Conflict Management

According to Business Insider, a big turn off for Gen-Z workers is what workplace experts call “a double bind.” Jeanie Chang is an expert on mental health in the workplace, and she defines it as “giving two or more contradictory messages at the same time.”

For example, claiming to value work-life balance by insisting workers are off their computers by 6pm, while at the same time supervisors routinely send messages after hours. Or when a job advertises unlimited paid time off, but workers are routinely denied PTO requests. Chang says that many Gen-Z workers use another name to describe the practice: “corporate gaslighting.”

As a member of Generation X, Chang doesn’t exactly blame managers for their double-bind habits. She thinks that many of them had the same practices modeled for them in their younger years, and just assumed that’s how work has to be. “People my age and up didn’t talk about mental health,” said Chang. She said that many of her coworkers adopted a survivalist mindset in order to battle burnout and fatigue, but they didn’t understand what was happening since they didn’t have the same common language to describe it.

By contrast, many Gen-Z workers adopt what Chang calls “a thriving mindset.” If they perceive that the company is an impediment to their happiness, many of them will quit, even without a backup plan in place.

“At the end of the day, you can't blame those older folks because they don't know what that is. So, it's a learning curve, but all sides have to be open. No one generation is better than the next.”

Possible Preaching Angle:

Business; Church Staff; Volunteer Recruitment; Volunteers - Whether managing people in an office, or working with volunteers in a church, leadership must be clear about their expectations and open about the amount of time and effort that is expected and not take advantage of workers.

In an article in The Atlantic, Ross Andersen raises the question: "Did Humans Ever Live in Peace?"

Archeologists have long had evidence of conflict between small rival groups. And the earliest signs of war have been dated to the dawn of civilization (with the Sumerians and Egyptians). But recent discoveries at Laguardia, Spain pushes proof of our warring inclination to the dawn of agriculture. So how far does war go back in our history?

Because war is, by definition, organized violence. Hieroglyphic inscriptions tell us that more than 5,000 years ago, the first pharaoh conquered chiefdoms up and down the Nile delta to consolidate his power over Egypt. A Sumerian poem suggests that some centuries later, King Gilgamesh fended off a siege at Uruk, the world’s first city. But new findings, at Laguardia and other sites across the planet, now indicate that wars were also occurring at small-scale farming settlements all the way back to the dawn of agriculture, if not before.

For nearly a century, anthropologists have wanted to know how long people have been engaged in organized group violence. It’s not some idle antiquarian inquiry. For many, the question bears on human nature itself, and with ruinous wars ongoing in Europe, the Middle East, and elsewhere, it has become more resonant. If warring among humans began only recently, then we might be able to blame it on changeable circumstances. If, however, some amount of war has been with us since our species’ origins, or earlier in our evolutionary history, it may be difficult to excise it from the human condition.

But Andersen closes his piece with a view of what he thinks is hope:

What separates us most from other species is our cultural plasticity: We are always changing, sometimes even for the better. We have found ways to end blood feuds that implicated hundreds of millions. War may be a long-standing mainstay of human life, an inheritance from our deepest past. But each generation gets to decide whether to keep passing it down.

Possible Preaching Angle:

Andersen's view is common today. It sees humanity as though in constant progress towards perfection. We currently rest at the zenith. His "hope" is for this progress to continue. But a survey of our history reveals that this view is no hope at all. It is simply doing the same thing over and over again while expecting a different result. That is not hope, it is insanity. There is no hope for lasting peace until the Prince of Peace appears (Isa. 9:6-7).

Roni Bandini is an artist and computer coder in Buenos Aires, Argentina. Like a great many Argentinians, he hears a lot of reggaeton music (a blend of reggae, hip-hop, and Latin rhythms). But not always voluntarily, that is.

In a post on Medium that has since gone viral, Bandini explained that the neighbor he shares a wall with plays loud reggaeton often and at odd hours of the day and night. But rather than pounding on the wall or leaving a note, Bandini decided to find a technical solution.

Bandini was inspired by a universal TV remote-control called “TV-B-Gone” that reduces unwanted noise in bars and restaurants from televisions that no one is watching anymore. So, he put together a contraption that could do the same thing with reggaeton music.

He used a small Raspberry Pi computer and AI that he trained to recognized reggaeton music. He then installed the device near the wall to monitor his neighbor’s music. Finally, he 3D-printed a name on his device: the “Reggaeton-Be-Gone.”

