Being self-righteous doesn't make you truly righteous.
On that, I agree. There's clearly a disagreement on how it's applied.
You want to push Christians into a revolt
No. I only want good people, truthbound people, Christians, to resist evil, to espouse truth in the face of lies, to fight evil when it attempts to harm what they love (if what they love is truthbound).
but our Lord has said "turn the other cheek".
Oh look, another passage that has other ways of being interpreted, but which you use to advocate for peace, for the sake of peace, no matter what, and which you refuse to address on its face, because you know the position is ridiculously false.
According to your own translation of that verse, it means you should accept the slights of others. So, why are you ignoring your own interpretation of that passage, and being hostile toward me? Shouldn't you, according to the Bible, accept my refutations, my "slaps"? Why are you being unChristian to rebuke me, who you claim to be unChristian? Are you a hypocrite, or just a bad Christian?
For the sake of argument, here are alternative arguments for Matthew 5:39:
Much of the material surrounding Jesus’ command to turn the other cheek complements the nature of His coming, which was characterized by mercy, sacrificial love, and longsuffering toward sinners. At the same time, Jesus affirms the “last is first” principle upon which the kingdom of God is based. For instance, He tells us to go the extra mile for someone who abuses us (Matthew 5:41) and to love and pray for our enemies instead of holding enmity against them (verse 44). In summary, Jesus is saying we need to be pure inside and out and as accommodating as possible for the sake of a lost world.
In essence, according to this interpretation, it means that we shouldn't escalate an evil, for fear of growing the evil. We should meet evil with love, so that we deescalate it, and grow the kingdom of Christ on earth. However, pertaining to this argument, if who we're facing won't back down, and will escalate no matter what, this lesson is null and void, and there's no reason for us to turn the other cheek.
Matthew Henry’s comment on this verse is helpful: “Suffer any injury that can be borne, for the sake of peace, committing your concerns to the Lord’s keeping. And the sum of all is, that Christians must avoid disputing and striving. If any say, Flesh and blood cannot pass by such an affront, let them remember, that flesh and blood shall not inherit the kingdom of God; and those who act upon right principles will have most peace and comfort”
This means, essentially, to act in a way which facilitates peace, against honorable opponents. However, as I've repeatedly been arguing, if our enemy doesn't want peace, we have zero reason to turn the other cheek.
Turning the other cheek does not imply pacifism, nor does it mean we place ourselves or others in danger. Jesus’ command to turn the other cheek is simply a command to forgo retaliation for personal offenses. He was not setting government foreign policy, and He was not throwing out the judicial system. Crimes can still be prosecuted, and wars can still be waged, but the follower of Christ need not defend his personal “rights” or avenge his honor.
Uh oh, not your heckin' pacifism. This here, just like above, is advocating for acting/reacting in a way which leads to peace (when our opponents/aggressors are honorable). Our opponents aren't honorable, and seek the death of each and every one of us. Thus, we aren't obligated to turn the other cheek.
There was a time in history when a man would feel compelled to protect his honor against one who slandered him or otherwise besmirched his character. The offended party would challenge the offender to a duel. Swords, firearms, or other weapons were chosen, and the two enemies would face off. In most cases, senseless bloodshed ensued. Samuel Johnson wrote in favor of the practice of dueling: “A man may shoot the man who invades his character, as he may shoot him who attempts to break into his house.” The problem is that “invasions of character” are exactly what Jesus told us to tolerate in Matthew 5:38. Turning the other cheek would have been a better option than dueling, and it would have saved lives.
Oh look, historical applicability to the Biblical passage in question. Shocking! This aligns with the previous parts of Matthew 5 (like in 5:38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’"), that Jesus is merely advocating for instilling more peace upon people seeking needless violence (among honorable opponents). And, repeatedly, our opponents are honorable, and seek violence regardless of what we do, thus we aren't obligated to turn the other cheek.
