Killing as a member of the defence forces.

[Shard]

Originally Posted by ioogy

Well since you seem to have already done your homework, why don't you enlighten the rest of us?

Ok
A literal interpretation of the passages, in which the command refers specifically to a manual strike against the side of a person's face, can be supported by reference to historical and other factors. At the time of Jesus, striking someone deemed to be of a lower class with the back of the hand was used to assert authority and dominance. If the persecuted person "turned the other cheek," the discipliner was faced with a dilemma. The left hand was used for unclean purposes, so a back-hand strike on the opposite cheek would not be performed. The other alternative would be a slap with the open hand as a challenge or to punch the person, but this was seen as a statement of equality. Thus, by turning the other cheek the persecuted was in effect demanding equality. By handing over one's cloak in addition to one's tunic, the debtor has essentially given the shirt off their back, a situation directly forbidden by Hebrew Law as stated in Deuteronomy 24: 10-13:

When you make your neighbor a loan of any sort, you shall not enter his house to take his pledge. You shall remain outside, and the man to whom you make the loan shall bring the pledge out to you. If he is a poor man, you shall not sleep with his pledge. When the sun goes down you shall surely return the pledge to him, that he may sleep in his cloak and bless you; and it will be righteousness for you before the LORD your God.

By giving the lender the cloak as well the debtor was reduced to nakedness. Public nudity was viewed as bringing shame on the viewer, not the naked, as evidenced in Genesis 9: 20-27:

Noah was the first tiller of the soil. He planted a vineyard; and he drank of the wine, and became drunk, and lay uncovered in his tent. And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brothers outside. Then Shem and Japheth took a garment, laid it upon both their shoulders, and walked backward and covered the nakedness of their father; their faces were turned away, and they did not see their father's nakedness.

The succeeding verse from the Sermon on the Mount can similarly be seen as a method for making the oppressor break the law. The commonly invoked Roman law of Angaria allowed the Roman authorities to demand that inhabitants of occupied territories carry messages and equipment the distance of one mile post, but prohibited forcing an individual to go further than a single mile, at the risk of suffering disciplinary actions. In this example, the nonviolent interpretation sees Jesus as placing criticism on an unjust and hated Roman law as well as clarifying the teaching to extend beyond Jewish law. As a side effect this may also have afforded the early followers a longer time to minister to the soldier and or cause the soldier not to seek followers of Jesus to carry his equipment in the future so as not to be bothered with their proselytizing.

I would say that none of us are the Lord, and we do kill one another whether in a real war or in other ways.

And I say this because I am going through this right now.

Asking for help.

Everyone thinking I need a husband, and when others have chose the loves of their lifetimes, and protect and cover them, I am not jealous, I don't understand, why they would want to harm someone who would glady love and honor a good man.

[ioogy]

Originally Posted by Shard

The succeeding verse from the Sermon on the Mount can similarly be seen as a method for making the oppressor break the law.

Well i will certainly not deny that you have constructed quite an elaborate interpretation of the simple words spoken on that mount. But let me see if i understand what you're implying... You believe that these commands, given by our Lord, were meant to force the oppressing person to yield or be forced to break the law? I find that to be a bit disturbing. And if you continue reading, i think you and anyone looking into it will find that what you are suggesting doesn't exactly fit...

"And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him two. Give to him that asketh thee, and from him that would borrow of thee turn not though away. Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thine enemy; but I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them who despitefully use you," Matt 5:41-44

Also, I find it incredible that you would imply that Christ, who sacrificed Himself without resistance, would condone violence in any form. Did He not rebuke Peter in the garden for assaulting the servant sent to arrest Him? The meek shall inherit the earth my friend.

I also notice that all references people in this forum have given that support violence, whether it be "killing" or"war" or even the implication of a "just war", are taken from the Old Testament. Let it be clear, Christ did not come to destroy the Law, He came to FUFILL the law. And as such, the ancient law that was given to Moses has been usurped by the death of Christ. Jesus was the sacrifice, therefore the old order is gone, Christ is why we as Christians are not required to give burnt offerings.

Follow Moses or follow Christ... personally, i am following my Savior.

Christians can worship our Lord in any government, under any dictator, regardless of the circumstances of this world... as we have in the past, so can we still. We do not need to fight, because our God fights for us. Using technical babble to try and circumvent your responsibilities as a follower of Christ might make you sound smart to some, and i agree, its very likely that ancient tradition was probably what the Lord was refering to. But i believe His usage of that practice was deeper than the coldness you imparted. It seems to me that His point was a bit more meaningful... that we as His followers should not return evil for evil.

i hope, for your sake, you learn to let go of your pride before you are forced to reap what you sow. Your anger is blinding you from accepting the truth that the Lord is trying to tell you. My brother, be at peace...