The Anger of Man

I've recently been in discussion with someone regarding the idea of depression being the result of inwardly directed anger. I've been thinking a lot about their thoughts, and their quest to learn how to process anger, if not inwardly. I think I'm on a similar quest, and I really appreciate their openness and vulnerability on the subject. I think I've also tended to internalize anger, maybe because I've not known where to direct it. And I wonder if that's a key with processing anger. Not so much the idea of getting angry, and maybe beyond figuring out where it's coming from (or what's behind it), but then to direct the anger appropriately. So I guess I'm seeing three phases with anger management. Acknowledging it, learning what's behind it, then appropriately directing it. I think most of us don't even get through the first stage very well. I'm not claiming to always do well with the second phase either, but my default for the third phase I think, is to turn my anger inward, on myself, resulting in unhealthy mindsets even including depression at times. Objectively, I think I can reason that that's not really fair for others to do, so I guess it's not fair for me either. But my default setting is to still direct my anger inwardly. I don't have a dog to kick when I get home, and if I did I wouldn't kick it. And I understand that kicking a dog is an inappropriate display of anger, but at least it's not an internal display. That doesn't make it better by any means, but it probably decreases depression for a person (not the dog). But I digress. My point is that I think there are different consequences based on how you deal with anger. Depression vs dog bites if you will. Choose your poison. Funny how we'll go to great lengths to avoid the dog bite consequence. But while it seems absurd to be accepting of the dog bite, we often are quite complacent when it comes to a state of depression as a consequence of anger.

The concept of appropriately directing anger elsewhere (besides inwardly) was a hard one for me to grasp. I would rather internalize it and call it a day. But I've come to grips that Jesus was the perfect example of directing anger appropriately. I am capable of being angry enough to turn over tables at a temple, but I'd probably also yell at the poor people for not knowing better than to buy to overpriced goods. But Jesus always directed his anger towards the appropriate party (and never kicked a dog that I know of).

I'm capable of yelling in the face of Peter's arrogance, but Jesus said "Get thee behind me Satan" even while looking directly at Peter. Direct hit on Satan, but Peter got the point too.

I'm capable of pulling up the wheat with the tares, but Jesus knows how to get just the tares, and He will at the appropriate time, sparing the wheat.

My anger does not achieve the righteousness of God because most of the time, I don't know how to direct it appropriately, including when I direct it towards myself. I can see that so much more clearly now. I think that is why God tells us to leave the vengeance to Him. We are just too capable of collateral damage. I don't think that means we turn totally passive. But I think it might be better to error on the passive side than on the vengeance side.

And even though I can convince myself to error on the passive side towards other people (maybe it's called grace), it's still very hard to cut myself the same slack. But I don't think it has to remain that way. I think maybe I'm getting a little better with cutting myself some slack, without becoming a slacker (don't know if those terms are really related, but, oh well).

Probably doesn't help much for me to tell anyone to cut themselves some slack. But I'll ask you, the reader, if you are willing to cut yourself some more slack. Can you give yourself permission to fail? Can you cut yourself the same slack you're willing to cut others? I have to ask myself the same things. I'm also finding that venting can be an excellent tool to help diffuse some of that anger. It also helps to have a person listen and give feedback in terms of what might be under the anger. Of course even venting needs to be done appropriately so it doesn't turn slanderous. But I think that's what good friends are for. Plus, the best of friends don't let us slander ourselves. So, see if you can give yourself permission to vent as well. And perhaps we'll both grow in allowing God the duty of vengeance, even towards ourselves. An in the event we need to courageously take appropriate action outwardly, may the God of discernment truly guide our paths so His righteousness is achieved, not our collateral damage.

Happy Returns

It was only the day after Christmas. Actually, the night after Christmas, and I thought the rush for returning gifts may have diminished at least a little bit. So I headed to the local retail store to return one simple item. I found I was not the only one trying to sneak in a quick return. Even the greeter commented on the long line. But I was determined to carry through with my task.

So I settled in line and amused myself with a little people watching. I didn't have to look far for my first little person, for just a couple of spots in front of me was a young mom and a little 4 or 5 year old boy. I thought "this could be interesting" considering the amount of time we would be in line. However, I was soon distracted by something else; a moaning noise. I couldn't immediately see where it was coming from, and based on the disparity of the moan, I wasn't sure I wanted to know. I saw looks from people ahead of me, and in the distance, looks from cashiers. No one looked at ease. This did make me more curious, but not more sure I really wanted to find the source.

