I recently watched a History Channel special on sex. I think it was called “The History of Sex” actually. I didn’t mean to watch it. I actually meant to record something else, but the DVR apparently thought I needed to see this. Occasionally, I think my DVR takes instructions from God, because it was really a rather informative journey through the secular view of sex and the Christian Church.

Basically, the program focused on how sex had been suppressed by the Christian Church. It made ancient Rome with its prostitutes and debauchery look really fun and then made the Christian era seem like one long trip to the analyst’s couch. It misquoted the great minds of Christianity to draw the conclusion that Christians were and are puritanical prudes who think asceticism is the path to enlightenment. It so bothered me that I asked several friends over to watch it a second time and discuss our thoughts on the subject.

What we decided was that the secular world has never understood the Christian attitude toward sex and that because our attitude differs from that of the secular culture they feel it’s fine to accuse us of prudishness when, in fact, what they are witnessing is sexual selectivity for a higher purpose.

The Bible speaks with great clarity on the subject of sexual morality. It makes “love” more than a three-letter word. What may surprise most non-Christians is that the Bible esteems not only love but sex to a high degree. No one should have a greater appreciation for the God-given gift of sex than Christians.

It’s amazing how far the value system of our culture has slipped in a few decades. In my mother’s day (1930-40s) young women feared the stigma of being immoral. If you weren’t a virgin you didn’t want anyone to know and sexually active girls lived in fear of what disclosure of that behavior would do to their reputation. Now the fear is of being known as a virgin. My daughter, who is honest and proud with respect to her virginity, says many of her friends have counseled her not to “be so open” about that. She lovingly ignores them, but it is indicative of the culture in which we live. She recently returned from health class to tell me that nearly 50 percent of 20-somethings are infected with a sexually-transmitted disease. Abortions are down, but teen pregnancies are up (which might explain the rate of STDs). Clearly our nation has a moral problem. A primary reason for the morality problem in our culture is that we have equated “love” with “sex”. Love has become so diluted and perverted a concept that it is considered synonymous with sex. The connection between sexual conduct and Biblical standards has been lost. Many consider sex not even to be related to morality. Our culture is in a state of moral collapse so that our churches discuss AIDS, condoms and abortion rather than morality.

We find that the Bible turns the secular view of love and sex upside-down.

Paul had already written much about the Christian “walk”, a figure of speech referring to one’s lifestyle or conduct. Using the metaphor of walking, Paul described the Christian life as a walk “worthy of our calling” (4:1-16), based upon a renewed mind (4:17-32), in love (5:1-6), in light (5:7-14) and in wisdom (5:15-6:9).

Now Paul called Christians to imitate God. In other words, walk as God walks. Being made in the image of God at creation and remade in the image of Christ upon salvation, our potential for Christ-likeness is a certainty. It’s not something we do, but something God did. However, it is still completed as a matter of our disciplined obedience. Our sanctification involves both divine sovereignty and human responsibility, although both are the work of God. We are the children of God, after all, which is both the motivation and the means by which  God made us His beloved children. We are grateful for the opportunity to be like Him. As His children, we share in His divine nature and it is through this new nature, empowered by the Holy Spirit, that we are able to serve Him and meet His standards (Romans 8:1-4).  The imitation of God, by the way, was often taught in the Old Testament  (Leviticus 19:2). The New Testament merely reiterated an old theme (Matthew 5:43-48; 1 Peter 1:16).

Paul instructed Christians to imitate God only in certain ways, specifically by demonstrating the same kind of love which God has shown us. There are certain dimensions of God’s attributes and character which belong only to Him. Theologians call these God’s incommunicable attributes. Self-sufficiency, sovereignty, and omnipotence belong only to Him; we cannot and should not imitate them. Satan wanted to be “like God” in these ways, after all (Isaiah 14:12-14). He wanted to do so in his own strength to serve his own purposes. He did not seek to bring glory and honor to God, but to usurp these for himself. There are some cults that teach that humans can become “gods”. We never find this in the Bible. We are to be like God in that we love as He first loved us, in Christ (John 13:34; John 15:12; Galatians 2:20; 1 John 4:7-10).

To this end, we can and should imitate God’s communicable attributes; His love, mercy, justice, longsuffering and grace should be evident in our lives.

The love which we are to manifest will not be defined as a three-letter word (sex); it is defined as a nine-letter word: sacrifice. Christ demonstrated His love for us on the cross of Calvary. His love, which sets the standard for biblical love, motivates our love. Christ’s death on the cross of Calvary was a two-fold sacrifice. As a sacrifice for sinners, Christ (in love) died on Calvary for our sins, sacrificing Himself for our benefit. Christ’s sacrificial death was prompted by love for the Father. His sacrifice was “a fragrant aroma,” one that gave the Father pleasure.

Our love is meant to be sacrificial, not self-serving. Christian love is expressed by acts of sacrifice to God. Christian love does not seek its own gratification, but the good of others, Christian love not only imitates God, it seeks to please Him by sacrificially serving others. This is why the Apostle Paul speaks of Christian service as the surrender and service of our bodies as a living sacrifice (Romans 12:1-2).

