Is it ever appropriate to be angry?

[Fether]

Im not just talking about common situations where someone harms us or our kids are loud in sacrament meeting. I want to go to the extremes where someone maliciously harms us in an extreme way, or some atrocity is committed. 

I have the opinion that, though it may be understandable and that there may be good reason, it is never appropriate to be angry.

Many point to Christ cleansing the temple as a justification that it is ok to be angry. But I challenge that idea that Christ was angry.

If there are times when it is appropriate to be angry, could you explain what those times are and what factors play into making it appropriate?

[rpn]

I don't challenge the idea that Christ was angry (though He might not have been, His actions would have made anyone watching assume He was, at least --- it surely is described like those who wrote about it in the records we have thought He was).    And I do think it entirely appropriate to be angry in some circumstances.   And I think that righteous anger doesn't last long and effects change, not retribution.  

[JLHPROF]

The number of scriptures indicating God is angry leads me to say yes, anger can be an appropriate emotion.

But we are rarely angry for the right reasons.

[The Nehor]

God can express anger without malice. I am not sure humans can.

[Meadowchik]

There's nothing wrong with feeling anger or being angry. Anger is an emotion and it just is. 

The key is to respond appropriately to the emotion. What is an appropriate response to anger? It depends on the situation. But first and foremost, there needs to be the self awareness, "I am angry," and the awareness that it may or may not correspond directly to whatever seems to be drawing our attention in the moment. 

Maybe you're angry at fussy kids during sacrament meeting because you've attached yourself to the idea that their noise level corresponds to your parenting skills.

Maybe someone hurt you through no fault of their own and deserve none of your ire.

Maybe someone hurt you through negligence or abuse and your anger is a necessary defense against them harming you further.

My mom taught me that anger often serves one of two purposes:

Teaches us something about ourselves.

And/or 

Motivates us to resist and even fight against evil.

 

 

[Fether]

Just now, JLHPROF said:

The number of scriptures indicating God is angry leads me to say yes, anger can be an appropriate emotion.

But we are rarely angry for the right reasons.

 

Just now, The Nehor said:

God can express anger without malice. I am not sure humans can.

I would agree with Nehor here. There are different types of anger too. I would go as far to say that all of the anger we feel as humans is accompanied by a feeling of wanting to get back at someone. I doubt God’s anger comes with that. 

[Fether]

4 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

There's nothing wrong with feeling anger or being angry. Anger is an emotion and it just is. 

3 Nephi 12:22 and Matt 5:22 JST “whosoever is angry with his brother shall be in danger of the judgment:”

Edited April 17, 2022 by Fether

[Chum]

27 minutes ago, Fether said:

I have the opinion that, though it may be understandable and that there may be good reason, it is never appropriate to be angry.

Appropriate to who? In recovery from trauma, anger can be necessary.

[The Nehor]

When I realized that someone at my job was directly and actively trying to ruin my career by blaming the results of their incompetence on my supposed laziness. I felt anger at first. When the anger’s fire burned out I then rather methodically contributed and possibly caused them to get fired within the next week. I am not sure if that was expressing anger or if it was justified self-defense.

[Meadowchik]

1 minute ago, Fether said:

Matt 5:22 “whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment:”

Anger can be dangerous indeed, but it is pretty much inevitable. Learn how to manage it to navigate through the danger.

[The Nehor]

33 minutes ago, Fether said:

I have the opinion that, though it may be understandable and that there may be good reason, it is never appropriate to be angry.

That is an impossible standard. More likely it is not appropriate to act out of anger or at least primarily out of anger.

[Fether]

7 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

When I realized that someone at my job was directly and actively trying to ruin my career by blaming the results of their incompetence on my supposed laziness. I felt anger at first. When the anger’s fire burned out I then rather methodically contributed and possibly caused them to get fired within the next week. I am not sure if that was expressing anger or if it was justified self-defense.

One can act in self defense and self respect without being angry. I would say your action was appropriate 

Edited April 17, 2022 by Fether

[Fether]

2 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

That is an impossible standard. More likely it is not appropriate to act out of anger or at least primarily out of anger.

Christ’s decree to be perfect is also impossible, yet it still stands. How can we rationalize that?

[The Nehor]

2 minutes ago, Fether said:

Christ’s decree to be perfect is also impossible, yet it still stands. How can we rationalize that?

You can read it as the “being complete or whole” thing that some say is a better translation. You can read it as aspirational as perfection is impossible in a fallen body so it is more shoot for perfection. I suspect Jesus felt anger. If not he missed out on a key element of the human experience. I don’t think he acted on it or at least not primarily on it.

[SeekingUnderstanding]

53 minutes ago, Fether said:

Im not just talking about common situations where someone harms us or our kids are loud in sacrament meeting. I want to go to the extremes where someone maliciously harms us in an extreme way, or some atrocity is committed. 

I have the opinion that, though it may be understandable and that there may be good reason, it is never appropriate to be angry.

Many point to Christ cleansing the temple as a justification that it is ok to be angry. But I challenge that idea that Christ was angry.