Jesus was, of course, the perfect example of turning the other cheek because He was silent before His accusers and did not call down revenge from heaven on those who crucified Him. Instead, He prayed, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing” (Luke 23:34).
Keep in mind that Jesus knew that his opponents would be met with failure, harm, death, and hell, regardless of what they did to him. He didn't need to seek immediate retribution, as he knew what awaited them should they continue on their course. He prayed for their change of heart, but knew what awaited them should they continue on their path. This doesn't necessarily mean that someone should never fight back, however.
There has been thousands of interpretations of this phrase across time, but I will show you a few that could help us to understand it better.
Many theologians, like N.T Wright (former Bishop of Durham) and P.T Penley, tell us that the answer lies in the historical and linguistic context of the phrase. They see meaning in the fact that Jesus doesn’t generally talk about turning your cheek, but specifically focuses on turning from the right one to the left: “if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other one also”. They highlight that Roman soldiers would slap Jewish citizens on the right cheek, using the back of their hands – the type of slap reserved for their ‘inferiors’. However, backhandedly slapping a person on the left cheek (which is what you are forcing them to do when you turn your cheek) would indicate that the recipient was an equal...Thus, this act of “turning the other cheek” has been interpreted as a subtle assertion of the oppressed person’s humanity: pointing out their equal status of being human, to the attacker. Jesus doesn’t suggest that we offer ourselves up as a sacrifice or invite our aggressor to hurt us again, as I initially thought; he is encouraging a nonviolent strategy of highlighting that the attacker is mistreating a fellow human being. Barbara Reid says that the aggressor is then “shamed” and “humiliated” by this highlighting of their wrongdoing.
This would indicate Jesus is advocating for the victim to force the attacker to treat/view him as an equal. This is completely contradictory to your assertion that God/Jesus advocates for us to be pacifists in the face of our own destruction.
So, what interpretation is correct? Is it yours? Why? Are you asserting it's yours because it supports your positions, or because it's what God intended? If so, what is the reasoning for why God and Jesus advocates for us to remain peaceful even when evil threatens to destroy us and everything we love? Is that truly a logical and just position?
You also asked for other Biblical passages which support the position that Jesus/God support righteous violence. Here you go:
Pretty much the entirety of the Old Testament is God commanding the Israelites to war with and destroy various people so they can inhabit a specific area. Are you arguing that God was wrong throughout all of the OT period? Why would God/Jesus command us to be pacifists but completely contradict Himself when commanding the Israelites to go the war?
Exodus 15:3: The Lord is a man of war: the Lord is his name.
Joshua 10: 7-11: So Joshua marched up from Gilgal with his entire army, including all the best fighting men. The Lord said to Joshua, “Do not be afraid of them; I have given them into your hand. Not one of them will be able to withstand you.” After an all-night march from Gilgal, Joshua took them by surprise. The Lord threw them into confusion before Israel, so Joshua and the Israelites defeated them completely at Gibeon. Israel pursued them along the road going up to Beth Horon and cut them down all the way to Azekah and Makkedah. As they fled before Israel on the road down from Beth Horon to Azekah, the Lord hurled large hailstones down on them, and more of them died from the hail than were killed by the swords of the Israelites.
Deuteronomy 20:1: When you go to war against your enemies and see horses and chariots and an army greater than yours, do not be afraid of them, because the Lord your God, who brought you up out of Egypt, will be with you.
Exodus 22:2: “If a thief is caught breaking in at night and is struck a fatal blow, the defender is not guilty of bloodshed; 3 but if it happens after sunrise, the defender is guilty of bloodshed.
This is probably referring to the fact that someone defending their home, in the dark, is more understood to self defense (and defense of family) in the dark/night, than in the day. However, again, this is probably swayed by variations in customs of the time, which alter interpretation.