Frequently, we hear love and doctrine spoken of as though they were opposite and opposing entities. Some think of “doctrine” as cold, irrelevant and unloving. They think of “love” as warm, fuzzy and unrelated to doctrine. People arrive at this conclusion through bad experiences, not through study of the Scriptures. Elsewhere, Paul wrote, “But the goal of our instruction is love from a pure heart and a good conscience and a sincere faith” (1 Timothy 1:5).

The goal of Paul’s doctrinal instruction was love. 1 Timothy 1 implies that his doctrine was the basis for a “pure heart,” a “good conscience,” and a “sincere faith.” From Ephesians, we can conclude that biblical doctrine defines God and His attributes. We cannot possibly imitate God without knowing God and His attributes. Biblical doctrine is our only reliable source of information concerning the God whom we seek to imitate. We should never consider doctrine and love enemies. Like the old song goes, “You can’t have one without the other.”

The pagan world confuses love with lust and immorality. The Israelites were delivered from Egyptian bondage and given the land of the Canaanites, one of the most morally depraved cultures of all time. Sexual immorality was rampant, so much so that God commanded the Israelites to kill every living Canaanite, and even their children and their cattle. The world of Paul’s day was little different. It’s been said that chastity was the one new virtue which Christianity introduced into the world. Ancient civilizations regarded sexual immorality so lightly that it was no sin at all. It was expected that a man should have a mistress and in places like Corinth, the great temples were staffed with stables of priestesses who were sacred prostitutes whose earnings supported the Temple. Cicero in his speech Pro Caelio, pled “If there is anyone who thinks that young men should be absolutely forbidden the love of courtesans, he is indeed extremely severe. I am not able to deny the principle that he states. But he is at variance not only with the license of what our own age allows but also with the customs and concessions of our ancestors. When indeed was this not done? When did anyone ever find fault with it? When was such permission denied? When was it that that which is now lawful was not lawful?”

Remember that, in contrast to the God of the Bible, the “gods” of the heathen were often immoral themselves, so that those who “worshipped” them did so by acts of immorality. To be an imitator of the heathen gods was often to be immoral.

Paul adamantly declared that Christian love and sexual impurity are incompatible. Three words are used to describe sexual immorality in this verse. The first (“immorality”) is the most general, referring to “immorality and sexual perversion of almost every kind.” The second (“impurity”) speaks of sexual sins in terms of uncleanness. The third term (“greed”) is somewhat debated among the scholars. Some think the term goes beyond sexual misconduct to material greed. I agree with those who see this as a lust or greed for sexual impurity. Many of us know coworkers or family who live for immoral sex and cannot seem to do without it, bringing Cicero’s words more weight.

Paul forbade Christians to engage in sexual immorality. We cannot pursue love and lust at the same time. One is of the spirit, the other of the flesh. Paul was saying more than this, however. His words imply that while individual saints should avoid immorality, they are also corporately responsible to assure that such sins are not committed by the saints.

We are our “brother’s keeper,” commanded not to allow sexual sins even to be named among us. Paul meant that the church should be characterized by such purity in sexual matters that no accusation or allegation of sexual misconduct can even be raised. Some scholars believe that Paul may have been saying that sexual immorality is not a fit subject for conversation among Christians.  Honestly, folks, there are certain subjects that are simply not edifying. In my opinion, sexual immorality is one of them. It simply does not fit edifying discourse that uplifts others in their faith and Christian conduct at Paul explained in Ephesians 4:29 (see also Philippians 4:8)

I am among those who think that Christians should enjoy sex within marriage. However, I deplore the recent efforts by some to have “an open discussion” of Christian sexuality. Yes, some of us may need to talk about past sexual traumas or current sexual dysfunctions, but we should choose our confessors circumspectly and with an eye always to what is more glorifying to God.  I think Christians should avoid the endless parade of television talk shows that focus on every kind of sexual sin in a most public way. Yeah, it’s curious making, no doubt, but we had best consider the strong words of warning God gave to the Israelites, forbidding them to satisfy their curiosity concerning the evil practices of the Canannites (Deuteronomy 12:29-31).

Ignorance is bliss when it comes to sin. Adam and Eve refused to believe this in the Garden of Eden, and their sons and daughters have ever since sought forbidden knowledge which does not edify, but only destroys.

Unfortunately, those sins which we think we would never commit are those which we will openly discuss. In verse 4 Paul moved from immoral conduct to immoral speech, forbidding his readers to joke about immoral subjects. There’s no real worth in breaking it down, but Paul does indicate that both crude, lowbrow sexual humor and high class dirty talk couched to seem clever are not suitable for saints. What’s wrong with humor that deals with immorality? First, it doesn’t take sin seriously enough, which is a deadly error. Second, it enables us to talk about things we would not dare to discuss seriously. Humor allows us to press the line of appropriateness further than we could normally. If we venture too far, we simply say, “Just kidding.” Third, joking about immorality often is the first step we take toward immorality itself. I wonder how many people “fell” into immorality after joking about it.

