Does anyone else find it ironic when America's 'Religious Right' (comprised largely of those identifying as Christian) sees fit to "stick to their guns" about the 2nd amendment right to bear arms? It seems to me like this would be in 100% direct opposition to the charge that they "resist not evil; but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also" (Matthew 5:39). Scriptural passages don't influence my personal or political leanings, but I don't think that anyone claiming to be a follower of Christ has that sort of luxury.
... in context ... you would find the verse you quoted applies to "abuse" suffered for presenting the Gospel of Jesus Christ ... Luke 22:36 speaks to personal self defense in times of trouble ... shortly after we find Peter does carry a sword but uses it improperly, both in purpose and aim ... John 18:10 ... personally I think he was going for the neck but needed more practice ...
Do you mean to imply that this is the only case in which the instruction to Christians was that they not respond to conflict with violent resistance? I still find it difficult to agree that the original intent of this passage is to say that a believer should allow others to defame and persecute them for their religious convictions, but if a crook with a weapon shows up in their house then it is perfectly fine to kill 'em dead.
The Bible records the violence of man throughout the ages. I believe you'll find that there are many "righteous killings." Whether it be in wartime, or b/c man was following the laws of the land. Take for example the prophetess Deborah. God told her to drive a tent peg through the head of Jabin, while he slept, to deliver Israel from his hand. You may feign disbelief, but good must triumph over evil or evil will destroy like a cancer. She wiped out the cell before it spread through the whole country and destroyed it... and it was an act sanctioned by God.
... careful ... not aware of God speaking to her but the implication is God approved ... and her name was Jael ... she is in the Song of Deborah ...
I studied the story many years ago and remembered Deborah doing the deed, but she was leading the land at the time. She was the prophetess lead by God to take down Jabin, but you're right, it was Jael, the female who took the life and it was that of Jabin's high official Sissera. The story is found in Judges 4 and 5. My apologies.
If you heard God tell you to kill someone would you do it?
... no, i am implying nothing ... i am stating that this is the only case i know of where we are to turn the other cheek as it were ... and i don't believe it means to stand there defenseless while you are pummeled ... on the contrary, one should be smart enough to move on (Mark 6:11) when there is an avenue of retreat ... should a malcontent continue their abuse or pursue you when you turn away then let them suffer the fury of self-defense ... and "love thy neighbor" has to do with doing that which is called for, in this case, maybe a lesson in manners so the foolish one will think twice the next time ...
... as to killing ... what do you mean by this ...
Turning the other cheek and allowing someone to take your money goes against human nature. That's why it makes no sense.
... you'll have to catch up ... you're understanding is incorrect ... read my previous ...
Sorry, my understand of "turn the other cheek" is correct. It doesn't say to run away or fight back. You don't get to decide that "turn the other cheek" really means to run away. What a joke. You don't like conflicting information so you simply pretend it means something else. Can you really look at yourself in the mirror and say that to turn the other cheek means to run away?
... i see comprehension is not one of your strong suits so i'll expand a bit for you ... here we have a man, we'll call him #1, talking to another man, we'll call him #2, about God ... #2 does not want to hear it ... so rather than him walking away #2 swats #1 ... #1, in this setting, is under a directive is not allow to strike back as this was, in essence, a response to the message not the messenger ... so the #1 is free to move on as indicated in Mark or stand there and take more abuse ... #1 decides to move on, as it says in Mark ... #2, for whatever reason decides to pursue the retreating #1 ... bad move ... cuz now the #1 is under no restrictions ... and as #2 pursuits #1, #1 might feel a physical assault is imminent, he has no reason to wait for the second swat or touching and goes into a proper counter offensive mind set ... so you see we have two varied confrontations ... one brought on by a spiritual comment for which #1 accepted the physical rebuff ... as is proper ... and one brought on by the purposeful assault, no touching required, by #2 which has no spiritual connotation ... self defense is therefore an accepted response ... but only to point which the prudent man would find necessary ... its really quite simple ...
And I have the comprehension problem? You however turned this...
“You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you."
... even with that "whatever it is" version, you are on the right page ... problem is you will not and can not understand the Bible without the Spirit of God directing you ... and you only get that Spirit by accepting the fact that you are a sinner, that God is looking for your repentance and by your asking Jesus Christ to come into your life and save you ... outside of that, you have no hope of understanding ... assuming you really want to understand ... picking a few verses out of a message that spans 3 chapters is not the way of understanding ... nor is picking a few chapters out of the entire Book ... but I stand on my statement ... he is teaching his disciples that will soon go out to talk to people such as yourself, unbelievers as I once was ... and Jesus sums up this portion in verse 48 ... you want perfection, do all these things ... the realization is, even those closest to Him at the time can't make the grade and therefore they and you need Jesus as your savior ...