Any time it detects any reggaeton music, it will overwhelm his neighbor’s Bluetooth receiver with packet requests. He said, "I understand that jamming a neighbor’s speaker might be illegal, but on the other hand listening to reggaeton every day at 9 AM should definitely be illegal.”

There are three lessons here. First, if you want to be a good neighbor to someone who shares a wall with you, be mindful of when or how often you play loud music. Second, creativity and technical ingenuity can solve so many more problems than we think possible. But a third hidden lesson remains – so much hassle can be avoided if you simply take the initiative to communicate directly. Because who knows? Maybe Bandini’s neighbor might have turned the music down if he’d simply asked.

Possible Preaching Angle:

Many small problems can be kept from growing into large problems by diplomatically discussing it with the people involved (Matt. 18:15-17). So much hassle can be avoided if you simply take the initiative to communicate directly.

Almost 690,000 couples reported getting divorced in 2021, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That’s about half the number of couples who reported getting married. Most couples file for what is called a no-fault divorce, which means you can dissolve your marriage without showing that either party has committed any wrongdoing.

There are a handful of commonly cited factors that couples feel put a strain on their marriage, according to a Forbes Advisor survey. These conflicts include (in ascending order):

#6 – Finances

#5 – Relationships with Friends

#4 – Relationships with Family

#3 – Division of Household Labor

#2 – Parenting differences

The biggest conflict divorced couples encountered, with 46% naming it:

#1 – Career choices

Only 5% of divorcees say there was no way their marriage could have been saved, the survey says. A whopping 63% said that having a better understanding of commitment prior to marrying could have helped them avoid divorce. And 54% said that if they had a better understanding of their spouse’s morals and values prior to getting married, they might still be together.

Editor’s Note: The Forbes Advisor survey is well worth looking at for its wide-ranging statistics on the state of marriage and divorce in 2023. You can access the results of this survey here.

Possible Preaching Angle:

It is important to keep in mind that this survey was taken of society as a whole. With proper guidance through premarital counseling and personal growth toward spiritual maturity, a believing couple would be much more likely to establish a solid marriage for life.

A total of 689,308 divorces occurred in 2021. That’s about half the number of couples who reported getting married, with subsequent marriages failing at higher rates. Understanding why marriages fail can help you to make your own union stronger if you are married. It can also guide you in making choices about entering into a marriage and it can help you support the married couples in your life.

Forbes Advisor commissioned a survey of 1,000 Americans who are divorced or who are in the process of divorcing to discover why marriages fail. Based on this data, here are some of the most likely reasons marriages come to an end.

• 43% - Lack of family support
• 34% - Infidelity
• 31% - Lack of intimacy
• 31% - Too much conflict/arguing
• 24% - Financial stress
• 20% - Parenting differences
• 10% - Marrying too young

Key Facts About Divorce

• The majority of divorces are initiated by only one party, with only 27% of respondents indicating the decision to end the marriage was mutual.
• Just 4% of couples divorce after 10 years of marriage.
• 63% of divorcees believe a better understanding of the commitments of marriage could have helped them to avoid divorce
• Only 5% of divorcees say there was no way their marriage could have been saved, the survey says.

You can access all the results of this survey here.

Possible Preaching Angle:

It is important to keep in mind that this survey was taken of society as a whole. With proper guidance in premarital counseling and personal growth toward spiritual maturity a believing couple would be much more likely to establish a solid marriage for life. Remember, 63% said a better understanding of commitment prior to marrying could have stopped their union from collapsing.

Iconic quiz show Jeopardy! faces an uncertain future due to ongoing labor strikes by two labor unions, the Screen Actors Guild (SAG) and the Writers Guild of America (WGA). Sony Pictures Television, the show's producer, is exploring solutions like reusing questions to maintain broadcast continuity during the labor disputes. However, the imminent start of Season 40's production adds urgency to resolving the impasse.

Contestants set to compete in the upcoming Tournament of Champions have expressed solidarity with striking workers. Toronto's Ray Lalonde, a 13-time winner last season, declared his support on the Jeopardy! Reddit forum, vowing not to cross picket lines. More holdouts could cause a postponement to winter or spring.

Moreover, the status of hosts raises another concern—Mayim Bialik has already halted her duties until the resolution of the labor issues, while Ken Jennings faces increasing pressure to follow suit.

As Season 40's premiere approaches, the show's future hinges on negotiations between the two unions and Sony Pictures Television. Those negotiations are said to be imminent and/or ongoing. With a rich legacy and loyal fan base, the fate of Jeopardy! rests on key leaders in both camps being able to find middle ground in this dispute. And fortunately, the answer to this problem need not be stated in the form of a question.