Lastly, and perhaps more importantly, joking about sex demeans it. Consider what we joke about. Joking makes “light” of something, mocking and demeaning that which someone else usually holds dear.

Now consider this: sex is a gracious gift from God. We shouldn’t make light of God’s gifts. We mock them when we do so, suggesting that lust, impurity or temptation comes from God when we know that only good things come from God  (James 1:13-17).  Instead of belittling God’s gracious gifts, Paul told his readers to “give thanks.” Thanksgiving is the appropriate response to God’s good gifts. If sin depreciates all that is holy, righteous and good, love appreciates those very items.

Just how seriously does God take immorality? Does He wink at sin?  Hardly! Not only do the sexually immoral not go to heaven, such sinners suffer the wrath of God (verse 6). God hates all sin, including the sin of immorality, and those who practice such sin find that God’s wrath awaits them.

Christians are sometimes accused of being “puritanical” and thus are wrongly charged with failing to hold sexual intimacy in high esteem. It is the unbelieving, immoral world which does not value sex highly enough. The pagan fails to regard sex highly enough, and thus they almost indiscriminately engage in sex with a host of partners. It is only the Christian who can rightly appraise the greatness of this gift from God.  Christians value sex, and thus they restrict its pleasures to one mate, within the context of marriage.

Those tools in our garage which my husband values most are those whose use he most restricts. He doesn’t loan his valuable tools to those who fail to appreciate them or who will not use them carefully and skillfully. Less valuable tools, he will loan almost indiscriminately. It is the same with sexual intimacy. If we value it highly, we will restrict its use.

There are those who would deceive Christians with “empty words” suggesting that sexual immorality, being “natural”, is not really “all that bad”. They suggest that God “winks” at sexual sin. Though the Bible speaks clearly, repeatedly, and emphatically on the subject of sexual morality (Hebrews 13:4; Revelation 21:7-8; Revelation 22:14-15), there are those who seek to obscure its teaching. They appeal to the flesh, urging us to follow our impulses. They tell us that God “wants us to be happy and fulfilled.” They assure us that there will be no judgment on such sin. “For this you know with certainty, that no immoral or impure person or covetous man, who is an idolater, has an inheritance in the kingdom of Christ and God” (Ephesians 5:5).  Yikes!  It could hardly be more clear that those who practice sexual immorality aren’t going to heaven. God saved us to deliver us from such sin, not to allow men and women to persist in their sin with impunity (John 8:10-11; Romans 6:1-2). The Bible often warns about such false teachers and not all come from outside the church, either (2 Peter 2:1-3; 2 Peter 2:18-22).

It’s appalling that much of the professing church, in an attempt to be “relevant” to the secular world, has succumbed to the values of a depraved culture rather than to hold fast to Scriptural values. Many mainline denominations not only refuse to call sexual immorality and perversion sin, they ordain those who openly practice such sin. Worse still, they not only practice sin, they openly promote it: “… and, although they know the ordinance of God, that those who practice such things are worthy of death, they not only do the same, but also give hearty approval to those who practice them” (Romans 1:32). The final straw, as it were, is when immorality is not only tolerated in and by the church, it is done with a certain pride, and often justified in the name of love (1 Corinthians 5:1-2).

If our society has taught us that immorality is “making love,” the Bible exposes this as a lie. Immorality is never an expression of love, but rather of lust. Immorality is not the work of the Spirit, but the fruit of the flesh. Immorality is not to be practiced by Christians or tolerated in the churches. Christian love is defined as sacrifice, emulating the love which Jesus Christ demonstrated in His sacrifice for sinners at Calvary.

It may be that these words of Scripture have pricked your heart, and that you now look back upon previous immorality with remorse. The cross of Christ is the solution for all sin. Jesus forgave the woman caught in the act of adultery. Paul wrote of those who were once immoral, but who have been cleansed by the blood of Christ. That forgiveness is available to you in Christ (John 8:3-11; 1 Corinthians 6:9-11).

When we treat sex as the gift from God that it is and practice it only within the confines that the Giver has prescribed, we do so to the glory of God. This should be our highest ideal, the standard to which we always strive. It is not for our own selves that we exist, but for the glory of God and that which gives us pleasure is not truly for our own benefit (though benefit we may derive), but for the glory of God.  Whatever we do, we should do for the glory of God.

Stealing is a major problem in our nation. Many businesses suffer economically from theft by employees. People comfortably cheat on their taxes. I’m told that most retailers experience shoplifting rates of around 30 percent of available profit. My church experienced the theft of 700 gallons of heating fuel this year, causing the building to nearly freeze and costing the congregation $2500 dollars in fuel alone. Prisons themselves have a problem with theft, not by the inmates, as one might expect, but by the guards. In the process, prisons act as training grounds to make mediocre thieves more efficient.

Thievery has been around a long time. Paul wasn’t dealing with a new phenomenon in that regard, but he was dealing with new believers who had apparently been thieves in their former lives.

