Is it Ever Okay to Kill

[ebia]

Well, if I hadn't stood up for myself, I would have been a bullied "doormat",

Doormat and psychopath are not the only options.

 

[apache1]

Doormat and psychopath are not the only options.

Well, duhhhh...

 

[ebia]

Well, duhhhh...

Well, people keep writing as though the only non-violent approach is to be a doormat so I thought I'd reflect the other side of that coin. If non-violence equates to doormat, violence equates to psychopath.

The point of "turn the other cheek" and the other two case-studies that go with it is that they are non-optional instructions to find imaginative and effective non-violent solutions to problems. "I had no choice but to shoot him..." isn't allowed as an option by Jesus. If that seems hard - well, following Jesus is hard.

 

[apache1]

Well, people keep writing as though the only non-violent approach is to be a doormat so I thought I'd reflect the other side of that coin. If non-violence equates to doormat, violence equates to psychopath.

The point of "turn the other cheek" and the other two case-studies that go with it is that they are non-optional instructions to find imaginative and effective non-violent solutions to problems. "I had no choice but to shoot him..." isn't allowed as an option by Jesus. If that seems hard - well, following Jesus is hard.

Once again, well, duhhhhhhhh............. Nobody in their right mind is advocating unprovoked agression. All we are saying, stand up for yourself if you have to, and only if you have to, and yes if non-violent solution to problem, fantastic, but as in "Coward of the County" by Kenny Rogers near end of song, he says "Sometimes you have to fight when you're a man". My admittedly arrogant and un-abashed view than I don't feel a damn bit guilty feeling writing what I just wrote. I have never been in your shoes anymore than you have been in my shoes. Duhhhhhhh........... Duhhhhh.....

 

[ebia]

Once again, well, duhhhhhhhh............. Nobody in their right mind is advocating unprovoked agression.

And no-one is suggesting being a doormat. Non-violence is to doormat as "self-defence" is to psychopath.

All we are saying, stand up for yourself if you have to, and only if you have to, and yes if non-violent solution to problem, fantastic, but as in "Coward of the County" by Kenny Rogers near end of song, he says "Sometimes you have to fight when you're a man"

Do you follow Jesus or Kenny Rogers?

 

[Hawisher]

Do you follow Jesus or Kenny Rogers?

 

[apache1]

And no-one is suggesting being a doormat. Non-violence is to doormat as "self-defence" is to psychopath.


Do you follow Jesus or Kenny Rogers?

Jesus, but even if I didn't, I would come closer to following Kenny Rogers than you.

 

[Hawisher]

Jesus, but even if I didn't, I would come closer to following Kenny Rogers than you.

So when Jesus said to turn the other cheek... was that just a suggestion?

 

[Hawisher]

I'm of the opinion it is only ever acceptable for a Christian to kill to save the life of another (not one's self). It's one thing to choose nonviolence for oneself, but quite another to choose nonviolence for another.

 

[apache1]

 

[apache1]

So when Jesus said to turn the other cheek... was that just a suggestion?

Once again, was Jesus suggesting having the other cheek slapped off? I don't think so. As stated again, somebody attacking me or robbing me, raping my wife or daughter (or anyone else), some crackpot shooting into a crowd of people, I don't give a damn what some self-righteous pseudo-intellectual "pious" "Joan of Arc" type says, I will try (may no succeed, but will try) to help. Even from this wimpy wussy point of view, one might keep and unbeliever from being killed by more hostile unbeliever. Unabashedly standing by what I write, can't wait to see the snippy smug comeback on this one. I'm enjoying playing with ya.

 

[Hawisher]

Once again, was Jesus suggesting having the other cheek slapped off? I don't think so. As stated again, somebody attacking me or robbing me, raping my wife or daughter (or anyone else), some crackpot shooting into a crowd of people, I don't give a damn what some self-righteous pseudo-intellectual "pious" "Joan of Arc" type says, I will try (may no succeed, but will try) to help. Even from this wimpy wussy point of view, one might keep and unbeliever from being killed by more hostile unbeliever. Unabashedly standing by what I write, can't wait to see the snippy smug comeback on this one. I'm enjoying playing with ya.

If you think this is play, then maybe you should take a long and hard look at your convictions.

Did Jesus not rebuke Peter for defending him with violence?

Also, Joan of Arc was hardly a pacifist.

 

[apache1]

If you think this is play, then maybe you should take a long and hard look at your convictions.

Did Jesus not rebuke Peter for defending him with violence?

Also, Joan of Arc was hardly a pacifist.

I am very comfortable with my convictions, thank you, your advice is not wanted nor needed, thank you.

 

[ebia]

I am very comfortable with my convictions,

All the more reason to challenge them.

thank you, your advice is not wanted nor needed, thank you.

Not wanted - clearly.
Not needed - that's something you can't judge for yourself.

 

[David Brider]

Once again, was Jesus suggesting having the other cheek slapped off? I don't think so.

Why don't you think so?

 

[ebia]

Once again, was Jesus suggesting having the other cheek slapped off?

Firstly, Jesus set the model. Giving ones life instead of ever taking. That's the only way the cycle of violence and death is ever broken.