Possible Preaching Angle:

Scripture has much to say about the rich and powerful withholding wages from the hardworking laborer. Regardless of how this particular strike is settled, there is a day coming in God’s timetable for all accounts to be settled in God’s courtroom (Jam. 5:1-6).

It’s in political news to note that Americans are hopelessly divided, and that this division is manifest in the lack of collaboration across the aisle in Congress. But Washington Post columnist Amanda Ripley might disagree that our situation is hopeless.

That’s because Ripley did a deep dive on the Select Committee on the Modernization of Congress, a bipartisan collection of twelve lawmakers. This year’s committee has made over 200 recommendations to revamp Congress processes and practices, most of which have already been accomplished or put into motion. By comparison, the last committee assigned to do similar work disbanded in 2018 after making exactly zero recommendations.

So, what made the difference? A series of bold steps to overcome the toxic division and promote dialogue and cooperation. Committee chair Derek Kilmer met with each committee member separately to gauge their willingness and/or optimism. Initially, it seemed bleak, particularly in the wake of the events of January 6, 2021. One Democrat told Kilmer: “I feel like not only was I in a relationship with someone who cheated on me; I was in a relationship with someone who cheated on me with someone who was trying to kill me.”

After those initial conversations, Kilmer said, “We’re going to have to do some stuff differently.” So, what was different? They engaged in practices that promoted listening and building trust in relationship. There was a joint retreat for mutual bonding. They created neutral zones for conversation and collaboration without the pressure of television cameras present, so that members could have real conversations. And they had another debrief and listening retreat after the January 6th attacks, so that each lawmaker could hear and be heard.

Several people commented on the results: “It felt like someone turned the air conditioner on. You saw people starting to be curious about each other again.” “The conversations were quite remarkable. They surpassed my expectations.”

Possible Preaching Angle:

Being effective requires trust, empathy, and teamwork. When we respectfully listen and engage, we are modeling the behavior God desires.

In an issue of CT magazine, author and musician Sandra McCracken writes:

I played softball in a community league when I was a teenager. We didn’t know each other the first time we stepped out under the lights together. We were strangers in gray polyester uniforms and orange baseball caps.

At the start of our opening game, there was a palpable feeling of possibility. My teammates were talented, and the coach was tough. As he invested time watching us throughout the season, he positioned and repositioned us in different roles, playing to our individual strengths. As each player lived into her giftedness, there was more synergy and success.

Today, instead of feeling like a single team with diversely gifted players, we find ourselves in a cultural moment where it often feels we’re on different teams altogether. This is true in society at large, and sadly, it seems just as true inside the church.

But there was a time when the church was like a brand-new softball team, stepping out onto fresh-cut grass in late summer, individual differences obscured by what they were as a whole: “All of them were filled with the Holy Spirit ... All the believers were together and had everything in common” (Acts 2:4, 42, 44). God is so committed to this unity that Jesus prayed specifically for us, “that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you … so that the world may believe that you have sent me” (John 17:21).

Jesus was not naive. He knew that finding unity is patient, slow work.

Let’s open up our echo chambers and build bridges instead of moats. Let’s listen for the still, small voice of the Spirit and attend to what he may ask of us. These are heavy times, but there is kingdom work to be done.

Rumors have been circulating that Mathew McConaughey might be considering a run for governor of Texas in 2022, and perhaps a higher office after that. In a recent interview in Men's Journal, Jesse Will cornered the Hollywood star on the topic. McConaughey, resisted confirming or denying his thoughts on the matter. But when pressed to give a hypothetical campaign slogan, he shared that his favorite suggestion has been, "Make America All Right, All Right, All Right, Again." Then he paused and said, "But for me . ..It’s ‘Meet Me in the Middle—I Dare You.'" He then explained:

When facing any crisis, I’ve found that a good plan is to first recognize the problem, then stabilize the situation, organize the response, then respond. You can’t have unity without confrontation. And to have confrontation, you have to at least validate the other’s position. We don’t even do that. So, I’d say, I’ll meet you in the middle. I dare you. It’s a challenge, a radical move. You come this way, I’ll come your way. That’s how democracy works.

In other words, to explain to another human why they are wrong (if in fact it is them and not us in error), we must listen to them. We must understand where they are coming from? Why do they make the choices they do? You must meet them in the middle.