“The thief must no longer steal. Instead, he must do honest work with his own hands, so that he has something to share with anyone in need.” Ephesians 4:28

This passage illustrates the dramatic change which faith in Jesus Christ should produce in an individual’s thinking and conduct. Please set aside any notion that this text is only addressed to thieves. It is the declaration of a Christian “work ethic” which every true believer should apply in their employment. Listen well to these words, seeking to understand and apply them to the glory of God, for the edification of the church, and for our own good. Stop Stealing! Let him who steals steal no longer …

There are several significant elements of this command which we must note. Surprisingly for some, Paul was writing to Christians. The proof of this is that he laid down the fundamental doctrines of the Christian faith in Chapters 1-3. Anyone still sitting at the reading of this, halfway through the letter, was a Christian. Further, Paul wrote to those who had not yet given up stealing. He used the present tense: “Let him who steals steal no longer …” Strange as it may seem, Paul believed that there were those who continued to practice their former lifestyle as thieves after they became Christians. Apparently Paul believed thieves are not beyond the power of God and His gospel. Thieves can be saved, and Paul assumed they had been saved. This is reminiscent of the thief on the cross who became a believer (Luke 23:39-43). There are no sinners too lost for God to save through the shed blood of Christ (I Corinthians 6:9-11).

Interestingly, unlike many in the churches today, Paul did not believe that salvation automatically or instantly changes a man’s thinking or conduct. I believe God in His grace sometimes delivers sinners from specific sins at the time of their conversion; certainly I’ve heard testimony of radically changed lives, of addicts who received immediate release from their addictions, for example. This is not true of all Christians. As I understand the consistent teaching of Scripture, coming to faith in Christ does not end our struggle with sin, it begins it in earnest (Romans 6 and 7). If every Christian were instantly delivered from sin, the command of Paul here would be meaningless.

Paul did not believe that there is a general, once-for-all, life-transforming event in the life of the Christian, which instantly changes him from a sinner to a sinless saint. In short, Paul rejected perfectionism. There are those who teach that we can have complete victory over sin in this life. Many who do would not claim this victory comes at the time of our salvation, but through a second, life-transforming experience. By whatever means, they speak of a quantum leap in our spiritual life, an instant and total victory over sin. If this were so, Paul would have called for Christians to enter into this experience rather than to deal with sins individually and specifically.

This is not to say that Paul rejected the concept of watershed changes of heart and commitment. In Romans 6:12-14, 12:1-2, Paul urged people to put aside sin and commit to a life without sin. Realistically, though we may make life-long commitments, we must also expect a life-long struggle with sin. The sins which are woven into the fabric of my nature and character will dog my heels all my life. When I think victory finally come, I will find their ugly heads raised once again for me to deal with anew. The struggle with sin is life-long; total victory over sin comes only when we are transformed into the likeness of Jesus in Heaven.  Note that Paul understood the gospel and true Christian conversion requires a radically different way of thinking and behaving. There are some things requiring no change—indeed, should not change—when we come to faith in Christ. For example, our station in life need not change (1 Corinthians 7:17-24). But our former way of thinking and behaving must be set aside. 

Most of us approach the subject of stealing with a narrow mental picture of this evil. In our mind’s eye we see a man with a gun in his hand, a mask over his face, forcibly taking the property of another. Stealing has many more forms than this. Let us explore some of the many forms which stealing takes, broadening the range of practices which can be called stealing. I think we will find the church has more thieves among its members that we might think for stealing persists in the lives of professing Christians in many forms.

Let’s be honest here, folks. Even Christians can find themselves in circumstances where sin is almost the required response. Starving people will be tempted to steal if that is the only way to get food. Others steal for the thrill of it. Some of us are in businesses where making a profit is considered the highest value and cheating the customer is considered good business practice. How many of us have items in our garages and kitchens that were borrowed from someone and never returned? Doesn’t the government already take enough of my money? Why shouldn’t I take advantage of that loophole in the tax code? And that 10 percent of my income does me far more good in my pocket than in the Lord’s collection plate.

Both the Old Testament prophets and John the Baptist spoke against theft by oppression. In Jesus’ day, tax collectors had the power of government behind them. They abused this power by increasing taxes to include a healthy profit for themselves. Those resisting or refusing to pay these inflated taxes placed themselves against the government. Soldiers often abused their power to forcibly take the property of others and make it their own. Who could resist them? When robbed by a bandit, we can call upon the police for help, but who does one call on for help when robbed by the police?  And, make no mistake, I know police officers who take every advantage to get money from the public to put in the government coffers, even if the public is not actually in the wrong. A friend of mine who has a criminal record from a long distant youth is pulled over regularly just so cops can search his car, even though my friend is now a missionary who hasn’t broken even a traffic law in many years. He has, however, been cited many times for broken taillights that weren’t broken before the police pulled him over.