Now lets look at the passage:

But I say to you, Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also; 40 and if anyone wants to sue you and take your coat, give your cloak as well; 41 and if anyone forces you to go one mile, go also the second mile. 42 Give to everyone who begs from you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you.
Love

Three examples of finding imaginative non-forceful (not just non-violent) ways of addressing abusive situations. They aren't simple commands to non-violence; they are stronger than that. In place of violence they demand we find imaginative ways that challenge the thinking behind the abuse. "Turn the other cheek" and allow him to hit you again - but as an equal instead of as an inferior. "Offer your cloak" and leave him shamed by leaving you naked. "Go the extra mile" and leave him demanding you stop.

Lets face it, the first line is nonnegotiable and clear: "do not resist an evildoer". Whatever your human heroes might say, Jesus is clear.

Who do you follow again?

 

[apache1]

All the more reason to challenge them.
No need to challenge them, once again, comfortable with. Maybe I'm challenging you, hotshot, to re-evaluate you values.



Not wanted - clearly.
Not needed - that's something you can't judge for yourself.

I might need advice on things, but I sure ain't gonna ask you for it, have seen nothing yet from you that is beneficial to me. I can be just as smug and condescending and arrogant as you, and could do this for days straight, I'm too tired to give a diddly crap right now. Good night.

 

[apache1]

Firstly, Jesus set the model. Giving ones life instead of ever taking. That's the only way the cycle of violence and death is ever broken.

Now lets look at the passage:

But I say to you, Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also; 40 and if anyone wants to sue you and take your coat, give your cloak as well; 41 and if anyone forces you to go one mile, go also the second mile. 42 Give to everyone who begs from you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you.
Love

Three examples of finding imaginative non-forceful (not just non-violent) ways of addressing abusive situations. They aren't simple commands to non-violence; they are stronger than that. In place of violence they demand we find imaginative ways that challenge the thinking behind the abuse. "Turn the other cheek" and allow him to hit you again - but as an equal instead of as an inferior. "Offer your cloak" and leave him shamed by leaving you naked. "Go the extra mile" and leave him demanding you stop.

Lets face it, the first line is nonnegotiable and clear: "do not resist an evildoer". Whatever your human heroes might say, Jesus is clear.

Who do you follow again?

Well, as I have exhaustively said times before, I don't advocate starting any trouble with anyone for anything, only defend yourself or your loved ones if truly in danger. No, unlike some of these other posters on here, I'm not going to willingly bend over and spread 'em, figuratively or literally, without a struggle. That's my convictions, period. Whether you agree with me or not I frankly don't give a tinker's damn. Ok now, next snarky comment to counter my snarky comment (I'll read tomorrow evening, I'm too tired to care now).

 

[ebia]

Well, as I have exhaustively said times before, I don't advocate starting any trouble with anyone for anything, only defend yourself or your loved ones if truly in danger. No, unlike some of these other posters on here, I'm not going to willingly bend over and spread 'em, figuratively or literally, without a struggle. That's my convictions, period. Whether you agree with me or not I frankly don't give a tinker's damn. Ok now, next snarky comment to counter my snarky comment (I'll read tomorrow evening, I'm too tired to care now).

I can't see any way of reading this except "I don't care what Jesus said, I know better."

 

[QR1]

Firstly, Jesus set the model. Giving ones life instead of ever taking. That's the only way the cycle of violence and death is ever broken.

Well yes, if you mean giving up ones life by putting it on the line. The bad guy may win afterall . . . the courts or the media may take exception to some element of justified self/other defense and one may be crucified like Zimmerman. There is always risk in not simply rolling over and letting evil win. There is no risk in the pacifist's route, only the certainty that evil will triumph and that God will turn His nose up at vain self righteous sacrifice.

Now lets look at the passage:

But I say to you, Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also; 40 and if anyone wants to sue you and take your coat, give your cloak as well; 41 and if anyone forces you to go one mile, go also the second mile. 42 Give to everyone who begs from you, and do not refuse anyone who wants to borrow from you.
Love

If a frightened citizen screams out for help, is loaning them a gun and a qualified shooter not satisfying this verse? Surely the verse does not suggest assisting evil doers.

Three examples of finding imaginative non-forceful (not just non-violent) ways of addressing abusive situations. They aren't simple commands to non-violence; they are stronger than that. In place of violence they demand we find imaginative ways that challenge the thinking behind the abuse. "Turn the other cheek" and allow him to hit you again - but as an equal instead of as an inferior. "Offer your cloak" and leave him shamed by leaving you naked. "Go the extra mile" and leave him demanding you stop.

Here we agree and where that is possible, it is a moral imperative. Where it isn't possible, a threat to life or great bodily harm, it is a moral imperative to resist. You wouldn't say to a woman about to be raped "just lay there and take it honey, it is the Christian thing to do", surely? The risk of potentially fatal STDs is too high, the affront too great, it is in a category Jesus was not addressing in the quoted Scripture & trying to apply that Scripture to that higher category of violence is dishonest at best and the excuse used by predators to justify predation at worst.

Lets face it, the first line is nonnegotiable and clear: "do not resist an evildoer". Whatever your human heroes might say, Jesus is clear.

Who do you follow again?

No matter what micro factoids are snipped and taken out of context, the message of the Gospel is not "to be a good Christian you must pawn your personal responsibility for self righteousness".