New research has revealed that employees waste an average of $1,500 and an 8-hour workday for every crucial conversation they avoid. These costs skyrocket when multiplied by the prevalence of conflict avoidance.

According to the study conducted by the authors of the New York Times bestselling book Crucial Conversations, 95 percent of a company's workforce struggles to speak up to their colleagues about their concerns. As a result, they engage in resource-sapping avoidance tactics including ruminating excessively about crucial issues, complaining, getting angry, doing unnecessary work and avoiding the other person altogether. In extreme cases of avoidance, the organization's bottom line is hit especially hard.

The study of more than 600 people found that eight percent of employees estimate their avoidance costs their organization more than $10,000. And one in 20 estimate that over the course of a drawn-out silent conflict, they waste time ruminating about the problem for more than six months. Joseph Grenny, author of Crucial Conversations, says it's time organizations stop viewing interpersonal competencies as soft skills and start teaching their people how to speak up and deal directly with conflicts rather than avoiding them.

The last soldier to die in the Great War was an American, twenty-three-year-old Henry Gunther, a private with the American Expeditionary Force in France. He was killed at 10:59 A.M., November 11, 1918, one minute before the Armistice went into effect.

Gunther's squad, part of the 79th Infantry Division, encountered a roadblock of German machine guns near the village of Chaumont-devant-Damvillers. Against the orders of his sergeant, he charged the guns with his bayonet. German soldiers, aware of the Armistice, tried to wave him off. But Gunther kept coming and was gunned down; he died instantly. His divisional record states: "Almost as he fell, the gunfire died away and an appalling silence prevailed."

Possible Preaching Angles: (1) Salvation—We have peace with God through Christ but we still live like we're at war with God. Lay down your arms and enjoy Christ's victory and offer of reconciliation; (2) Conflict—Are we picking needless battles or picking battles in a way that leads to more conflict rather than living as peacemakers?

An unusual brawl broke out in a Florida courtroom as a judge and an assistant public defender came to blows. Video footage clearly shows the judge, John Murphy, instigating the fight with public defender Andrew Weinstock. The pair started arguing about whether Weinstock's client would waive his right to a speedy trial. Judge Murphy was trying to convince the defender to waive, but the defense lawyer was not having any of it. Judge Murphy said, "You know, if I had a rock, I would throw it at you right now. Just sit down." Weinstock responded, "You know I'm the public defender. I have a right to be here and I have a right to stand and represent my client." On the video, the judge then appears to ask Weinstock to come to the back hallway, an area where there are no cameras, which is where the fight apparently broke out.

"if you want to fight, let's go out back," Murphy tells Weinstock before the pair head off camera. There were no images of the fight, but the video does capture sounds of scuffling and several loud thuds. Two deputies broke up the fight, and the attorney was immediately reassigned to another area so he and the judge would not have to interact with each other. Judge Murphy agreed to take a leave of absence so he could seek anger management counseling.

A Danish health survey asked almost 10,000 people between ages 36 and 52, "In your everyday life, do you experience conflicts with any of the following people—your partner, children, other family members, friends, or neighbors?" Eleven years later, 422 of them were no longer living. That's a typical number. What's compelling, the researchers noted, is that the people who answered "always" or "often" in any of these cases were two to three times more likely to be among the dead. (And the deaths were from standard causes: cancer, heart disease, alcohol-related liver disease, etc.—not murder.)

The researchers concluded, "Stressful social relations are associated with increased mortality risk among middle-aged men and women." That's why they recommended that we develop what they called "skills in handling worries and demands from close social relations as well as conflict management."

But in case you think that all conflict is bad, people who said they "never" experience conflict from social relationships had a slightly higher mortality rate than those who "seldom" do. In other words, perhaps a little conflict is good for your health.

Cheryl Crausewell of Dora, Alabama wasn't happy about the toilet paper in her magnolia tree. A prank she wasn't laughing about, she was intent on cleaning it up ASAP. Her solution for the hard-to-reach bits? Fire. Of course, it didn't turn out well. Burning toilet paper set her grass, then her house on fire. The house? "A total loss." Oh, and there's still toilet paper in her trees.

Possible Preaching Angle:

If we misjudge the severity of a situation, or respond to conflict with more force than we need to, the solution to a problem can be far, far worse than the problem itself. You may just see a whole life's work or relationship go up in flames. All for a little bit of "toilet paper."

"The tone of our truth-telling can build a wall or a bridge," said Ed Waltz.