But in only a couple of moments later I saw a girl maybe 14 on the floor moaning in agony. Her apparent guardian was standing nearby with a rather unconcerned look on her face. That was my first clue that this was not a new experience for either. Occasionally the guardian would scoot the distraught girl forward with a shove of her foot, almost a kick. Again, onlookers gave concerned looks. But the two seemed to manage. Occasionally the girl would stand up, moan louder, make a fist and self inflict blows to her own head. To say the least, the setting was extremely sad and troubling. I certainly didn't know what to do, let alone know what to think. But the guardian seemed to manage.

About a minute into the episode I noticed another girl, maybe a year younger than the first, who had a similar disability, but on the other end of the spectrum. She had a look of sheer delight on her face, and she was gladly talking to anyone nearby, even with the counterpart's constant groaning. The guardian would simply say "they don't know you" to the delighted girl. It didn't phase her though. The look on her face remained constant.

I'm no expert on disabilities of this nature. I've not spent much time even thinking about people in this state. But I had a few moments to reflect that night in line. One thought that came to mind was that these two girls will probably never be much different than they are now. Again, I don't know about treatments, but I wouldn't be surprised if their worlds were pretty much constant.

I even caught myself wondering which state would be better: the constant turmoil, or the constant delight. At first I thought the delight surely had to be better. No worries, no apparent concerns, even in the midst of someone else's agony. But I had to give equal thought to the other side. At least something bothered them. Or perhaps it was so bad that they were in turmoil for no other reason than a physical abnormality in the brain. I would never know.

I felt sad for these two, but was glad that at least they had a guardian that didn't freak out while taking care of them. Not a job I'd want, nor do I feel capable of.

But my mind didn't stop there. I was witnessing two of the most extreme emotions on opposite ends of the emotional spectrum that I have ever seen side by side. For whatever reason, this seemed to be the makeup of these girls. No amount of reasoning or conversation would change the mood of either. Sure, I only saw them for maybe 20 minutes on only one night. But my mind was thinking they were pretty much in the state they'd be in for quite possibly the rest of their lives. Maybe not, but that's what my mind was thinking. And the guardian seemed to accept them right where they were. How could you try to change them anyway? And into what?

So my mind wandered a little further. Could it be that all of us have a natural bent that's perhaps different than all others? Some on one side of the delight spectrum, others on the other side of despair? And who knows where normal is defined to be. Sure, we'd like to think that we can choose to be happy. But couldn't one's dispositional default level be closer to happy than another's? Yes, happiness is a good place to be, and should be pursued, but maybe it's a more difficult journey for some than it is for others.

I think we may lose sight of that sometimes. I think we are quick to determine that all should be at the same place of emotional well being, with the same amount of effort. However, after seeing these two contrasts in the return line, I'm thinking it's quite possible that everyone's journey to emotional well being is unique. And none of us really knows what that uniqueness is for others. We'd do well to figure out our own bents and dispositions for our own journeys towards emotional health though, and maybe give some slack to others who may not be where we thought they should be. Not the kind of thinking I was expecting to do in the local return line.

Emotional Quadrants and Romans 8:28

I have to admit I am a conceptual learner. Sometimes the concepts make more sense to me with a visual. And when that’s the case, sometimes the visual is best understood when something common is used. For me, that may include diagrams that contain graphs or charts. I confess I often have a hard time following other people’s diagrams. But I think it sometimes helps me to express my thoughts using visuals that may include graphs or diagrams. I usually like to just paint the picture with words. But sometimes actual diagrams may be necessary for me to get a point across.

When it comes to human behavior, I have a diagram in mind that is getting more and more filled out in my mind as time goes on. I think one of the most basic distinctives of being human is the ability to feel. To me, that’s what sets us apart from other living creatures, and especially from technological attempts to mimic humanness. Great philosophers have debated the idea of how to know you’re alive. One said "I think, therefore I am." I’m sure someone else has already countered with "I feel, therefore I am". I think I’m in the "feel and think" camp. Let me try to explain why.

Imagine drawing a vertical line on a sheet of paper. To the right of the line you write positive emotions. To the left; negative emotions. I’m not saying positive is good and negative is bad. I’m just distinguishing between the two. This is more a distinction between happy and sad. Feel good vs feel bad. Since these are emotions I’m not going to attach a moral indicator on them, like right or wrong. They are feelings. So for now I’m not going to get into how a person should or shouldn’t feel. Healthy vs unhealthy can be discussed at another time.

I’m starting out with a premise that human behavior is prompted by feelings. Once a feeling is recognized on any level (strong or weak) I believe it is acted upon with a reaction. Sometimes the recognition may be almost unnoticeable, and the reaction may seem unrelated. But I still think that human behavior is stimulated by some kind of human emotion. The problems start coming with whether or not the behavior is appropriate or not. So think of another concept of appropriate vs inappropriate behavior by drawing a horizontal line with appropriate above the line and inappropriate below the line.