Leviticus 24:17-22: “‘Anyone who takes the life of a human being is to be put to death. 18 Anyone who takes the life of someone’s animal must make restitution—life for life. 19 Anyone who injures their neighbor is to be injured in the same manner: 20 fracture for fracture, eye for eye, tooth for tooth. The one who has inflicted the injury must suffer the same injury. 21 Whoever kills an animal must make restitution, but whoever kills a human being is to be put to death. 22 You are to have the same law for the foreigner and the native-born. I am the Lord your God.’”
Was God blaspheming himself here?
Genesis 9:6: “Whoever sheds human blood, by humans shall their blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made mankind.
Was God blaspheming himself here, opposing your divine edicts? How dare God oppose your assertions?!
Exodus 21:12–14: "He that smiteth a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death. And if a man lie not in wait, but God deliver him into his hand; then I will appoint thee a place whither he shall flee. But if a man come presumptuously upon his neighbour, to slay him with guile; thou shalt take him from mine altar, that he may die."
Was God blaspheming against your divine decree here?
Romans 13:4: for he is God's servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for he does not bear the sword in vain. For he is the servant of God, an avenger who carries out God's wrath on the wrongdoer.
Why would God command us to be pacifists, when He Himself holds the sword?
Proverbs 24:5-6: A wise man is full of strength, and a man of knowledge enhances his might, for by wise guidance you can wage your war, and in abundance of counselors there is victory.
Oh look, the Bible espousing EXACTLY what I've been arguing this entire time, that good men (truthbound men) are righteous in their violence and wars, and if they are truthbound, they will surely find victory, and that God approves of it.
Do you need more examples, or will you continue to argue that Jesus/God advocates for us to remain peaceful no matter what?
If you seek only to justify your rage and ego - go ahead.
If it's true, it's justified. I've justified everything I've said thus far with logic and with Biblical passages, many of them. Just because you deny it doesn't make it false.
I will try my best to remain meek.
On this, I will cast judgment upon you. You won't be meek. You don't even know what it means. You will be prideful and antagonistic against God. You will demand He adhere to your whims, and not you adhere to Him. You will follow your own course, and fail in kind. Only in failure, of being broken, will you ever come to see the light of God. I have no control over your course. Only you do, in pursuit of current course, in needless misery, and defiance of God, through your own choices. I've given you the option, the knowledge to correct course. It's up to you to change. Free will, after all, is the only way we can be rightly judged. Your decisions are your own.
With all your boasting, you have 6 posts in here... You're such a "warrior of justice"... Perhaps I should delete 90% of my posts to be more like you?
Delete nothing. Even errors toward pursuit of truth are worthy to follow. And, again, you cast stones at me not knowing. Keep flinging, your stones do not hurt.
None of the verses gives you the right to be violent...None of the verses say that YOU should be violent.
It's rather remarkable how defiant people can be when presented with truth. I could tell you the sky is blue, present every logical, scientific, and observable fact to you, and you would stick your fingers in your ears, close your eyes, and scream as loudly as possible, hoping the truth went away. That's not how truth works. It is ever present, ever judgeful, just as God, because they are the same and of the same. Denial of truth is denial of God. Not knowing one is to not know the other.
You are so prideful in your denials that you've missed the bigger picture. You have placed yourself above truth, above God, demanding both be subservient to you. In the place of God, there you dwell, claiming yourself to be God, ever boastful and prideful. In your height of folly, so too will you fall greatly. That is what awaits your course. I warn you, but, your actions are your own.
If you only knew the real battle is won through the truth, not by a sword, or simple arrogance...
I've attempted to explain to you, in detail, through logic and Biblical passages, that violence is not inherently wrong, that good people can be violent and be just, righteous, and adhere to God's commands. And yet, you still deny, because you place yourself above God. It's rather odd that you say "real battle is won through the truth", which is true, but then you wholly deny the truth. You claim to be righteous, but cut out every part of you which is righteous, and replace where you once were with hypocrisies and idols of Saturn.
24 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me. 25 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it. 26 For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?