While government is probably the greatest purveyor of oppressive robbery, some of the most despicable examples are done by religious leaders. This was condemned in both the Old and New Testament (Ezekiel 34:2-6; Hosea 6:9; Matthew 23:25; 23:14).  Jesus implied that those who had preceded Him were thieves with intent to rob the sheep. He, on the other hand, came as the Good Shepherd, Who would give His life for the sheep. Some of these “thieves” may have claimed to be the Messiah, but many of them were simply Jewish religious leaders, whose task was to shepherd the flock, but instead abused their authority, taking advantage of foreigners who came to worship at the temple (Matthew 21:11-12), acquiring the houses of widows (Matthew 23:14) and victimizing those they were meant to protect. Many of the religious leaders were thieves. In the 21^st Century there are many who use religion to get rich without actually preaching the gospel.

A commentary I read really exercised my conduct meter because I am guilty of it and I think so are many Christians today. No one gets more pleasure out of finding a “good deal” than I. When I find something of value, which I am able to buy at a fraction of its true value, I pat myself on the back for having done so well. I often brag about my “great buy” to my family and friends. I have even had people say appreciatively in response to one of my bargains: “You didn’t buy that; you stole it!” I used to think this was a compliment. Now, I must consider the possibility that it is really an indictment. Did I knowingly or unknowingly gain at someone else’s expense? Did I buy something at an extremely low price because the seller was vulnerable? Did I avoid paying a fair price because I had power (money) and the other party was powerless (in desperate need)? One of the broad terms which the Bible uses as a synonym for stealing is “unjust gain.” A “just gain” is one where both parties—the buyer and the seller—gain. An unjust gain is one in which one takes advantage of the other. Let us beware that our “good buys” are not a “steal.”

“Let him who steals steal no longer; but rather let him labor, performing with his own hands what is good, in order that he may have something to share with him who has need.” Ephesians 4:28

If Paul’s first command was addressed to Christian thieves, the remainder of the verse applies to everyone. It sets down a work ethic which is diametrically opposed to the thief’s code and should be the standard for every Christian.

It is self-evident that stealing is not a noble occupation, certainly not for the Christian. Paul’s words indicate that stealing should be replaced by sweating. Stealing is the opposite of hard work. There are those who may sincerely wish to work, but cannot find jobs, and thereby feel “compelled” to steal. It’s not justified, but understandable. For most thieves, however, stealing is the lazy way out. When I was involved in our church’s jail ministry, there was a young man who made the comment that he would much rather break into a couple of coin-operated machines than to work as a laborer for unattractive wages. Stealing for him was much easier than work. I guess that’s one way to avoid the consequences of the Fall, but as we know, all things are lawful, but not all things are profitable.

Paul wrote thieves should work with their own hands.  I don’t think this forbids “white collar” desk jobs, but I do think it gives dignity to “blue collar” workers. There’s nothing wrong with manual labor; in fact, Paul advocated it as good therapy for thieves.

A Christian work ethic requires more than just hard work. It also requires a worthwhile enterprise. We are commanded to perform with our own hands “what is good”, in other words that which is useful and beneficial. The world has many jobs, often involving hard work, but some jobs do not produce anything of value. The community is not benefited by useless labor. We should not only feel good after a day’s work because we have worked hard, but also because we have done something worthwhile.

We should work so that we will not become a burden to others (2 Thessalonians 3:8) and so that we might support our families rather than make them rely on others (1 Timothy 5:3-8, 16), but we also should work so that we may use what we make to help those who are truly in need.

Charity is a mindset foreign to thieves, but a requirement for the Christian. The criminal mind must be put off because it is part of the old man. In its place we must have our minds renewed, so that we think and act Christianity. The criminal mind is really no different than the fleshly mindset of the unbeliever. The criminal simply takes his self-centeredness outside the bounds of what society accepts. The corrupt mind, criminal or not, focuses on selfish “needs” or desires. Someone else has what I want, I take it. Why work for it if someone else has worked for it and I can take it from him?  The Christian mind should think in exactly the opposite way, focusing on the principle of grace, not greed. Work hard and set aside resources so that you are able to meet the needs of others. The corrupt mind uses its strength to steal from the weak; the Christian mind uses its strength to serve the weak. The corrupt mind seeks to gain at the expense of others. The Christian mind seeks the good of others, at our expense.

It should not come as news to us that robbery is wrong. By seeking to avoid work, robbery forces others to sacrifice to serve our own self-interest. It rebels against the sovereignty of God in the way He has distributed material things, and expresses unbelief, failing to trust God to provide for our needs.

There are far more thieves among Christians than we wish to believe. Ephesians 4 indicates that conversion alone does not eradicate this sin from our lives. It is an evil which must be acknowledged and put aside. If we are to put off stealing, we must replace it with hard work, producing what is good and useful, so that we can support ourselves and earn money to minister to others.

Salvation is a radical change of life as we turn from trusting in our own righteousness to trusting only in the righteousness of Christ. It entails a dramatically different way of thinking and behaving. Rather than seeking to gain at the expense of others, Christians are to give at their expense. They are to willingly accept the toil of work as God’s will, and as a way of earning the means by which they can minister to the needs of others.