Ed and his wife, Barb, from Ann Arbor, Michigan, should know. They witnessed two types of truth-telling by two doctors. The Waltz's daughter, Deb, has cerebral palsy.

Barb had hoped that Deb would walk one day. After performing a battery of tests, the first doctor led Ed and Barb into a small conference room where he bluntly laid out for them what they could expect. In a tone that was cold and emotionally disconnected from his patient, the doctor said, "It is extremely unlikely that your daughter will ever walk."

Still in a state of shock from the devastating news, Barb asked, "But what kind of shoes should I buy for my daughter?" She was thinking about some special corrective shoes, or perhaps shoes connected to a brace.

Without softening the blow, the doctor retorted, "Buy her whatever kind of shoes you want. She won't be using them to walk in." And with that, he quickly left the room, where Barb burst into tears.

Several months later, the family met with a second doctor. This time the entire scene felt different, though. Ed said, "My wife asked this new doctor essentially the same question she had asked the first one. She was still wondering if there was anything we could do that might enable our daughter to take even a few steps."

The doctor paused for a moment, thinking. Then, he looked compassionately and directly into Barb's eyes and said, "You know what I would do if I were you, Mrs. Waltz? I'd buy my daughter the prettiest little pink shoes I could find, with purple shoe laces."

Barb knew what he meant.

Ed said, "We talked about our experience on the way home. Both doctors had told us the same thing—Deb would never walk. I'm ashamed to say what we felt like doing to the first doctor, but we felt like hugging the second doctor."

How we tell the truth makes a difference in how that truth is received.

If anyone had a right to unleash an uncivil, scathing … attack on his opponents, it was Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. It is hard for [many people today] to remember the conditions under which many African Americans lived throughout the South just over 40 years ago. Segregation, lynchings, African American churches and homes firebombed. Jim Crow laws even prevented "colored people" from attending the circus and playing pool with whites.

Yet civil rights leaders painfully, persistently, and peacefully protested the injustice of segregation. In doing so, they often broke segregation laws. All too often, protesters reaped a reward of fire hoses, police dogs, and incarceration.

Several Birmingham clergy admonished the protesters, urging them to work within the law. King's letter was a response to those clergy.

Put yourself in his place. Who would not be furious, even enraged, by the statement of these ministers? How was King able to respond in such a civil and well-reasoned manner? Remember that King himself was a Baptist pastor. His response—known today as the "Letter from Birmingham Jail"—reflected his deeply held Christian convictions. He quoted the words of Jesus, and appealed to the example of Paul, as well as Thomas Aquinas, Martin Luther, and John Bunyan.

Also, he did not question his opponents' motives. Instead, he called them "men of genuine good will" whose "criticisms are sincerely set forth." "I want to try to answer your statement," he wrote, "in what I hope will be patient and reasonable terms." And that he did.

Yes, King clearly cataloged the injustices faced by African Americans. He called "white moderates" to task and forcefully reminded them that justice delayed was justice denied. And most famously, citing Augustine, he claimed that "an unjust law is no law at all."

But King never engaged in name calling or personal attacks. Without distortion, he patiently and fairly acknowledged his opponents' positions—and then dismantled them.

King had reason, justice, facts, and conviction on his side—as well as the gospel. He did not need vitriol, and he did not employ it.

Our country is grappling with many high-stakes, emotionally charged issues….We should defend our positions vigorously and with conviction—but with civility. That is why our nation more than ever needs the spirit contained in King's "Letter from Birmingham Jail."

In an article for Leadership journal, Gordon MacDonald shares the story of a friend who was caught in the middle of a nasty church conflict that had spun out of control. When MacDonald asked his friend how the situation had been resolved, his friend told him that he had been confronted with a piercing piece of advice: "Someone has to show a little dignity in this thing. It really should start with you." MacDonald's friend took the wisdom to heart, and it worked wonders in the situation. MacDonald took the wisdom to heart himself and had the opportunity to apply it when caught in the middle of an airport fiasco.

MacDonald was scheduled to fly from Boston's Logan Airport to Chicago, but the boarding-pass attendant realized that he was scheduled to fly not out of Boston, but Manchester, New Hampshire. MacDonald asked whether she could solve the problem for him. She could—but for an extra $360.

MacDonald was shocked. "I'm a 100k customer on your airline. I give you guys a lot of my business. Can't you just get me on the flight for free as a courtesy?" But the boarding-pass attendant said her hands were tied. MacDonald would have to pay the $360.