I believe that it is normal and healthy for people to feel both the positive as well as the negative emotions. For example, there is appropriate grief or mourning during loss. And there is appropriate joy and satisfaction during gain. So feeling a negative emotion isn’t always a "bad" thing, just as feeling a positive emotion isn’t always a "good" thing.

When an emotion pops up in our soul, it will prompt some sort of action or behavior. So, scrap the first two diagrams or combine them. This time draw a horizontal line along with the vertical line. We now have positive and negative emotions to the right and left, but we also have appropriate and inappropriate actions or behaviors for each. So now, mathematically speaking, there are four quadrants, much like you learned in school.

In the first quadrant you have positive emotions followed by appropriate actions or behaviors. In the second quadrant you have negative emotions followed by appropriate actions or behaviors. Let’s stop here for just a second because a lot of times people don’t really understand there are appropriate behaviors that accompany negative emotions. Most of our efforts go into suppressing the negative emotions and not expressing any behavior whatsoever. I’ve not mentioned neutral yet for a reason. There can be a little or a lot, or high or low when it comes to experiencing emotions and expressing resulting behaviors. But I’ve not mentioned neutral yet. I think we often think that stuffing negative emotions will somehow neutralize them over time, and that over time there will be no actions to express. But there is a reaction to stuffing. It is usually stress on some level, or worse yet, anger, depression, bitterness or resentment. These will come back as stronger negative emotions and will require being responded to at some point. As the saying goes, "you can pay me now or you can pay me later". So, we do well to come up with some kind of appropriate action or behavior even for the negative emotions instead of waiting for the "pay me later" scenario with the usually stronger accompanying reactions.

Here are a couple of examples of what goes on in the first two quadrants. Quadrant I: you see someone doing a job well done and you are pleased, so you pay them a compliment. You hear or see a good performance which pleases you, so you applaud or cheer. These are examples of positive appropriate behaviors compelled by positive emotions.

Quadrant II isn’t much different even though some of us may tend to shy away from these areas. You hear of a death in a friend’s family. Out of your sadness you send a sympathy card or attend the services to offer support. So many of us do nothing because we don’t know the appropriate action to take. My point on neutrality here is that in cases like this, neutrality can be more negative than neutral.

Another example for Quadrant II: you see a bully working the playground. You are angry and step in to intervene. This can be done appropriately. Inaction is not necessarily neutral. Inaction can be passivity, which I’ll classify as a negative behavior. But I think the point has been made that there are appropriate behaviors when experiencing both positive and negative emotions. Of course the examples can be numerous, and everyone has their own personal list and experience.

Quadrants III and IV are really not much different either. Take the previous examples and exchange inappropriate behavior. So in the first example, you hear or see a good performance and you overly shower the person with praise and adoration or flattery. Maybe you neglect others at the expense of adoring this person. Maybe you over tip a waitress or stalk the movie star. Again, the examples are numerous. But these inappropriate behaviors land the scenario in Quadrant IV. An example of Quadrant III would be to single out the 12-year-old bully and beat them up yourself in a dark alley. Or, as was mentioned earlier, maybe saying or doing nothing can actually be a negative behavior of passivity. Whatever the example is that generates anger, inappropriately directing your anger towards innocent parties would land you in Quadrant III.

Seeing these four quadrants helps me to classify and understand. I think that speaks to the mathematical element of my personal make up. But it doesn’t stop with this simple classification. There are so many more elements besides emotions that trigger reactions. There’s an entire thought response that takes place, sometimes ever so quickly, in the time between an emotion and a reaction. I’ll label this as the belief system filter we all have. As a man thinks in his heart, so is he. I believe this element is the self-control element. We’ve all seen people that seem to react inappropriately without much thought. Proverbs talks about these people extensively. Sometimes people don’t think before they speak. Sometimes people don’t think before they react.

I believe what is necessary, for however long it takes, is for a person to learn how to respond to emotions that trigger inappropriate behaviors. This is not an easy process at all. In fact, I believe this is the essence of maturity. Think about it. How many people do you know that always seem to say or do the right thing according to the need of the moment? If you can think of someone, do they strike you as mature? Do they strike you as someone controlled by their emotions? Or as someone controlled by their belief system? Even a mature person’s actions are stimulated by their emotions. But I believe there is a huge difference between being controlled by one’s emotions or by one’s belief system. If the eye (filter) is bad, the whole body is bad. I’m thinking more and more that a person’s belief system is a filter to their behaviors and actions.