Yet you picked one verse that is completely irrelevant to "prove" your point. Really - try reading your book.
Oh, I get it, I get it, I get it. I'm unable to understand a simple sentence, while you are able to pretend it means something completely different. How again does turn the other cheek mean run away again? Have you ever read the entire Sermon on the Mount? Because that's where he tells you to turn the other cheek, he also supposedly told us to love your enemy, I'm not sensing that from you.
... once again we have the uninterested trying to interpret that which they are adverse to ... learn the difference between like and love, from the Biblical perspective ... then we'll talk ... and i promise to keep it down to your level of understanding ...
This passage you quoted (Mark 6:11) has absolutely nothing to do with turning the other cheek. Your passage is to do with sticking your religion at them and then when they say "no thanks," you are to walk away and God will kill them later.
Why the need to lie about what the bible says?
... as usual you're understanding is incorrect and your comments are offensive ... read my previous ...
Oh dear. Please stop bearing false witness against me.
Mark 6.11 has absolutely nothing to do with turning the other cheek.
And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.
I wonder - have you read this book? Or is your understanding so poor? What did goddun to Sodom and Gomorrha again?
... i just love the way you start most times with your whinnie, sniveling comments ... boo, boo, you're judging, you're bearing false witness ... wahhhh ... it always makes me chuckle ... anyway ... without God, common courtesy and social graces, all of which you lack, you haven't snowballs chance in Hell of understanding ... much of anything ...
Oh dear. The passage you quoted had absolutely nothing to do with the matter in hand. Keep bearing false witness against me then. No wonder your religion causes so many fights.
Its a nice way of saying...... All sorts.
Not buying it. Try reading your book for a change.
... see, you're learning, growing up as it were ... just a straight response with no whining ... you are a world shaker ...
And you wonder why your religion causes so many wars.
... just when you make a move forward ... boom ... two steps back ... i believe that was your statement about wars ... and war doesn't have a religion ... that is just one of the many excuses ...
That was ATM's catch phrase. He was the one who claimed he wasn't English. I assumed he was one of your persona's.
This I love.
You reply to someone that you think his comments are whinnie and snivelling and then you tell him that it's because he is without God they he has no common courtesy or social graces and hasn't a snowballs chance in Hell of understanding much anything.
He however has the excuse of not "having" God. What's your excuse?
... uh oh ... calling in the reinforcements ... should i cringe ...
No, just tell us what your excuse is so we can move on.
... well, well, well, another thin skinned motor mouth ... dish it out but can't take it ... you make me chuckle ... like a couple others ... rant, rant, rant but have absolutely nothing enlightening nor positive to add to a conversation ... people have to believe exactly what you believe or they are totally wrong ... and it has nothing to do with beliefs or religion, just trying to make yourself relevant in a world that couldn't care less about your existence ... feel sorry for you ...
Here is a link that may offer insight behind the real meaning of the phrase, for anyone who cares to know.
http://www.reenactingtheway.com/blog/tu … -injustice
As the title implies, "offering the left cheek" is a form of peaceful resistance, and a way of challenging the other person to think about their aggression. It's the same method used by Ghandi and Martin Luther King,Jr. for example. It is a way to effect positive change. Including in the link is the cultural context of that time, which discusses how Roman soldiers randomly slapped people all of the time.
I've used this "left cheek" method in the workplace, and frankly, it makes a very strong statement. I may have to begin using it more on hubpages. (Lol)
Long story short, the verse is highly misunderstood. It is not intended to say, "Be a doormat." It is a call to effect change in a more powerful way.
Just curious what your stance is on Christians going into the armed forces such as the police force or the army. Is it your stance that Christians not be allowed to hunt for food? Or is it simply self defense that you take issue with? Thank you.
You don't have a problem with killing human beings then? Not surprising - many self professed Christians are not fans of turning the other cheek.
Did I say I didn't have a problem with taking life? That was a moon jump you took there. I simply asked for clarification from the OP. I like the frowny face. Thanks. Here's a smiley face for you.
Ah - sorry - I assumed. I take it you are against Christians going in the armed forces then?
Not at all. I recall David wielding a sword and he was the apple of God's eye. Although few armies use a sword anymore.
So you don't have a problem with killing human beings then. Glad we got that cleared up.
If you are going to ask and answer every question, I really don't need to be here.
I personally have not, nor do I plan to take a life.
I can tell you if someone were to hurt someone I loved, I believe God would expect me to forgive, though it would be no easy task.
