More on Colossians 3

I thought that I would post as a main entry my response to a very good question regarding my sermon summary on Colossians 3.5-7. The question was great (to view the question click on "comments" at the end of the last post...this post might not make much sense without viewing the question). I hope my answer is at least half-way adequate. Here is my response to Bobby:

Bobby,

You have touched upon a very thorny issue in theology. Your question is highly relevant, and important.

First, I think it is helpful for me to clarify my comments. When we are given a new nature in Christ it is true that we will desire to be like God in every way. However, I would add that we will desire to be like God in every way that He has ordained (or we could say intended) for mortal man whom He created in His image. Obviously, we cannot be like God in exactly every way. That was never God’s intention. Created in His image at creation, man was not an exact carbon copy of God. Rather, he represented God better than all of the rest of creation. When man fell into sin through Adam’s transgression in the Garden, that image was marred (not destroyed though!). That image begins to be restored only through the atoning work of Christ. Furthermore, it does not all happen in one shot. When man is restored to fellowship with God through Christ, that image is in process of being restored. This is what theologians refer to as sanctification. And in Colossians 3.5-7, Paul is speaking about sanctification even though he does not use the word.

Second, it might be helpful to identify two categories that theologians often discuss that relate to your question (s). The first category is what is known as the “communicable attributes” of God. The communicable attributes of God are simply attributes of God that are more shared with us by God. Communicable attributes include things like wisdom, truthfulness, love, mercy, grace, and patience. The second category is referred to as the “incommunicable attributes”. This category includes attributes such as the unchangeableness of God, the eternity of God, the omnipresence of God. These are attributes that are less shared with us by God. It must be stated that these are not perfect categories because we cannot completely understand God’s character. In addition, there is some overlap between these categories. But most theologians think these distinct categories are at a least a good start in understanding this thorny issue.

Now I think that everything I have mentioned will help to answer your question. Let me try and put it all together. Here it goes…. Anger and wrath in and of themselves are not bad qualities. As you pointed out, there is a real sense in which God possesses both. The difference is that God is holy, thus when He demonstrates anger or wrath it is always a righteous and praiseworthy act. However, when sinful man (even man restored to God through Christ) demonstrates anger or wrath the result is not always the same. That is why Paul can tell the Christians to put off anger and wrath. We do not have the proper filter that enables us to demonstrate righteous anger and wrath exactly like God. Simply put, we are not holy and perfect.

Your last question- “…are those in Christ NEVER justified in their anger?” is a somewhat different issue. I am assuming that when you placed the word “never” in all caps you were emphasizing “no exceptions whatsoever” (?). If I am wrong let me know. But if that is what you were getting at, then I think I can answer your question with some degree of confidence. I would say that there are actually instances where if a Christian does not have some degree of anger, then it is sinful. Let me illustrate. If a child smarts off to his mother, and the father hears it, he is obligated to communicate to that child that that type of behavior will not be tolerated. One of the ways to communicate this to a young child would be to give a 50-minute exposition of the command “Honor your father and mother”. Although, this would not be a bad idea, it’s probably not the most effective method. The father might mention the command, and indeed he should. But he will also communicate to the child that he is angry because his wife has been slandered. The child must see that the father’s first priority is his relationship with the child’s mother. The child must see the seriousness of the offense. In other words, it would be unnatural for a Christian father to not possess some degree of anger if his wife is slandered. Indeed, it would reveal that he does not value and love his wife. He is obligated to teach the child respect for his parents, respect for authority in general, and respect for God ultimately. The seriousness of it will be communicated through the demonstration of controlled anger on the part of the father. Now let’s say that instead of talking to the child in this manner he opts to slap his kid across the face in a fit of rage. Well, that is not righteous anger! Right? Or, let’s say one Sunday the preacher preaches on the rapture (in support of it). And let’s say that you disagree with him. As you are leaving the preacher suspends his hand for you to shake it. Instead of shaking his hand, however, you punch him in the face. Your anger smoldered the whole sermon, and now you gave the preacher what he deserved. I think we can clearly say that is not righteous anger either (and I’m not just saying that because I am a preacher)! That is the type of action that Paul is telling Christians to put off.

In saying all of that I realize that no illustration is perfect. Furthermore, no situation is the same as well. It would be wrong to categorize different examples of anger into certain categories of “right” anger and “wrong” anger. However, there still must be a sense in which instances exist where anger on the part of the Christian is permissible, and even obligatory.

In Ephesians 5:1 (in almost a carbon copy passage to Col. 3.5 ff.) Paul tells Christians to “Be imitators of God, as beloved children”. This is what Paul is doing in the Colossians passage as well. We are to demonstrate that we are “partakers of the divine nature” (2 Pet. 1:4) as much as possible on this side of glory. This is only done by the power of the Spirit that indwells us, and is ultimately done for the glory of God alone. Furthermore, we will not reflect God perfectly, nor has God enabled us to in this lifetime.

Let me know if this helps:)- AS