and so that yes he's not don't get me wrong I'm not an accusing Paul of cherry picking scripture passages
26:24
not Paul when Paul when Paul uses a passage from the Old Testament he's usually including the whole context into just one reference and yeah absolutely
26:36
that when you look at the two you see that it's within the community it's interpersonal it's not the the monastic you know self-fragilation before you go to bed
26:46
to bed um so that yeah it's definitely in the context with Ephesians 4 and Psalm 4 in the context of of interpersonal relationship within the community of God's people God's people so there's a place within that Community
26:59
for anger for anger and you know if stot and Lloyd Jones are correct failure to exhibit it in the proper situation and of course in the proper
27:12
way would itself be sin in terms of the community
27:25
that his countrymen were selling their fellows into slavery yeah okay
27:39
but not necessarily irrational he did not he did not create elves and did not bring about his glorious
27:50
Redemptive history through emotionless beings Nehemiah is an excellent example of righteous anger on several occasions okay um and you know you you might look at
28:01
that book and say boy he had a temper but you should look at that book and realize that he understood the principle of righteous anger
28:27
there's two ways of looking at that giving place to the devil okay if you were looking at anger yourself and this is a factor there is a way that anger can lead to
28:38
giving place to the devil in your heart and I don't mean possession you know I I will get into that because looking at what righteous anger does mean we also have to look at what it doesn't
28:49
and and how it is that they're like James has the anger of God Is Not An accomplished righteousness the anger of man does not accomplish the righteousness of God what does that mean um but so that's one way the other way
29:01
is allowing giving plays of the devil in our midst in the community and frankly I think that's the clear meaning in Ephesians 4 and in Psalm 4
29:13
that he's not talking about being placed to the devil in your heart but it's giving place to the devil in your midst why because an outrage was committed and
29:23
you didn't get angry and do something about it so I think they're both very true and we're going to see that in names and in
29:34
other passages of James but because there's a point at which anger in US becomes sin becomes sin and we'll be talking about at that point
29:46
I know that I would say you've given place to the devil but you've definitely crossed the line from what would have been as best we can have it righteous anger
29:56
you've now entered into sin
30:16
and if you're if you're not angry when you should be the problem can also be both Inward and outward inward can lead to apathy to apathy and really a coldness of Art
30:27
outward if you do not oppose what is an outrage in Israel then you are giving place to the devil within the midst of the congregation in
30:37
the midst of the community anger I mean thinking about it anger is a very valuable emotion for
30:49
survival for defense for defense okay it it it's not one that we really think about much because we tend to think of it is always in the negative we live in an age where everything I like
30:59
them we all just get it along and everything is is Pacific okay in ironic but actually anger is is valid again we have the example of both the father and
31:10
the son exhibiting anger okay so we have the examples in the New Testament that they're not they're not nearly like the ones the Old Testament but Mark spoke on this one in Acts 15 we
31:24
have this situation between Paul and
31:49
I can't speak for Jews but I can speak for Italians when the disagreements are Sharp most people would call that anger looking in from the window they'd say they're mad at each other
32:02
okay it was definitely something serious okay and the opposition one to the other was keenly felt and I think we are we're
32:12
perfectly justified in assuming that the situation got somewhat heated we don't like to think that because we're talking about Barnabas the son of encouragement and Paul the apostate of
32:24
the gender these are human beings and then we can't even say oh that's that justifies or at least excuses their behavior they both consider themselves to be right
32:37
to the point where they could no longer walk together walk together the other example that we have is in Antioch related in Galatians 2. again this is a situation where Peter who was
32:47
eaten with the Gentiles and having a good time until men came down from Jerusalem and then he withdrew from the Gentiles the word anger is not used
32:58
what is used is Paul saying I withstood him to his face oh I bet that was fun and I'm sure Paul had a smile on his
33:10
face while he was brother think about what you're doing no the determinology is rebuke is it not
33:20
Paul rebuked the pope no Peter okay
33:37
now in both cases the sequel we have to assume turned out okay as Park pointed out in the sermon Sunday that later on Paul had eight use for
33:47
John Mark and asked for him to come to him and him and later on of course we have Peter referring to Paul as our beloved brother now he might have been afraid Paul would
33:58
yell at him if didn't but no I don't think that's the thing about if this anger is done correctly it's
34:13
okay um let's see if I can find the quote it's um
