Bill has been preparing daily messages for some time, the fruit of his nightly meditations on Scripture. Some of these have been published on Facebook. We intend to select a few of these as topic pieces for the blog here.
Moses got angry when Pharoah refused to release the Israelites for a time of worship. Jonah became angry when God changed His mind about destroying the wicked city of Nineveh, David got angry with the shepherd who stole his neighbor’s pet lamb, Elisha was angry with the 40 youths who mocked him for being bald, Jesus was angry with the merchants in the temple and drove them out. And did not Paul write, “Be angry and sin not” (Ephesians 4:26). With all these examples it would seem right to get angry sometimes.
God’s PUNISHMENT of Moses for his ANGER.
Moses was an angry man. He took his anger out on the Egyptian slave master by killing him. He got angry with Pharoah for rejecting God’s commend even though God told Moses that Pharoah would reject it. Moses lacked self-confidence by claiming that he was not a good speaker in spite of God telling him what to say. He expressed his frustration by getting angry. In an act of anger he threw down the tablets of stone on which God had written the ten commandments. His final act of anger was striking the rock rather than speaking to it as God commanded. This cost him the opportunity to enter the promised land.
The LACK of CHARACTER revealed in Jonah’s ANGER.
Nineveh was known for its cruelty, torture, sinfulness and murder. It is not surprising that Jonah dreaded going there. But when he preached against it, the king and all the people repented, and God postponed judgement. This caused Jonah to get angry. God pointed out Jonah’s lack of pity and compassion for all the people of the city who had just repented of their sins. God revealed that Jonah was as heartless as those whom he preached against!
David’s ANGER was self-incriminating.
When Nathan told David about a rich man who stole his neighbor’s pet lamb, “David’s anger was greatly kindled against the man.” Nathan replied, “You are the man!” (II Samuel 12:5,7). We tend to get angry with people who have the same failures that we have.
God’s condemnation of ALL ANGER!
Many people try to justify their anger by claiming that it is “righteous indignation.” There is no such word in the Bible. Instead, God condemns ALL ANGER by stating: “The wrath of man does NOT PRODUCE the RIGHTEOUSNESS of GOD” (James 1:20). Only God can be angry!
We are commanded to “Let all bitterness, and wrath, and ANGER…BE PUT AWAY FROM YOU” (Ephesians 4:31). This command is repeated in Colossians 3:8. Anger is not only futile it is damaging to the person’s health and all his relationships: “A man of great wrath shall suffer punishment” (Proverbs 19:19). “Wrath is cruel, ANGER is outrageous” (Proverbs 27:4).
Anger blocks out Godly qualities: “Be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ’s sake has forgiven you” (Ephesians 4:32). God gives His conclusion on anger: “ANGER RESTS IN THE BOSOM OF FOOLS” (Ecclesiastes 7:9).
Bill Gothard, Ph.D. 10/04/2022 EmbassyUniversity.com
St. Paul said ” be angry, do not sin. do not let the sun go down on your wrath” in Ephesians 4:26.
Bill has also mischaracterized Moses, David and Jonah. The murder of the Egyptian by Moses was probably more like manslaughter in that he was coming to the defense of a fellow Jew and the resulting fight probably cause the death. There is no condemnation from God for what happened, Moses ran away due to Pharaoh, not God. Moses was called the meekest man on earth in Numbers 12:3. That doesn’t sound like an out of control angry man at all. The incident that resulted in preventing Moses from going into the promise land was not due to uncontrolled anger but not obeying God in speaking to the rock, instead he hit the rock. Moses body was assumed into heaven (read Jude), he also appeared with Elijah in the transfiguration so Bill is wrong in painting Moses as out of control angry man and if he was, I highly doubt he would have been assumed into heaven.
Painting Jonah as some sort of out of control angry guy is also totally wrong. Jesus does make reference to Jonah in that it would be the “sign of Jonah” that would prove who Jesus is.
King David got angry at the injustice of the parable that Nathan told him. It is not mentioned that this anger was sinful, it was King David’s adultery and murder that was sinful.