You, again, intentionally misinterpret the Bible to support your own position. You're not acting like a Christian. You're acting like a child of the devil, who is the father of lies, the antithesis of God. You think the Bible can mean whatever you want it to mean. You demand God adhere to your own assertions, and not you to His.
Matthew 16:24-25 means precisely what I've been telling you. You can't pursue Jesus/God while prioritizing yourself above them, above truth. You have to accept when you're wrong, and adjust accordingly when you find out you erred. You can't learn when you're prideful, which you are. You can't admit wrong when you proclaim perfection, which you are. You can't improve when you think you're never wrong, which you are.
You must accept you've sinned, to know of your imperfections, and try to overcome them, to prioritize and pursue truth, to embody it, to come closer to God. To "take up one's cross" is to bear the burden that comes with pursuing truth, to pursuing perfection. to pursuing God. Sinning is easy. Perfection is hard, and for us it's impossible, but a cross we must bear. To "save their life will lose it" but "whoever loses their life for me will find it" literally means that life, for the sake of life, leads to ruin, but life, in pursuit of truth, in pursuit of God, will be saved (i.e. live). This is why, philosophically, we must prioritize truth above life. If we prioritize life above truth, we sacrifice truth and inevitably die; and is also what corrupted modern philosophy teaches, through various means, like with feminism (the inversion of the natural patriarchal order and the philosophical pursuits of men and women, of truth and life respectively). The Bible, explicitly and implicitly, many, many times, says that Jesus/God are truth incarnate, or that truth is Their will in this universe. Reread the Bible, and every time you see Jesus/God, replace their name with "truth", and the passages will make more sense. To deny truth, is to deny Jesus/God. Matthew 16:26 means that pursuing our own interests, our own power, our own greed, will result in ruin (our soul will be damned), but pursuing God, pursuing, truth, will save us.
Are you ready to die for Christianity, or live for your ego?
There's only one person here who knows what it means to be Christian, and to let go of ego. It's not you.
It's not like I wish for things to be the way they are. I don't burn with rage at the way things are, I simply try to find out what is. I've changed my mind many times, and some of them core philosophical and foundational beliefs, so that I can adhere closer to truth, even within the last few years. Why? Because I was wrong. Because I prioritize truth above myself. I let go of my ego. I am a servant of God, and I know exactly what that means.
This time it only took you 3 days to reply. You're getting better at this.
I am not reading all that ego-filled self-righteousness from you again... 3 sentences in your nonsense and "On this, I will cast judgment upon you." - ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah. This honestly made me laugh!
Being self-righteous doesn't make you truly righteous.
You want to push Christians into a revolt, but our Lord has said "turn the other cheek".
Your anger and your ego won't help you.
On that, I agree. There's clearly a disagreement on how it's applied.
No. I only want good people, truthbound people, Christians, to resist evil, to espouse truth in the face of lies, to fight evil when it attempts to harm what they love (if what they love is truthbound).
Oh look, another passage that has other ways of being interpreted, but which you use to advocate for peace, for the sake of peace, no matter what, and which you refuse to address on its face, because you know the position is ridiculously false.
According to your own translation of that verse, it means you should accept the slights of others. So, why are you ignoring your own interpretation of that passage, and being hostile toward me? Shouldn't you, according to the Bible, accept my refutations, my "slaps"? Why are you being unChristian to rebuke me, who you claim to be unChristian? Are you a hypocrite, or just a bad Christian?
For the sake of argument, here are alternative arguments for Matthew 5:39:
https://www.gotquestions.org/turn-other-cheek.html
In essence, according to this interpretation, it means that we shouldn't escalate an evil, for fear of growing the evil. We should meet evil with love, so that we deescalate it, and grow the kingdom of Christ on earth. However, pertaining to this argument, if who we're facing won't back down, and will escalate no matter what, this lesson is null and void, and there's no reason for us to turn the other cheek.
This means, essentially, to act in a way which facilitates peace, against honorable opponents. However, as I've repeatedly been arguing, if our enemy doesn't want peace, we have zero reason to turn the other cheek.