34:25
I'll get to that one later maybe it's this one this one it's it's it's a quote of oh here it is uh John stopped notes that true peace is not identical with appeasement now I'll start with
34:37
Brit who lived during the pre-war War War era as a young man and of course appeasement everybody thinks of now Chamberlain and you know
34:48
Pete true peace does not it's not identical with appeasement in such a world as this now here he's quoting another Anglican e k Simpson in such a world as this comments EK
35:00
Simpson the TRU is Peacemaker may have to assume the role of a peace breaker as a sacred obligation
35:20
not from our pulpits the idea that that a Christian a Christian breaks the peace as a sacred obligation I'm not necessarily agreeing with that statement I think it's very provocative
35:33
um but I do think that certainly Antioch all would have been guilty had he not broken the peace he would have been accomplice to a crime
35:46
an outrage in Israel if he had not withstood Peter to his face do we accept that and is it just because it was Paul
35:57
I don't think so pardon me pardon me because he was right yeah because he was right and because Peter was wrong and so and I think it's so wonderful
36:08
that we have that example because they're both apostles and that means that that doesn't matter you could still be wrong and if you're wrong you're wrong
36:19
and to be called out for that is not is not as a sin it would be a sin not to
36:30
so that's the cut that's kind of the positive side positive side that anger there is a place for for righteous anger but James says and it's interesting that
36:41
James says be slow to anger he does not say never be angry and the phrase that he uses there in one verse 9 verse 19 is is incredibly
36:55
important because it's a progression it hangs together okay quick to listen slow to speak
37:05
slow to anger if you forego either of the other two you will arrive at the third one and it will be sinful because it will be rash
37:18
and it will be without proper
37:37
to let the sun go down before doing something about whatever the subject of righteous anger so that some go down before doing something about it
37:49
whoever it can be for two reasons first of all it allows the outrage to continue to continue but secondly it can also
38:00
settle within you now I'm going to quote um you know please forgive me he is a he's a Jesuit
38:11
um Matthew Russell he had an article on this passage be angry and sin not his first take on that Passage
38:24
was this was this he's Jesuit okay figures all right but he couldn't maintain that maintain that and very quickly in his article he goes
38:35
into the interpersonal relationships which is the context of the passage okay and he has us to say he says do not let anger congeal into hatred
38:48
which as some has said is anger driven in to cut and faster in heart a moral blood poison of the worst
38:58
kind do not sin thus but on the contrary as quickly as possible break off from the feeling of anger quell it do it by the Dominion of reason and through the fear and love of
39:10
God now I added that last part in order to comment on it afterwards he was of the 19th century product of the Enlightenment the highlighting of reason and so he
39:21
he's not right he's right and said do not let anger congeal into hatred but do not quell it if it's true
39:32
do not overcome it with reason if it's true okay don't don't internalize it he's saying but also don't defuse it
39:43
act on it if that is what is needed but the point I want to make is the the truth of what he says is if you do wait
39:55
there is the danger that it will congeal into anger and I do like the word picture very Vivid he says anger driven to clot and fester in the heart
40:08
a moral blood poison
40:22
when it turns to hatred has crossed the line and the action that then comes from that will be sinful so here you have the same man the same
40:34
outrage okay outrage okay but instead of dealing with it you let it Fester and congeal and congeal and maybe over years
40:45
and finally and finally you deal with it and now it's sin now you see you you've now you've allowed that to fester in your heart and from
40:56
that putrid Mass out of the abundance of your heart your mouth speaks whereas if you have spoken at the event before the sun had gone
41:07
down wouldn't have been sin but now but now it is
41:23
yes and actually that would indicate that perhaps your anger is not righteous to begin with because if there is an outrage and you deal with it even if that person does
41:36
not repent not repent you have discharged your duty and if the motive is truth then your conscience is absolved
41:47
if you're still angry now you're taking it personally okay why would I still be angry he did it wrong I told him he did it wrong wrong
41:59
wrong wrong so I discharged my duty but if I didn't discharge my duty what is my duty am I now taking this offense personally and maybe that's what Levi and Simeon
42:11
did Eric
42:29
yep right and and I Howard is not quite sure that we're in the right and how can we ever be totally
42:40
sure even if we know that what the other person did is wrong how can we know that our motive is pure well we can't and and in that sense we have to go to
42:51
Psalm 139 and pray Lord search my heart and show me if there be any wicked way in me it keeps me from following you and we're not going to be perfect that okay
43:01