So, does this at all help answer the question of "how does a person watch over their heart with all diligence"? I certainly hope so. We need to make sure our eyes (filters) are clear. That we aren’t just reacting without thinking. A primary question would be "what is our belief system based on"? Intuition? Human wisdom? God’s word? Everyone has a belief system, and I believe that everyone has a dose of their own wisdom incorporated into their belief system. But God’s ways are not our ways. So, as a person develops their Christ centered belief system, they will be challenged to put away "their own understanding" from Proverbs 3:5 and replace it with God’s ways. This is not an easy process. We have been deceived over time. We have engrained lies that we have accepted into our belief system. Yes, we are a new creation when we first get saved, but the overhaul of our belief system is a lifelong process. This is why we have been left with The Helper, the Holy Spirit. We can’t exchange our lies for His truth without His illumination in our thinking.

I don’t believe the ministry of the Holy Spirit is to simply make us stop feeling a certain way. We can cry out "I’m hurt. Make me not hurt anymore". Or even confess "I’m angry. Take away my bitterness". I believe instead that He will use our feelings to trigger learning opportunities in order to help clean up our belief system, which ultimately points us to His ways instead of our own. If we base our behaviors on the truth of God’s word, and the truth of who God is, then we’ll demonstrate growth.

Now, for those of you who are more mathematically inclined, consider yet another dimension to the previous two-dimensional diagram. Add the dimension of intent. So, now you have the emotional experience (positive or negative, doesn’t matter), you have a belief system that contemplates an appropriate response. Hopefully this contemplation includes intent. Intent all by itself doesn’t make the whole action the best case scenario. The world is full of people with good intentions. But they can hurt people without intending too. So, intentions by themselves don’t make an action necessarily appropriate. And there are plenty of examples where bad intentions can have positive results. In some ways consumer greed can create more products that are more useful to more people. Or, in lots of different examples, people can do the "right thing" with the "wrong attitude". How many times have we heard "I don’t care how you do it, just get it done right"? Many times those things might have been done right, and benefited a lot of people, but the motivation may have been off.

I realize it is an oversimplification to state that behaviors are prompted by emotions. Some emotions are prompted by behavior. It’s not a matter of figuring out which came first. It’s a matter of realizing the cyclical nature of the relationship between emotions and reactions. What do we do when people intend to wrong us, or hurt us? Or what if we are hurt or wronged by someone unintentionally? This is where it gets real good. In reality, the only One who always does the right thing at the right time for the right reason with the right attitude for all the right people is Jesus. He alone is our perfect example. So, when He says He will work out all things together for good, I think He knows what all to consider. I can try to explain things in terms of quadrants, but I run out of more dimensions that I could possibly fathom. And not only is Jesus the perfect example, He has a supernatural way where he can take any inappropriately displayed actions towards us and turn them for good, for a purpose that really matters – His.

I have a hard time wrapping my mind around this concept of turning evil around for good. That’s why I so like the story of Joseph in the Old Testament. It personifies this very idea. Joseph’s brothers meant their inappropriate actions towards Joseph for evil, but God meant it all for good. The human way is to retaliate with vengeance. However, God wants us to leave the vengeance with Him. Joseph understood that even though his brothers still feared Joseph the man, even at the end of the story. But Joseph assures them that he understood that he was not in God’s place of avenging evil. This was said to calm their fear. It was after this that Joseph proclaimed that what they meant for evil was meant by God for good. I believe the use of the word "meant" implies intent. I don’t know how it all works, but somehow God reached into the proper quadrant of the brothers’ inappropriate behaviors and motives, and brought about His desired results. And this was all intentional on God’s part. How great and awesome is He to be able to do that. I have to believe He does that for all of us who can claim Romans 8:28 "…them that love God and are called according to His purpose". His purpose seems to include taking what was meant for evil against me and transforming that into His well-intentioned plan. His purpose seems to include taking what was done to me intentionally, unintentionally or out of neglect and transforming that into His good plan. He is actively at work in us to complete the work that He started in us. Am I confident of that fact, as the apostle Paul was? Or does my belief system need some strengthening? I think it is significant that in another verse Paul states "I know whom I have believed in, and am convinced that He is able…". That is truly an example of Paul’s belief system being shaped by his knowledge of who God is.

I too can have the confidence that God will help me on my own personal journey of maturity. This includes self-governing the things that I can control, meaning, my planned responses to triggers generated by my emotional experiences. But it also includes accepting the divine intervention God has for me regarding the inappropriate actions and behaviors displayed to me by others, regardless of where they are in their journey. This is not the mindset I was born with. This is not my normal understanding that I have a tendency to lean on. But this is a trusting mindset that I do well to convince myself to embrace.