Uh oh, not your heckin' pacifism. This here, just like above, is advocating for acting/reacting in a way which leads to peace (when our opponents/aggressors are honorable). Our opponents aren't honorable, and seek the death of each and every one of us. Thus, we aren't obligated to turn the other cheek.
Oh look, historical applicability to the Biblical passage in question. Shocking! This aligns with the previous parts of Matthew 5 (like in 5:38 “You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’"), that Jesus is merely advocating for instilling more peace upon people seeking needless violence (among honorable opponents). And, repeatedly, our opponents are honorable, and seek violence regardless of what we do, thus we aren't obligated to turn the other cheek.
Keep in mind that Jesus knew that his opponents would be met with failure, harm, death, and hell, regardless of what they did to him. He didn't need to seek immediate retribution, as he knew what awaited them should they continue on their course. He prayed for their change of heart, but knew what awaited them should they continue on their path. This doesn't necessarily mean that someone should never fight back, however.
Here's another link:
https://www.thebubble.org.uk/culture/philosophy-religion/the-path-of-most-resistance-what-does-it-mean-to-turn-the-other-cheek/
This would indicate Jesus is advocating for the victim to force the attacker to treat/view him as an equal. This is completely contradictory to your assertion that God/Jesus advocates for us to be pacifists in the face of our own destruction.
So, what interpretation is correct? Is it yours? Why? Are you asserting it's yours because it supports your positions, or because it's what God intended? If so, what is the reasoning for why God and Jesus advocates for us to remain peaceful even when evil threatens to destroy us and everything we love? Is that truly a logical and just position?
You also asked for other Biblical passages which support the position that Jesus/God support righteous violence. Here you go:
Pretty much the entirety of the Old Testament is God commanding the Israelites to war with and destroy various people so they can inhabit a specific area. Are you arguing that God was wrong throughout all of the OT period? Why would God/Jesus command us to be pacifists but completely contradict Himself when commanding the Israelites to go the war?
This is probably referring to the fact that someone defending their home, in the dark, is more understood to self defense (and defense of family) in the dark/night, than in the day. However, again, this is probably swayed by variations in customs of the time, which alter interpretation.
Was God blaspheming himself here?
Was God blaspheming himself here, opposing your divine edicts? How dare God oppose your assertions?!
Was God blaspheming against your divine decree here?
Why would God command us to be pacifists, when He Himself holds the sword?
Oh look, the Bible espousing EXACTLY what I've been arguing this entire time, that good men (truthbound men) are righteous in their violence and wars, and if they are truthbound, they will surely find victory, and that God approves of it.
Do you need more examples, or will you continue to argue that Jesus/God advocates for us to remain peaceful no matter what?
If you seek only to justify your rage and ego - go ahead.
I will try my best to remain meek.
With all your boasting, you have 6 posts in here... You're such a "warrior of justice"... Perhaps I should delete 90% of my posts to be more like you?
None of the verses gives you the right to be violent.
None of the verses say that YOU should be violent.
If you only knew the real battle is won through the truth, not by a sword, or simple arrogance...
24 Then said Jesus unto his disciples, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me.
25 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: and whosoever will lose his life for my sake shall find it.
26 For what is a man profited, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul? or what shall a man give in exchange for his soul?
Are you ready to die for Christianity, or live for your ego?
If it's true, it's justified. I've justified everything I've said thus far with logic and with Biblical passages, many of them. Just because you deny it doesn't make it false.
On this, I will cast judgment upon you. You won't be meek. You don't even know what it means. You will be prideful and antagonistic against God. You will demand He adhere to your whims, and not you adhere to Him. You will follow your own course, and fail in kind. Only in failure, of being broken, will you ever come to see the light of God. I have no control over your course. Only you do, in pursuit of current course, in needless misery, and defiance of God, through your own choices. I've given you the option, the knowledge to correct course. It's up to you to change. Free will, after all, is the only way we can be rightly judged. Your decisions are your own.