Although the emphasis in this text is on the necessity of hard work, let’s be perfectly clear that works in no way contribute to salvation.  The work of Christ on the cross is the only means by which we are saved. This was God’s work, not our own. The gospel is the good news of salvation apart from works. It is a message of grace. As we are saved by grace, we are to serve God and man in a way that manifests grace, so we work that we may give to others freely, expressing to others the same grace that God has shown to us.. The gospel turns crooks into caring Christians and takers into givers.

We live in an angry world. On a recent youth trip to the big city of Anchorage, which is almost 400 miles away from my home town, I sought to save gasoline in the gas-hog van I was driving by making use of cruise control. The side benefit of this was that I could set the speed to right at the speed limit and know I was legal at all times.  There aren’t a lot of cars in the mountain pass between Fairbanks and Anchorage, but even so, we were passed by several angry drivers who were exercising their middle finger. By the time we reached Wasilla, 300 miles into our journey, the teens were wondering why so many drivers were mad at us. I could only shrug and say, “Well, I really don’t know because I’m in the slow lane going the speed limit and they have the option to pass me.” This is just one example of the rage that rules our national discourse. You see it everywhere. People are angry at one another and quite open about it, even when they’ve never seen one another before in their lives.

Paul had something to say about this 2000 years ago and Christians in the 21^st Century should heed his warnings.

“Since you put away lying, Speak the truth, each one to his neighbor, ^{[Zch 8:16]} because we are members of one another. Be angry and do not sin. ^{[Jms 1:19–20}; ^{Ps 4:4]} Don’t let the sun go down on your anger, and don’t give the Devil an opportunity.” Ephesians 4:25-27

“All bitterness, anger and wrath, insult and slander must be removed from you, along with all wickedness. And be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving one another, just as God also forgave you in Christ.” Ephesians 4:31-32

Anger and jealousy are frequently attributed to God in the Bible, so we must concede that not all anger and jealousy are evil. Taken to the logical conclusion, if we are to imitate God, then there must be times when we should be angry. Ephesians 4:27-28 is about righteous anger. There is a difference between righteous and unrighteous anger that is shown in how we can express righteous anger in a way that brings glory to God.

Please note that Paul’s teaching in Ephesians 4 are similar to the Book of Proverbs:

“Don’t answer a fool according to his foolishness, or you’ll be like him yourself. Answer a fool according to his foolishness, or he’ll become wise in his own eyes.“ Proverbs 26:4; Proverbs 26:12

In Proverbs, we are first instructed not to answer a fool according to his folly. In the very next verse, we are instructed to answer a fool according to his folly. Both statements are true and should be taken seriously. In the first proverb, we are taught that we ought not to allow ourselves to be brought down to the level of a fool by answering him as foolishly as he has spoken. On the other hand, we are to answer the fool in a way that gives him no satisfaction, lest he take himself too seriously. A fool is to be dealt with as a fool, but we should not make ourselves fools in the process.

Similarly, in Ephesians 4 we have two seemingly conflicting statements. Verse 26 seems to command us to be angry while verse 31 seems to command that we not be angry. The solution to this conundrum is, of course, that there are two kinds of anger. The anger which is a manifestation of our old self (the flesh) is to be put off. The anger which is a manifestation of God’s righteousness is to be put on.

The command, “Be angry!” just doesn’t sound right, does it? We are uncomfortable with such a command, seeking to avoid or explain this command away, because anger does not sound godly. Yet there are two kinds of anger. There is the “anger of man” which “does not achieve the righteousness of God” (James 1:20), and the anger which is an expression of God’s righteousness. We are commanded here to be angry in a way that is righteous, which is a reflection of God.

We have many examples of righteous wrath in the Bible.  God was angry at Moses’ unbelief, which caused him to resist obeying God’s command to go to Egypt and confront Pharaoh (Exodus 4:14). God is angered by the mistreatment of those who are helpless, the strangers, the widows, and the orphans (Exodus 22:21-24). God was angered by men turning from trusting and worshipping Him to the worship of idols (Exodus 32:10; Deuteronomy 6:14-15; Judges 2:13-14; Ezra 8:22). God is angered by the grumbling and complaining of His people (Numbers 11:1, 10), which is often expressed by resistance to His appointed leadership (Numbers 12:9).

All of these offenses which arouse God to anger seem reasonable enough, but there are times when men commit offenses which seem minor to us, yet provoke God’s anger. In 2 Samuel 6, the ark of the covenant, captured by the Philistines, was housed in the temple of Dagon, the Philistine god. God shamed their “god”, causing a plague to fall on those in whose city where the ark was kept. Eventually, the ark was returned by the Philistines, transported on an ox cart. The Philistines didn’t know that God had stipulated in the Law that the ark must be carried by the Levites from poles placed through the rings on the ark. One would expect the ignorant Philistines to transport the ark on an ox cart, because they didn’t know any better. The Israelites apparently forgot the proper procedure as well and left the ark on the ox cart. The ox stumbled, the ark seemed in danger of falling off the cart, and Uzzah reached out to stabilize the ark. He was struck dead by God, which angered David, who could not immediately understand this outburst of godly wrath. Only later, upon reflection, did he realize the importance of obedience to God’s instructions.