However, were I called to defend the life of someone in danger, I would feel compelled to act bravely and do what was necessary to protect someone who was innocent. What would you do in that situation?
Perhaps you could try and be more clear? You are fine with Christians in the armed forces whose purpose is to kill people - yes? So you are OK with Christians killing?
If a Christian were a police officer hired to uphold the law and he had to take a life b/c legally and morally it was required of him? Yes, I'm ok with that. Do you discriminate against the religious holding those posts? What other jobs should they not hold according to you?
So - you are OK with killing humans. Thanks. That is all I wanted to know. I made that assumption based on our interactions in the past - odd you attacked me for doing so when I was right.
I am ok with killing humans? What a very odd thing to say.
If a child molester had a knife to your daughter's throat and a cop could safely take a shot and end his life. Would you choose for the criminal to be legally stopped by law enforcement or would you prefer for your child to die?
Perhaps we should just leave that up to God and see where that gets us? Just pray and wait?
Maybe God's saying, "I sent you a cop with a gun. What more were you looking for?"
Some Christians don't believe in medication for blood transfusions of any kind. Just another interpretation of your bible.
Yes, Radman, that is correct.
Jehovah's Witnesses don't believe in blood transfusions.
Mormons believe a teenage boy's permission to marry multiple wives was prophesy from God.
Christian Scientists don't believe in medical care.
Hindus believe cows are sacred and that we shouldn't kill bugs 'cause of reincarnation.
There are all sorts of beliefs out there.
You do understand that the NT was written after the fact right. It's easy to right that prophesies were filled, but obviously the Jews of the time (who were waiting for the prophesies to be fulfilled didn't think he was the one. The Jews wanted him dead. If he had fulfilled the prophesies that would have believed him to be the son of God.
Would you like to see a list of fulfilled prophesies from the Quran?
"Their skins will bear witness against them as to what they have been doing" (41:21)
The finger prints system at borders, criminal investigation cells and immigration centres prove the fulfillment of this Quranic prophecy.
"They will alter Allah's creation." (4:120)
The holy Quran has prophesied the plastic surgery, genetic engineering and cloning in this short and concise sentence.
Here we have prophesies that are being revealed today. Yours are stuff that was supposedly revealed before they were written about.
I spose it is a necessity at times. Luckily I don't have to make that decision. You never answered any of my questions. Like what would you do in a situation like that. Would you be ok with a cop pulling a trigger to save your daughter (or any innocent) if an outlaw is going to harm them?
That's not really what we were talking about was it? Going into another country to kill others is what we were talking about.
Good - at least we are clear. "Followers of Christ" are OK with killing. What difference does it make what I would be OK with? I am not a "follower of Christ." How many did Christ kill? You think he would have killed to prevent an innocent from going to certain heaven?
Christ was not a cop, he was and is the messiah. Were he a cop, he would have been a whole different kind of force to reckon with. I doubt he would have needed a gun, as his verbal response of "I am" knocked a whole group of soldiers off their feet.
"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword." Mt 10:34
Yes - I agree. This religion causes nothing but conflict and hatred. Is that what it means to be a "follower of Christ" - you go around causing fights?
To kill or not to kill, that is the question.
The problem lies in the mountain of conflicting information. The bible says God says to not kill your neighbours, unless they are promiscuous girls or homosexuals. It says nothing about not killing people of other tribes. Rather conveniently written isn't it? So it appears Christians are asked to kill for Jesus.
As it turns out people are people and most of what Jesus supposedly said is lost on us. When it's convenient they fall back on the laws of the OT, when that's not convenient they claim that the NT overrides the OT. So they can go to war and kill as many people of others tribes guilt free and when they come home they can eat pork and shellfish and work on Sundays all guilt free.
As long as you profess "love" as you do it I suppose.
Not to be condescending, but you don't have a good understanding of the Bible and should not try to dictate its meaning until you do.
Rather than simply showing me I'm wrong you throw insults. It appears everyone gets different meanings from the bible because of these contradictions. That's way baptists, catholics and all the other secs. You guys can't even agree, why should I take your advice about my opinions being invalid when you guys can't even decide who's opinions are valid?
If you don't like what I said prove me wrong.
For my own part, I am grateful to all of America's armed servicemen and women, regardless of their religion or beliefs. I don't feel that Christians should keep out of the military any more than I feel that children really should leave out cookies and milk for Santa Claus. In fact, I would say that it is a morally superior decision to fight for others' freedom than to bury one's own moral conviction beneath dogmatic teachings of any creed. However, in so doing, these same Christians make the unconscious assertion that their own moral compass can guide them more rightly than biblical doctrine! And, I would argue, they are correct in this case. But you can see the dilemma this causes for someone who wishes to say that they follow the teachings of Christ (who is supposed by most Christians to actually be the source of morality itself!)