Bill also ignored Phinehas, grandson of Aaron who became angry at an Israelite consorting with a Midianite woman that he killed them both and this incident was counting as a righteous act (see Numbers 25) This doesn’t fit Bill’s ideas here. Bill also ignored Jesus over turning money tables in the temple and driving people out with a whip. Bill also ignores the many references of God Almighty being angry himself. Bill needs to stop proof texting the Bible to fit his ideas. If he want to claim that all anger no matter what is sinful, does God getting angry which is mentioned several times in scripture make God sinful? Anger is a powerful emotion, it is more often used in sinful ways that good ways which prompt the warnings we do read about. But to make blanket statements that anger in it of itself is always sinful no matter what is not supporting when one looks at ALL of scripture, not just proof texting verses together to support it. Bill want to paint God in control of the weather in the other post here as ready to use it to punish people due to anger and then turn around and state all anger is sinful no matter what. He can’t have it both ways but makes me wonder if Bill himself, deep inside of himself is dealing with a lot of anger.
“St. Paul said ” be angry, do not sin.””
Bill quoted that. A better rendering of that is “being angered, sin not”. We are all angered – what happens next is the key.
Moses: Moses was the meekest man to ever have an anger problem. Mose WAS angry with the people, and did a stupid thing. God forgave him – Jude tells us about a fight over the body of Moses, but he definitely went to heaven.
Jonah: Was definitely angry over God not killing the Ninevites, and over God killing his favorite vine. I think he was wrong to be.
David: That anger was way out of line and an expression of a man with a guilty conscience. We are hardest on others that are in the middle of the same sin we are.
Phinehas: Was not recorded as being angry. Firm action as an emissary of the government (God in this case) is not the same as being personally angered by a crime and acting on it. THAT is the difference between a “good cop” and a “bad cop”.
The Lord Jesus: Bill clearly stated that, yes, GOD alone has the right to get angry.
None of them, Moses, Jonah or King David can be characterized as “angry men”. Bill is misinterpreting them. Jonah could be accused of maybe prejudice against pagans like found in Ninevah but that doesn’t make him an “angry man”. Getting upset about the vine doesn’t make him an out of control angry man. David’s sins were adultery and murder, not anger, that’s what got him into trouble. I read Psalm 95 this morning. It talks about coming before the Lord and that He is the one who made us. Then it gives a warning, “Today, listen to the voice of the Lord, Do no grow stubborn, as your fathers did in the wilderness when at Meriba and Massah they challenged me and provoked me Although they had seen all of my works. Forty years I endured that generation. I said “they are a people whose hearts go astray and they do not know my ways”. So I swore in my anger “They shall not enter into my rest”.
Mariba and Massah was where Moses, struck the rock instead of speaking to it. Moses is not mentioned in Psalm 95 as a warning but the attitudes of the people were. That is what we should take away from this whole affair, not that Moses was such a angry man which is false, but being stubborn and lacking faith in God. The conclusions Bill has come up with are false. He has no business to condemn Moses, Jonah or King David which is what he did to come up with his idea that having any or all anger is always sin. This contradicts Ephesians 4 totally, even if you are trying to reinterpret to say something else.
There are things that God tolerates in us that are not His best. That includes things like multiple wives and fathers imperfectly disciplining their children “after their own pleasure”. Anger is one of them, possibly even related to the last example. The Lord has made it clear that anger is not a good thing. It is never praised, and multiple times eliminated, including in this verse:
Psalms 37:8 “Cease from anger, and forsake wrath: fret not thyself in any wise to do evil.”
Anger is quite literally when we leave the path of being a bondslave to the Lord and we become our own law, judge, jury, and executioner. Anger is personal vengeance. It may parallel God’s purposes, but never does so perfectly.
And as to Eph. 4, this appears to be a direct quote from Psalm 4:4:
Psalms 4:4. “Stand in awe, and sin not: commune with your own heart upon your bed, and be still.” In the German translation (Luther) that Psalm substitutes “Anger” for “Awe”. Darby’s translation of the Psalm: “Be moved with anger, and sin not”
So . . . There are a variety of ways to go with this. Whatever the strong passion we are moved by, we must get control and not sin. If the “wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God”, then, whereas the anger itself is not the sin, ANY action based on it is. Which means – we need to have a vigorous plan of attack to get rid of it before we take another step.