Jesus was also occasionally angry. The Gospels record His anger at the Pharisees for their hardness of heart (Mark 3:5) and a similar anger expressed in the cleansing of the temple (John 2:13-22). This anger was implied in Jesus’ rebuke of Peter, when he chided Him for speaking of His sacrificial death (Matthew 16:23).

Godly men were also angered by unrighteousness. Moses was angered by Pharoah’s hardness of heart, his refusal to listen to God and let the Israelites go (Exodus 11:8). Moses, initially unshaken by Israel’s worship of the golden calf, became angry when he finally came down from the mountain and saw the extent of Israel’s sin (Exodus 32:1-20). David was later angry when Nathan told him the story of the rich man who stole a poor man’s little lamb, not knowing that he was the villain (2 Samuel 13:21). The whole epistle of Galatians is white hot with Paul’s expressed anger and outrage at the false teachings being broadcast in Galatia and that some Christians were embracing them. When illegally beaten and detained at Philippi, an angry Paul refused to allow his persecutors to simply release him, demanding and receiving a public apology, which probably protected the church at Philippi from future similar injustices (Acts 16:35-39).

Clearly, anger is not always wrong. Righteous anger has certain earmarks, which distinguish it from unholy wrath. Godly anger is God-like anger; godly people are angry when God is angry. It is anger consistent with the holy and righteous character of God. Godly anger is legal anger. It is not vigilante justice; it is legal justice. For example, abortion should make all Christians angry as it is the murder of innocent children. However, we are not permitted by God to burn abortion clinics as an expression of that anger, because such behavior would endanger other lives. Godly anger is not explosive; it is slow to be provoked. Repeatedly throughout the Bible, God warned sinful Israel through the prophets before pouring out His wrath on them. God’s anger does not have a hair trigger.  God does not take pleasure in expressing His anger in the judgment of men. He is patient in exercising His judgment, not “wishing for any to perish, but for all to come to repentance (2 Peter 3:9).  God’s anger is always under control. It is not the result of “losing” His temper. Ungodly anger is excessive and abusive; godly anger never is. It remains under the control of the one expressing it; godly anger does not take control of the one who is angry.

If anger is not always evil, it can easily turn one to evil. Anger, like greed, is often the root of various evils. Ungodly anger may become the root of some of the evils addressed in Ephesians 4 and 5. Anger may prompt one to speak to a brother in a way that is destructive, tearing down and destroying rather than edifying and building up. Anger not properly resolved may lead to slander or false testimony; it has prompted people to steal or be unfaithful to their mate. Even anger that begins as righteous indignation can turn sour, becoming ungodly wrath. Note that immediately after Paul commands us to be angry, he warns us not to sin in our anger. Paul quoted from Psalm 4:4 here, which teaches us the importance of taking the Bible as a whole, as Paul himself did. 

David composed this psalm out of his own distress. Unrighteous men have scoffed at David’s honor, making it a reproach. They loved what is worthless and deceptive. David agonized over the wickedness of such men, and called upon God to deal with them. Beginning with an address to God, David pled that God would hear his prayer and respond. He then rebuked the wicked men who scorned his righteousness, identifying their sin and setting forth God’s truth. David instructed himself to act as a righteous man and not allow his anger to turn sour and become sin. He will not dwell upon his anger. He will leave the judgment of men to God and focus on worshipping God rather than seeking revenge.

In my opinion, Paul’s words, “Do not let the sun go down on your anger,” recorded in Ephesians 4:26, are prompted by his grasp of David’s words in Psalm 4. David would not allow his anger to remain to trouble his sleep and sour his worship of God. While we most often think of this command as an instruction to make our peace with men (usually our mate) before we go to sleep for the night, I think David felt the only real solution to his anger was obtaining peace from God. Unfortunately, confrontation and discussion may not resolve the problem which produces our anger. After having done what we can do, it is only as we turn the problem over to God that we find the rest which David describes in his psalm.

Paul’s mention of the devil should provide the Christian with strong motivation to avoid sinful anger. He warned that we are not to “give the devil an opportunity” through our anger. Satan may take advantage of unresolved anger to promote some other sin, such as slander, strife, or even physical violence. Satan would surely seek to use our anger to create divisions within the body of Christ. Many churches have been split over petty differences between two saints (Philippians 4:2-3). Satan, as the accuser of the brethren (Revelation 12:10) will surely use our sin, spawned by anger, as an occasion to accuse us before God, perhaps using us to accuse our brethren. Satan recognizes anger as a fertile field, capable of producing all kinds of sin, and sin is his specialty.

Paul provided only one method to avoid letting righteous anger turn to sin. He instructed his readers not to “let the sun go down on our anger.” While righteous anger should be slow to originate, it should be quickly dispelled. Corrosive in effect, anger is designed to prompt us to act, to get us “off the dime” of passivity, but it is not meant to be our ongoing fuel, for it will destroy us.