so and and none of this are we going to be perfect and I'm not even sure that Paul was entirely right in both situations that he was involved in Barnabas and Peter okay maybe he should
43:13
have taken Peter aside privately or something I don't know um but yeah I don't like second guess I'm just saying he was also Fallen he's not he was not sinless so that's a very
43:24
good point and there's a lot of psychology that goes on and it also there are different personalities okay there are Norwegians and there are Jews you know there are you know there
43:36
are people who are frigid nine months out of the year and there are people that are blooded and ready to shoot from the hip and both of them need to be quick to listen slow to speak
43:48
and I would it's it's not in the Greek but I think it's reasonable to infer him saying slower to anger and it's actually the the quickness of listening
44:00
listen listen to what's being said ruminate on what's being said contemplate what being said make sure
44:11
you're not misunderstanding what's being
44:22
then necessary speak and if really necessary be angry
44:55
yeah and I don't know how Barnabas felt but how did John and Mark feel you know maybe yeah he might have been an angry too he also might have that may have sunk deeper into him than blows on
45:07
the back of a fool and it may have been instrumental in him being ultimately useful for the kingdom okay we assume that Silas and John Mark
45:20
were in the audience I mean we don't know we're all together right so don't think they were necessarily so you know um it's not a pleasant circumstance but
45:31
you know a rebuke you know that's proverb of rebuke or proof goes deeper to a wise
45:42
man the blows on the back of the fool but it's not hasn't Justin you're absolutely right I mean nobody likes to be called out nobody wants Paul opposing you to to your face
45:52
um but if it is necessary and it is profitable and how we respond to that anger is every bit as important as how the person
46:04
delivers it delivers it and if somebody you know in our culture if if you simply frankly will not allow anybody to be angry at us because we never did anything wrong
46:15
we run a red light okay or we fly a drone at the Grand Canyon somebody says you're not allowed to do that um you know they're knocked okay
46:27
and I was trying to see the California Condors that they were scaring away with you know uh so there's no personal animosity at all
46:42
no one else was saying anything and the response is like who are you um we don't like to be rebuked and right Justin it's it is not for the
46:54
moment in fact even afterward when we think about it it's not a pleasant situation to be reviewed okay but the point of all this is that
47:04
there are times when it is sin not to be angry or it is sin be angry and do nothing about it
47:14
about it and so we we have to you know we have to not trust not trust and yet we don't um we don't we don't simply dismiss as
47:25
an emotion that is that is improper for a Christian and I want to make a couple of distinctions here and they're real quite related but in terms of
47:36
how do we avoid how do we be angry and yet sin not
47:51
I think we need to make some distinctions and and I can't point to words always used a certain way in a certain context and then other words always used in a different way that language isn't
48:03
like that so these more distinctions cons of concepts for example anger versus Wrath
48:16
okay and What flows out of anger and I'm treating anger as right Sanger as best we can do it okay I'm not I am not claiming nor would I accept that we
48:28
are ever perfectly righteous of anything we do we do but that also doesn't mean that we're perfectly wrong in everything we do that we can be angry and yet not sin in that
48:42
situation okay so what comes out of anger then is rebuke but what comes out of Wrath
49:05
I know I I don't like the the the cute little you know the 18 inch between your head and your heart preaching it's not what I'm saying but using the metaphor
49:15
there is a sense in which anger needs to stay up here
49:28
okay and be dealt with and not go down here
49:44
I believe so okay but again Italian 68 23 in me tell me okay so sixty percent of me said the other is German so so are you gonna get angry or
49:57
oh that's what you got with me no yes one other situation what other circumstance could Paul have done
50:09
in an Antioch to correct the situation because he wasn't just correcting the situation he makes a point why does he even relate this story because he's talking about the gospel
50:20
and how what was happening was an attack and an undermining of the Gospel so it was an outbreak in Israel and the only thing you can do and I
50:32
think Abe you're right there are circumstances where circumstances where anger is the only way out of the problem
50:43
doesn't mean that that way is going to be a clean out but it's cleaner than not being angry not dealing with it not pretending that
50:54
it didn't happen or or trying to to appease and to make everybody happy and no one's upset and that just makes everything worse
51:39
that's right and and whatever as we close out this evening we're talking about what about what how do we if possible how do we to avoid sinning and anger
51:51
and anger and that's a very good point thank you that that they lead to completely um goals they have different goals and different results now
52:02
this is not a one-way Street yes and he says Paul votes in Romans 12.