Hear, hear. A fruit of the Spirit is temperance. If ever there were something which needs temperance, it is our passions. The old-fashioned wording in the KJV warns about the “motions of sins” in the members of our flesh. They bring forth fruit unto death.
Perhaps not all anger is created equal? In Ephesians 4, is allowance made for indignation which flares in our emotions when we confront injustice? There seems to be an anger which is not yet sin unless we coddle it past its expiration date. Seemingly, we are warned not to permit our wrathful emotions to percolate into sin. Shouldn’t we temper our testosterone? If not the hormone, at least the effects?
Dr. Peter Williamson in his commentary on Ephesians wrote this concerning 4:26-27.
“Continuing to recall OT teaching, Paul quotes Ps. 4:5, Be Angry but do not sin. The Psalm continues, “commune with your own hearts on your beds and be silent” (RSV) The teaching recognizes a distinction between the emotion of anger, for which we may not be responsible, and what we do with it. People may say and do things that make us angry, sometime rightly angry, but the psalm Paul cites counsel restraint in our response, Paul goes further, advising, do not let the sun set on your anger. Keep short accounts. If at all possible (Rom 12:18), reconcile quickly with the person from who you are estranged (Matt 5:25, 18:15; Luke 17″3-5) If that is not possible, as often it is not, do not how on to your anger; surrender it to the Lord. Forgive and donor best to release from your anger the person who has offended you. Why? So that you may not leave room from the devil. ”
That is much better review and commentary on anger that what Bill stated which is a hard finger pointing condemnation of others including Moses, David and Jonah. Anger is an emotion that we all have had in some degree. It is what we do with anger that leads to sin or not. Bill stated all anger is a sin. He is extreme.
I really like that, and that is along the lines of how I heard Bill explain it, and others, like S. M. Davis. As to “all anger is sin”, please explain the following two passages before we try to settle this:
James 1:19-20 “Wherefore, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath: 20 For the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God.”
Psalms 37:8 “Cease from anger, and forsake wrath: fret not thyself in any wise to do evil.”
My explanation: In the first passage, while asking us to “slow anger down”, it states that our anger never is executing God’s righteousness. God may choose to use it, but it is never His chosen solution. The second tells us to quit, get off of anger, with the implication that unless we do, our “fretting” will produce evil.
Indeed, anger is a dangerous toy. However innocently it begins, it will probably become sin. S.M. Davis once noted the close connection between anger and lust. Both are natural impulses, but if we indulge them, they lead us into sin.
As for Gothard being extreme, consider the old Barry Goldwater defense. In politics, extremism in defense of liberty is no vice, and moderation in pursuit of justice is no virtue.
The same holds true in morals. Extremism may awaken us to moral danger, while moderation lulls our conscience into phony security. I don’t mind extreme warnings. Do whatever it takes to rouse my conscience.
James fits what St. Paul wrote in Ephesians, “slow to wrath”. Neither fit what Bill just wrote in this piece which is all anger is sin. Just because someone feels anger over a wrong or injustice doesn’t mean that in it of itself is sin but acting on it or going down the road to act on it more often than not will lead to rashness and sin. What Dr. Williamson wrote is a far cry of what Bill Gothard just wrote about. Maybe HOW you understand Bill really is very different from what Bill is teaching in this one-page meditation. Which lead me to my next comment, both of these meditations paint a very dark picture of God, i.e., a very angry and vengeful God. His own view and portrayal of God is very dark. Bill wants to condemn just having a feeling or feelings of anger but paints God as one big angry monster. There are two extremes, the one paints God as a giant Santa Claus type of sloppy agape character, the other is Bill, God is one big angry monster. I’m not sure what is in the other one-page meditations of Bill, but these two are quite horrific.
Not completely sure where all of that comes from, this “image of God”. Sin is horrid, and anger and wrath play a huge role in that blackness. So if God is super focused on eliminating the “wrath of man”, that is not bad, that is very good. God does not tolerate us becoming “little gods” – it really angers Him. And EVERY time we act on anger, we become exactly that, executing our vengeance according to our understanding of good and evil. An understanding that is always woefully incomplete.