How are we to act on our anger, producing a righteous and profitable response without giving Satan an opportunity? Paul did not elaborate here, though other Scriptures do spell out what is usually required of us. “Church discipline” as described in Matthew 18 is the course of action we should take. This process for dealing with our anger toward a brother is Christ is outlined in several texts. The first step is confrontation. The offended one or the one who recognizes that God is being offended is to confront the offender privately without broadcasting the complaint. If the offender repents, the matter is closed. If not, then the matter must become more and more public until it is resolved. If the sinning Christian persists in sin, he must finally be put out of the church and deprived of the benefits of fellowship. If the sinning Christian accepts correction, our anger should be converted to forgiveness. If discipline is necessary, our anger should turn to grief. In any case, our anger should not be allowed to linger and turn into bitterness.

In those cases in which our brother is angry with us, we also have a responsibility to bring matters to a conclusion dispelling anger and reflecting the righteousness of God. We are to go to that brother who has an offense against us, and seek to bring about a reconciliation as quickly as possible (Matthew 5:23-26).

There will be those cases where confrontation is not possible, or advisable. Such seems to have been the case with David in Psalm 4. It is unlikely the sinners described there would have been amendable to godly discipline. The Scriptures provide us with the “ultimate cure” for our futile anger; leave our wrath to Him Who alone can judge men in truth and justice:

Let’s be honest, folks! Most of our anger is the “wrath of man” and not the “holy anger” of God. When someone cuts us off on the freeway or is going “too slow” in “our” lane, we haven’t been sinned against. We’ve merely run up against another human and decided to be angered by their actions. We should want to see less and less of this self-centered anger in our lives.  Conversely, however, this text commands us to more righteous anger than most of us are comfortable with. We all recognize that “road rage” is wrong, but we indulge in it quite often. Yet when it comes to righteous anger, many of us fail to follow God’s commands. If God is angered by sin, then we should be angered by it. We 21^st century Christian, like the saints in Corinth (1 Corinthians 5), seem to be more willing to accommodate sin than to condemn it and we frequently refuse to remove it from our midst. All too often, I see parents—Christian parents—who think of the sinful actions and attitudes of their children as cute rather than something needing correction. Many Christians are not angered by rebellion, irate over injustice, distressed by abortions, immorality and other sin and there are Christian teachers who actually teach that we shouldn’t be angered by these things. We post-modern Americans tend to want to shade sin in hues of gray rather than seeing it as God sees it. If we were to see sin as God does, it would make us very angry.  When we are angry, then we should deal with sin as God has directed us, so that our anger is dispelled and does not lead us to sin. We need to confront the sinner without minimizing the sin and seek its solution in genuine repentance. In many marriages that flounder on the rocks of divorce, the root problem is anger that has not been righteously expressed and dispelled. In many families, division and discord stem from failure to obey Paul’s instructions concerning anger. In many churches, the unity of the body of Christ has been hindered by the lack of righteous anger. Let us seek to be both good and mad to the glory of God and for the health and unity of His body, the church.

My good friend Mark works with runaway teens in the Los Angeles area. The ministry he works with was started by his foster-father more than 30 years ago, but has expanded to include about a dozen full-time missionaries and 40 or so volunteers. They are by no means the only mission group or secular organization reaching out to runaways in that area. Most of the mission organizations cooperate with one another and one or two of the secular organizations cooperate with the faith-based groups.

Not so long ago, Mark encountered a supposedly faith-based group that preaches an unusual gospel. They claim to be Christians, but they tell the teens that they don’t need to change their lifestyle. Just accept Jesus and all will be well. They can continue having sex, selling their bodies and doing drugs. Jesus will still love them and understand their lifestyle choices.

When Mark first heard this message, he thought he had misunderstood. He figured it was an “emergent” group that was focusing on evangelism and only afterward might mention that, oh, yeah, Jesus wants you to live a different sort of life. In curiosity, he asked his teenage son to blend with a crowd or two to find out the specifics. His kid came back with a tale to tell, because he had actually engaged one of these missionaries in conversation and, no, they don’t think Christians need to show a lifestyle change after salvation. “Some of the best witnessing I’ve ever done has been in a bar over a beer or three,” the street evangelist said.

Mark then went to speak with the evangelist privately and came away shaking his head. This man is devoted to the idea of presenting Jesus without “any of the downsides.” He downplays the cross of Christ and Jesus’ death. This, of course, necessitates avoiding discussion of the resurrection. He instead focuses on Jesus’ ascension. He told Mark, who has been working successfully with runaways since grad school and is himself a product of his foster-father’s early ministry, that “the discussion of sin is a millstone around the necks of those who would come to Christ.” He advocates telling people that their life circumstances are God’s way of showing them their mission field. Just accept Christ and tell others about Him. How will runaways hear about Christ unless other runaways stay in the community and tell them?

I think Paul would be surprised to hear this was a “Christian” message. It’s certainly not a message Paul ever preached.

Christ did not save us in order that we may live any way we choose. He saved us to live godly lives, which are radically different from our lifestyles as unbelievers.  As doctrine informs conduct, the general principle of godliness informs the specific patterns of conduct. 

“