Excellent writing and thoughtful interpretations of the Bible, Dan! I like your view of the anger you felt toward your high school friend as a protective device. I had a very similar experience with my cousin, who was my best and intimate friend through high school and for 15 years beyond. But I was becoming uncomfortable with his attitude and then we got into a big fight and we never spoke again until last year (I am 59 now). When we met up last year, he said, "We don't have to talk about it." (and we also "don't have to talk about" politics since his views are the opposite of mine).But the thing is, I wanted to talk about it. Not politics, I mean about the reason we had stopped talking. We didn't. Afterward, viewing his interactions on Facebook, I saw that he had become a cruel person, which was in part my issues when we were young. The upshot is that I now see that my anger was also protecting me. I thank you for permission to have had that, for staying away, because often I wondered if I just was being a scaredy cat not looking him up and trying to make up. I'm glad we met up, because he is my first cousin, and we see each other occasionally at functions (until now I just kept my distance or didn't go to the function) and it will be more comfortable now, but we are not going to resume our friendship. My choice.
Anger can have value. But once that value has been provided, the trick (for me) is to integrate whatever valuable lessons and actions the anger provided and then to allow my anger to be cared for the way I might take care of an angry toddler. “There there…that thing happened. Did it make you angry? How do you feel now? Still angry? We can sit together for as long as you like.” After a while, the toddler has fully felt their anger and is ready to move on to other things.
The thing happened. The lessons are learned and appropriate actions taken. And then the anger (with a caring embrace) can be released.
I've read "Non-Violent Communication" twice. Last week I purchased another copy to give to someone else whom I thought might appreciate it. Clearly, I need to read it a third time for yet another refresher.
The insights you have shared here today have helped me understand why I'm angry with some people. It can be easy to lose sight of these things. But I think I can begin to have some conversations with these people. So, thank you.
I have grown to appreciate understanding scripture as literature. It's far more meaningful this way. There are not a lot of people in my church community who do this, so I am grateful to have recently discovered and placed you into my circle of wisdom influences.
Thought-provoking, as usual! I'm inclined to dismiss this God's anger as the projection of an ancient idea of the family and masculine prerogative. (If he owns it all, he *can* destroy it all.) However, with your helpful point about the practice *imitatio dei* coming later, it's possible to consider how such destructive anger and new-again love might coexist. For an infinite being, this anger and love would be synchronous, the God containing all (unless the angry God preceded the infinite God historically). For us mortals, the sequence of destructive anger first, renewed love second, sounds like a recipe for disastrous codependency or abuse.
The Bible-as-literature approach does help with this difficult characterization of God, as I think it allows a person to let go any particular metaphor (e.g., betrayed husband threatening to destroy the family property and claim the wife's ill-gotten pelf), understanding that it delivered meaning to people with another concept of marriage than it may deliver now. Still, one pauses, if only to tremble.
Excellent writing and thoughtful interpretations of the Bible, Dan! I like your view of the anger you felt toward your high school friend as a protective device. I had a very similar experience with my cousin, who was my best and intimate friend through high school and for 15 years beyond. But I was becoming uncomfortable with his attitude and then we got into a big fight and we never spoke again until last year (I am 59 now). When we met up last year, he said, "We don't have to talk about it." (and we also "don't have to talk about" politics since his views are the opposite of mine).But the thing is, I wanted to talk about it. Not politics, I mean about the reason we had stopped talking. We didn't. Afterward, viewing his interactions on Facebook, I saw that he had become a cruel person, which was in part my issues when we were young. The upshot is that I now see that my anger was also protecting me. I thank you for permission to have had that, for staying away, because often I wondered if I just was being a scaredy cat not looking him up and trying to make up. I'm glad we met up, because he is my first cousin, and we see each other occasionally at functions (until now I just kept my distance or didn't go to the function) and it will be more comfortable now, but we are not going to resume our friendship. My choice.
Anger can have value. But once that value has been provided, the trick (for me) is to integrate whatever valuable lessons and actions the anger provided and then to allow my anger to be cared for the way I might take care of an angry toddler. “There there…that thing happened. Did it make you angry? How do you feel now? Still angry? We can sit together for as long as you like.” After a while, the toddler has fully felt their anger and is ready to move on to other things.
The thing happened. The lessons are learned and appropriate actions taken. And then the anger (with a caring embrace) can be released.
Dan, thank you for this wisdom.
I've read "Non-Violent Communication" twice. Last week I purchased another copy to give to someone else whom I thought might appreciate it. Clearly, I need to read it a third time for yet another refresher.
The insights you have shared here today have helped me understand why I'm angry with some people. It can be easy to lose sight of these things. But I think I can begin to have some conversations with these people. So, thank you.
I have grown to appreciate understanding scripture as literature. It's far more meaningful this way. There are not a lot of people in my church community who do this, so I am grateful to have recently discovered and placed you into my circle of wisdom influences.
Peace.
Thought-provoking, as usual! I'm inclined to dismiss this God's anger as the projection of an ancient idea of the family and masculine prerogative. (If he owns it all, he *can* destroy it all.) However, with your helpful point about the practice *imitatio dei* coming later, it's possible to consider how such destructive anger and new-again love might coexist. For an infinite being, this anger and love would be synchronous, the God containing all (unless the angry God preceded the infinite God historically). For us mortals, the sequence of destructive anger first, renewed love second, sounds like a recipe for disastrous codependency or abuse.
The Bible-as-literature approach does help with this difficult characterization of God, as I think it allows a person to let go any particular metaphor (e.g., betrayed husband threatening to destroy the family property and claim the wife's ill-gotten pelf), understanding that it delivered meaning to people with another concept of marriage than it may deliver now. Still, one pauses, if only to tremble.