“Slow to wrath” means we stay in control, wrestling the monster into submission. That is exactly what Bill is teaching.
Speaking of anger, the angriest response to Josh Duggar came from Jinger Vuolo. Now she is coming out with a new book, Jan 2023 which takes direct aim at Bill Gothard and IBLP, which I am sure will not be pretty. This is not good news for Bill or IBLP. Just saying.
The entire Duggar family has been through so much. With all of the blessings of fame have come challenges that would crush the spirit. I understand the need for the young people to breathe their own air and direct their own families. Their brother, whom they trusted, has severely damaged them and the work and name of the Lord. It is difficult to fathom. I still do not have direct facts from him or the parents to work with, but the parts that are acknowledged and indisputable break the heart. I know the “wiles of the devil” and have some sense of how close any one of us are to train-wreck level disaster, except for the grace of God. May He turn the weapons of the Evil One against him. We will all say, “The Lord is in complete control and knows exactly what He is doing.”
Since the book is not out there is nothing to comment further on at this time.
Jinger Duggar was rebaptized. While I didn’t understand why at the time, with this book coming out and what the cover of it has stated, she was repudiating the version of the Christian faith she was brought up in. It makes more sense now than it did before. This goes well beyond your excuse of young people just wanting to explore something else. Josh Duggar has a very sad long history dealing with immorality which was not handled at all by the Duggars when it first came up in their home with Jill. Instead of getting him proper help, they sent him to work on construction with the Spiveys, who were put in charge of running the youth home Arkansas. Jim Bob along with Bill Gothard and the Spiveys are all together in a picture of its grand opening and dedication. That is also why the Spiveys showed up at Josh’s trial. His time at some Fundamentalist Church in Chicago also did not help Josh because all he did was sit in a room and read the Bible. It is a terrible tragedy all around and the people that suffer the most in this are Josh’s 7 children. This has nothing to do with the devil attacking them because the problems with Josh happen well before the TV shows. One of the subjects from Jinger’s book is about the so-called Umbrella of Protection. So, while you claim you can’t comment because you don’t know what is in this book, the subtitles do point to what she is going to talk about and address in this book.
Jill and Derek are also supposed to be writing a book. The Duggars have done it to themselves, and it has nothing to do with attacks from the devil.
Don’t rejoice over any failures you may see. I have seen, and I am sure you have, children from any number of Christian backgrounds end up in trouble. If Judas could get spiritually to where he was under the direct discipleship of the Lord Jesus, none of us are inherently immune.
We have discussed Josh’s troubles at length. Remember, this strict discipleship program he was under – and the gentleman’s name who ran it was not Spivey – was appropriate for his childish actions of satisfying his sexual curiosity at the expense of sleeping sisters, especially given that he “came clean”, confessed the deeds which would never have been discovered. What would you suggest have been done to him? The “experts” have no better track record. The parents in fact went to the police for guidance, did all that was given them to do, and then the record of the minor were to have been sealed forever. An unscrupulous police chief illegally leaked them, just to damage him and his family. Did that have a role in his eventual disintegration? I don’t know. But words that the Savior spoke about stumbling a child, of millstones and drops into the depths of the sea come to mind.
I have seen the grip that sexual bondage has on people – it is almost like when the Savior said, “The kind cometh not out but by prayer and fasting”.
As to Jinger, she was NOT repudiating her upbringing. She was acknowledging that she had never entered into a genuine new birth with the Savior when she confessed that as an 11 year old. Being baptized before she was actually saved at 14 rendered that act invalid. The “rebaptism” was simply an acknowledgement that baptism only “counts” as a symbol when a person has actually trusted Christ as Savior. I read two accounts and that is exactly what happened here. I know of others that have done this – the water only carries meaning when done in response to the genuine faith of the one being baptized.
I always anticipate and appreciate the polite words of clarification the moderator never fails to provide for each post. Thank you!
Thank you for sweet words. Much appreciated.