If there are times when it is appropriate to be angry, could you explain what those times are and what factors play into making it appropriate?

The original reading of Mark 1:41 almost certainly read “anger” instead of “compassion” so there is that to contend with too

Edited April 17, 2022 by SeekingUnderstanding

[Meadowchik]

15 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

That is an impossible standard. More likely it is not appropriate to act out of anger or at least primarily out of anger.

Even the quote he supplies above implies allowances for anger.

"whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment"

Implies there can be cause for anger and it doesn't even say someone angry without cause will suffer hellfire, but rather be in danger of it.

 

 

 

[Teancum]

1 hour ago, Fether said:

Im not just talking about common situations where someone harms us or our kids are loud in sacrament meeting. I want to go to the extremes where someone maliciously harms us in an extreme way, or some atrocity is committed. 

I have the opinion that, though it may be understandable and that there may be good reason, it is never appropriate to be angry.

Many point to Christ cleansing the temple as a justification that it is ok to be angry. But I challenge that idea that Christ was angry.

If there are times when it is appropriate to be angry, could you explain what those times are and what factors play into making it appropriate?

Sure.  Anger is just another emotion that we have amongst all the others. Now what you do with the anger is another issue.

[Fether]

37 minutes ago, The Nehor said:

You can read it as the “being complete or whole” thing that some say is a better translation. You can read it as aspirational as perfection is impossible in a fallen body so it is more shoot for perfection. I suspect Jesus felt anger. If not he missed out on a key element of the human experience. I don’t think he acted on it or at least not primarily on it.

 

28 minutes ago, SeekingUnderstanding said:

The original reading of Mark 1:41 almost certainly read “anger” instead of “compassion” so there is that to contend with too

 

26 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

Even the quote he supplies above implies allowances for anger.

"whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment"

Implies there can be cause for anger and it doesn't even say someone angry without cause will suffer hellfire, but rather be in danger of it.

 

 

 

I did find this insight in the guide to the scriptures under “anger”

”Anger is the display of temper.”

I suppose the term “righteous indignation” isn’t about justifying the display of temper in certain situations, but rather displaying the temper one has in a righteous fashion.

[strappinglad]

God's anger in scripture often uses the word " wrath " , which I think implies a step up from regular anger. To quote the Hulk, " you won't like Him when He's angry " . 

[Fether]

I’m finding the different sources refer to anger differently. Some refer to it as a display of an emotion, while others refer to it as the emotion itself

[bluebell]

I think it's complicated.

Sometimes anger can be motivation towards actions that are good.  Anger at seeing a dog being mistreated can cause someone to intervene and save the dog, for example, or decide to work to change laws so that it doesn't happen again, etc.  I do believe that righteous anger does exist.

But I would also say that probably 99% of the anger that we have in our lives is not righteous anger, and that it harms us and those around us.

[The Nehor]

1 hour ago, Meadowchik said:

Even the quote he supplies above implies allowances for anger.

"whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment"

Implies there can be cause for anger and it doesn't even say someone angry without cause will suffer hellfire, but rather be in danger of it.

The Book of Mormon equivalent is not so forgiving about being angry even if you have a cause.

[Fether]

46 minutes ago, bluebell said:

Sometimes anger can be motivation towards actions that are good.  Anger at seeing a dog being mistreated can cause someone to intervene and save the dog, for example, or decide to work to change laws so that it doesn't happen again, etc.  I do believe that righteous anger does exist.

Could the same actions be done without the anger?

[Calm]

54 minutes ago, Fether said:

Anger is the display of temper.”

Hmmm….I see it as the reverse myself.  When people say someone has a temper, that is a result of seeing the other express anger in an uncontrolled way.

But if you are going to be discussing appropriateness of anger with others, you need to first decide on what anger is and in my opinion if you are using this definition and others are seeing anger as the initial emotional reaction, you are talking about two different things…an emotion/feeling and the expression of that ‘emotion’.  If this is confusing, think of how we use “attraction” and “lust”, attraction may be something we can’t completely control but lusting is acting inappropriately on the attraction.  Perhaps finding a better word that implies expression of a feeling more than just the feeling would be usef, maybe “rage”?

[Calm]

2 minutes ago, Fether said:

Could the same actions be done without the anger?

Anger can be the initial reaction that causes us to pay attention, but then we should be making a judgment about about what we are seeing and changing our motivation to a desire to protect or see justice done.  If we continue to nurture our anger as a way to keep motivated, we are likely to make a mistake in how we attempt to resolve issues.  We need to find another to maintain passion about our cause, focus more on love or compassion for the ones harmed, not anger at the abuser.  Too often if we focus on the abuser because of anger or the fear that may be the root of our anger, the actual victims are further harmed or neglected and their situation is not changed.  Think of a justice system being effectively used to punish and imprison those who rob others, but this ‘just’ society neglects to resolve aspects of its culture that may increase someone’s likelihood of becoming someone who sees robbing another as a viable option for them to take.