52:14
leave room for the wrath of God for vengeance is mine it is mine to repay and that's why James as he goes on in
52:25
his passages concerning anger he's starting he's he says in in chapter one you know just be slow to anger but he does elaborate on that in fact he says something that seems very
52:35
unequivocal and that is the anger of man does not achieve the righteousness of God well God well I submit that that's hyperbola
52:48
because we do have examples where the anger of man especially the gut man but also Paul did bring out the righteousness of God as far as we can tell
52:58
and and even in Corinth where in First Corinthians he's handing over somebody to Satan to Satan it appears that in second Corinthians
53:10
he's counseling restoration now we don't know that they're exactly the same people but we do know that the person in second Corinthians have been made sorrowful
53:20
made sorrowful he had been the object of discipline and now he was to be restored because apparently his repentance was was true as far as Paul could tell
53:33
um if if God can do this in this way so can we in his strength by his base
53:43
but it's a two-way street the other person is part of it so for example if Paul had rebuked Peter Peter took offense to that
53:58
would there have been restoration and healing and no no there would have been destruction it's not just the person who's angry
54:09
it's the person also with whom or to whom the anger is directed okay and they both have to look at the situation and say
54:20
am am I right am I wrong and should I should I be angry should I accept this anger should I rebuke should I accept this rebuke
54:31
this rebuke and so it can go wrong in so many different places different places so Pete or James in his you know I've talked about these couplets and how it's woven these
54:41
concepts are woven through but they're Progressive and so we'll get to chapter three chapter four and chapter five we begin to see James focusing on
54:54
the nature of sinful anger okay and one of the key aspects of that is what is known as the ad hominem
55:16
at the man against the person now again you could take that uh hate this in Love The Sinner but that's not what we're talking about here about here what James is talking about is same
55:28
thing Paul talked us about because he goes on and he says when you judge a person you are placing yourself not under the law but above it
55:40
later on he he says the judge the righteous judge is at the door so do not judge one another the idea of judging one another
55:51
Jesus in his Sermon on the Mount says you know do not judge lest you be judged but then in John chapter 7 he says judge with righteous judgment
56:02
that's like do not answer the fool but answer the fool okay which is it Jesus I judge no I judge with righteous judgment and what I judge is not and never is
56:16
Ultimate that's where we leave room for wrath of God and as as Paul says in Romans 14 who are you to judge the servant and of other to that
56:27
to that more he will stand and he's not your servant okay so there's a there's a point at which as we are we're this is why you need to be quick to hear and slow to speak
56:40
because there's a point at which
56:54
James chapter 3 he gives a little bit more definition to this now it's in the context of the tongue and that's only a separate theme
57:05
verse 8 but no one can tame the tongue it is a Restless evil and full of dead poison that's why we need to be slow to speak but he goes on in verse nine with it we
57:17
bless our Lord and father and with it we curse men curse men who have been made in the likeness of God okay verse 11 of chapter 4 do not speak
57:30
against one another Brethren he who speaks against the brother or judges his brother speaks against the law and judges the law but if you judge the law you were not a
57:41
doer of law but a judge of it chapter 5 verse 9 do not complain Brethren against one another that you yourselves may not be judged behold the judge is standing
57:52
right at the door I think he's giving us insight into where not to go the Dark Side of
58:03
anger the anger that's going to lead to hatred the anger that's the blood poison and that is when it becomes directed at the brother and not at but the brother just did
58:14
just did not and what the brother is doing wrong that is self-sin but it's at the brother and you actually curse now the idea of a curse especially in
58:26
the ancient near East is a very serious concept it's cursed someone was make that person anathema to the deity
58:37
and to desire his utter destruction okay you put you over on this side of the whole situation
58:52
so there are safeguards that James gives us in in terms of avoiding sin while yet being angry and again please don't misunderstand me I
59:04
don't think we can possibly be free of sin if we're always angry
59:18
if we're walking according to the spirit as a community
59:30
yes not by our anger okay so they should know us by our love not not our anger so I'm I'm talking about anger tonight but I do not want to be misunderstood as saying that that
59:41
anger is a um essential component of the Community of Faith it is not
59:52
it is as wrath is God's what do they call it call it um his um his strange work strange work what does he prefer living kindness and