Regarding use of firearms for hunting, I don't recall any scripture specifically prohibiting the killing of animals for food, so I don't find it inconsistent for Christians to use guns in this way. But how many of the "Religious Right" are really just out to preserve their means of hunting?
So you are specifically talking about a group... sort of like the NRA. You're not saying that a Christian (who follows the Bible's code of not murdering someone) should not serve in the armed forces. You're saying that... who exactly are you saying cannot take up arms according to the bible?
I'm saying that Christians who serve in the armed forces are either unaware of this passage, or are aware of it and have decided to put their own moral judgment above biblical teaching. However, I don't see this as a bad thing. Clearly just another example of human morality surpassing the supposedly inerrant word of god. Or, at best, an illustration of how malleable scriptural doctrine must become in order to conform to what the average human would agree is the obvious right choice. I am reminded in some way of Abraham's near-sacrifice of Isaac at God's command.
Eye for Eye
38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’[h] 39 But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. 40 And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. 42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.
Mathhew 5 38:42
When he says "you have heard it said"... where do you think they had heard it said before?
They had heard it said b/c it was Levitical law. The difference between the OT and the NT is the former was about judgement and the latter was about mercy.
Neither of these situations have to do with war time situations.
Leviticus 24:19: "If a man injures his neighbor, just as he has done, so it shall be done to him: 20. fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth; just as he has injured a man, so it shall be inflicted on him.
Matt 5:38: "You have heard that it was said, `An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.' 39. But I tell you, don't resist him who is evil; but whoever strikes you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also.
As Ive tried to explain many times before, the bible must be taken as a whole, not dissected up into parts in order to make what ever point the poster is going for.
The bible speaks of wartime. Many godly men have gone into battle. You cannot just ignore that b/c it suits the point you want to make.
I have to go... see you later.
More conflicting information. One says an eye for an eye and the other says to turn and give him the other eye.
While those were not about war, this one was.
Love for Enemies
43 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46 If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47 And if you greet only your own people, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48 Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
Love your enemy. You are told to love ISIS, even the one who is beheading innocent people.
No, I don't find it ironic at all; only a minuscule minority will ever use that gun to shoot anyone. It thus has nothing to do with turning the other cheek.
I would argue that the small likelihood of opportunity does not diminish the relevance of intent in ownership of deadly weapons. For the same reason, I think most people would agree that it is immoral to attempt to murder someone even if the attempt fails or the right opportunity never arises.
illusive elusion, you've hit a powerful topic that many cannot resist flinching about.
First, though, the left-right paradigm is a lie. That carefully constructed lie has been used to pigeonhole us into separate camps in order to control us. Those with $Trillion$ can spend their money on think tanks to come up with every conceivable way to gain more power -- like creating the lie of 9/11 and blaming it on Muslim patsies. It worked!
Most Christians have no real idea of Christianity.
Doc Young, for instance, waffled on the idea of turning the other cheek. He doesn't understand its true power. This is easy to understand, if you've ever experienced full-blown miracles and have know how loving your enemies enough to want them to achieve all that they desire is what turning the other cheek is all about.
As spiritual beings, if we flinch when these temporary bodies of ours are threatened, then we are being too attached to them. This helps to keep us trapped in our "long sleep" of egoistic separateness.
by Evolution Guy5 years ago
http://theforeigner.no/pages/news/oslo- … or-terror/More proof this religion is dangerous to others as well as the people who follow it.
by Mike Russo11 months ago
Let's face facts people. The 2nd amendment was written for another time and another place. It has no place in today's world. It is causing mentally ill people to commit mass killings. The gun...
by lucieanne5 years ago
After reading and contributing to so many posts about Christianity on here I'd love for someone to answer this question. Which form (if any)of Christianity is the real deal? It's one thing to get into heated debates...
by Brittany Williams2 years ago
Atheism only means the lack of a belief in God. Why is it so hard for Christians to realize that we dismiss their religion for the same reasons that they dismiss all other religions? It doesn't make us horrible people,...
by Doug Hughes6 years ago
"You know, I don't know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we're trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it. It's a whole lot cheaper than starting a war ......
by My Esoteric16 months ago
If you were King for a day, what elements of of the U.S. Constitution amd its Amendments would you want to see deleted, repealed, added, or mofified to make it fit more to the way the SIGNERS of the Constitution...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.