The testy situation had reached its decisive moment. Though the problem was a result of MacDonald's incorrect booking, he felt "depreciated, blown off, victimized by a big company that seemed to put a monetary value on every transaction." As he points out in his article, "the ungodly part of me wanted to say something sarcastic (about friendly skies, for example) that would hurt the other person as I felt hurt. Hurting her would help me to feel that I'd hurt the rest of the company—all the way up to the CEO. Perhaps she'd call and tell him how I felt so that his day would be ruined like mine was about to be ruined."

But then he remembered the advice his friend had been given: "Someone has to show a little dignity in this thing. It really should start with you."

MacDonald swallowed his pride and applied the advice to the situation at hand. He writes about what happened next:

I said to the boarding-pass lady, "Before I pay you the $360, let me say one more thing. Six weeks ago I came here to take a flight to the West Coast and discovered that the airline had cancelled the flight and hadn't told me. They said they were sorry, and I forgave them.

"Then two weeks later, on a flight to Europe, the airline lost my luggage (for two days). They said they were really, really sorry. And, again, I forgave them.

"Last week, on a third flight, they got me to my destination two hours late. Your people fell all over themselves saying how sorry they were about the delays. And you know what? I forgave them again. Now here I am—fourth time in six weeks—wanting to fly with you again. See how forgiving I am?

"But this morning the problem's mine. I forgot that I scheduled myself out of the other airport. And I am really, really sorry that I made this terrible mistake.

"You guys have said 'sorry' to me three times in the last six weeks, and, each time I have forgiven you. Now I would like to say 'sorry' to you and ask you to forgive me and put me on that flight without charging me the $360. You have three 'sorries,' and now I'm asking for one. Does that make any sense to you?"

The boarding-pass lady took her own time-out and considered my idea and then said, "It really does make sense to me. Let me see what I can do."

She typed and typed and typed into her computer—as if she was writing a novella—and then looked up with a smile. "We can do this," she said. Two minutes later I was off to the gate with my boarding pass.

That morning dignity won. The airline forgave me. The skies were indeed friendly. I didn't have to pay an extra $360.

MacDonald offers these closing thoughts: "This increasingly crowded, noisy world is generating more and more of these kinds of moments where no one is really doing something bad … just stupid (me, in this case). But because our human dignity is eroded by these constant clashes, even our innocent mistakes point to the possibility for hateful exchanges and vengeful acts. You have to keep alert lest you get sucked into saying and doing things that you'll regret an hour later."

After successfully separating numerous Siamese twins and continuing to refine the techniques of several complicated surgeries, Dr. Ben Carson has become known throughout the world as a premiere brain surgeon. What many do not know is that because of an uncontrollable temper as a child, Dr. Carson's career was almost over before it began. In his book Take the Risk, Dr. Carson writes about the day he invited God to help him deal with this critical character flaw:

One day, as a 14-year-old in ninth grade, I was hanging out at the house of my friend Bob, listening to his radio, when he suddenly leaned over and dialed the tuner to another station. I'd been enjoying the song playing on the first station, so I reached over and flipped it back. Bob switched stations again.

A wave of rage welled up. Almost without thinking, I pulled out the pocketknife I always carried and, in one continuous motion, flicked open the blade and lunged viciously right at my friend's stomach. Incredibly, the point of the knife struck Bob's large metal buckle and the blade snapped off in my hands.

Bob raised his eyes from the broken piece of metal in my hand to my face. He was too surprised to say anything. But I could read the terror in his eyes.

"I…I…I'm sorry!" I sputtered, then dropped the knife and ran for home, horrified by the realization of what I'd just done.

I burst into our empty house, locked myself in the bathroom, and sank to the floor, miserable and frightened. I could no longer deny that I had a severe anger problem, and that I'd never achieve my dream of being a doctor with an uncontrollable temper. I admitted to myself there was no way I could control it by myself. "Lord, please, you've got to help me," I prayed. "Take this temper away! You promised that if I ask anything in faith, you'll do it. I believe you can change me."

I slipped out and got a Bible. Back on the bathroom floor, I opened to the Book of Proverbs. The words of Proverbs 16:32—["He who is slow to anger is better than the mighty, and he who rules his spirit than he who takes a city"]—convicted me, but also gave me hope. I felt God telling me that although he knew everything about me, he still loved me… That because he made me, he was the only one who could change me… And that he would. Gradually I stopped crying, my hands quit shaking, and I was filled with the assurance that God had answered my prayer.

Uncontrolled anger has never again been a threat to me or those around me. God has provided and will provide whatever strength I need to control my anger.