Delete nothing. Even errors toward pursuit of truth are worthy to follow. And, again, you cast stones at me not knowing. Keep flinging, your stones do not hurt.
It's rather remarkable how defiant people can be when presented with truth. I could tell you the sky is blue, present every logical, scientific, and observable fact to you, and you would stick your fingers in your ears, close your eyes, and scream as loudly as possible, hoping the truth went away. That's not how truth works. It is ever present, ever judgeful, just as God, because they are the same and of the same. Denial of truth is denial of God. Not knowing one is to not know the other.
You are so prideful in your denials that you've missed the bigger picture. You have placed yourself above truth, above God, demanding both be subservient to you. In the place of God, there you dwell, claiming yourself to be God, ever boastful and prideful. In your height of folly, so too will you fall greatly. That is what awaits your course. I warn you, but, your actions are your own.
I've attempted to explain to you, in detail, through logic and Biblical passages, that violence is not inherently wrong, that good people can be violent and be just, righteous, and adhere to God's commands. And yet, you still deny, because you place yourself above God. It's rather odd that you say "real battle is won through the truth", which is true, but then you wholly deny the truth. You claim to be righteous, but cut out every part of you which is righteous, and replace where you once were with hypocrisies and idols of Saturn.
You, again, intentionally misinterpret the Bible to support your own position. You're not acting like a Christian. You're acting like a child of the devil, who is the father of lies, the antithesis of God. You think the Bible can mean whatever you want it to mean. You demand God adhere to your own assertions, and not you to His.
Matthew 16:24-25 means precisely what I've been telling you. You can't pursue Jesus/God while prioritizing yourself above them, above truth. You have to accept when you're wrong, and adjust accordingly when you find out you erred. You can't learn when you're prideful, which you are. You can't admit wrong when you proclaim perfection, which you are. You can't improve when you think you're never wrong, which you are.
You must accept you've sinned, to know of your imperfections, and try to overcome them, to prioritize and pursue truth, to embody it, to come closer to God. To "take up one's cross" is to bear the burden that comes with pursuing truth, to pursuing perfection. to pursuing God. Sinning is easy. Perfection is hard, and for us it's impossible, but a cross we must bear. To "save their life will lose it" but "whoever loses their life for me will find it" literally means that life, for the sake of life, leads to ruin, but life, in pursuit of truth, in pursuit of God, will be saved (i.e. live). This is why, philosophically, we must prioritize truth above life. If we prioritize life above truth, we sacrifice truth and inevitably die; and is also what corrupted modern philosophy teaches, through various means, like with feminism (the inversion of the natural patriarchal order and the philosophical pursuits of men and women, of truth and life respectively). The Bible, explicitly and implicitly, many, many times, says that Jesus/God are truth incarnate, or that truth is Their will in this universe. Reread the Bible, and every time you see Jesus/God, replace their name with "truth", and the passages will make more sense. To deny truth, is to deny Jesus/God. Matthew 16:26 means that pursuing our own interests, our own power, our own greed, will result in ruin (our soul will be damned), but pursuing God, pursuing, truth, will save us.
There's only one person here who knows what it means to be Christian, and to let go of ego. It's not you.
It's not like I wish for things to be the way they are. I don't burn with rage at the way things are, I simply try to find out what is. I've changed my mind many times, and some of them core philosophical and foundational beliefs, so that I can adhere closer to truth, even within the last few years. Why? Because I was wrong. Because I prioritize truth above myself. I let go of my ego. I am a servant of God, and I know exactly what that means.
What have you changed your mind on lately?
This time it only took you 3 days to reply. You're getting better at this.
I am not reading all that ego-filled self-righteousness from you again... 3 sentences in your nonsense and "On this, I will cast judgment upon you." - ahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahah. This honestly made me laugh!
Thank you for making me laugh!