Well, I think the question needs clarification before it can be sufficiently answered. What do you mean by "roll over and take it", or "lay down and die"? Do I believe we should always respond nonviolently? Absolutely. Pacifism, though, isn't just "laying down and dying". It's not "doing nothing". I would say that when we are attacked, whether verbally or physically, we should respond in a spirit of love, not self-preservation. My response shouldn't be one of "doing nothing", but one that reflects patience, kindness, gentleness, etc. To love in the face of attack is far from "laying down and dying".FTAggies said:
Heard a sermon about NOT being someone who rolls over and takes it, abuse, punishment, etc.; essentially don't turn the other cheek, apparently the opposite of what Jesus said. My question is this, should we just lay down and die in the modern day coliseum?
This is more bad translating. No, no. There's no significance to the word smite vs slap. In Matthew the word rhapizo is used, which is specifically a strike from the palm of the hand. However, in St Luke's gospel the word tupto is used, which means to strike, or beat, to thump or cudgel, especially with a stick, especially with repeated blows, and no mention of left or right is made.Quote:
There is unwritten connotation here that Jews of the day would understand but is lost to most people. The King James uses the word smite instead of slap. personally i like smite better because it makes the connotation clear. Smiting is done by people of higher stature. smiting is generally used as a word when powerful people put lesser people in their place. The connotation here is that if a powerful individual seeks to do evil to you, it is best not to initially fight back because that will get you into trouble. Striking a social better back then even in a justified situation could get you killed. This is further supported by a tiny detail that usually gets lost to us. The fact that the right cheek is being struck is important because when a social better would smite someone of lower rank they would use their left hand, (the hand they wipe their ass with or dirty hand) which would strike the other person on the right cheek. This way the social better was putting the person lower in social standing in their place, effectively telling them they had no recourse and insulting them at the same time. Jesus tells the person lower in rank to turn the left cheek to them.
This action puts the person higher up in social rank in a precarious position. 1) It demonstrates humility by the person of lower social rank, showing the person higher in social rank the person they recognize their social positions.
2) If the person of higher social rank allows their anger to get the better of them and strikes the person of lower social rank with their right hand it changes the context of the strike. A strike with the right hand is something done when issuing a formal challenge to someone of similar social rank. so for someone of high rank to do this to someone of lower rank reduces the social untouchabikity of the person wishing to subjugate the person of the lower social rank and puts them on even footing and allows the person of lower social rank a wider variety of responses down the road up to potentially answering the percieved challenge with one of their own.
So here Jesus is not saying "let someone who wants to hurt u hit u multiple times because defending urself is bad" He is actually saying if someone in power wants to use their power in an evil way against you don't be dumb and strike back right away. force them to abandon their position of social power so they have less leverage against you before seeking out justice. These verses are for people who are victims of powerful people trying to abuse the law of an eye for an eye.
What gospel are you reading, friend? He never let them walk all over Him? He died the most shameful, horrible death. Naked, alone, beaten, mocked, scourged, spit on. Fully one third of the totality of the gospel accounts focus on the Passion of the Lord where He absolutely lets people walk all over Him, and forgives them as they do it.Quote:
going back to the violence thing, IMHO jesus was not weak and did not let people walk all over him nor did he ever ask us to. if the connotation of these passages were better understood then many people would get that these passages were just corrections for pathological behavior the jews had fallen into under strict adherence to the law of moses. and if you think about it, when jesus was confronted with people behaving incorrectly he never let them walk all over him.
I don't know what this means exactly.FTAggies said:
Heard a sermon about NOT being someone who rolls over and takes it, abuse, punishment, etc.; essentially don't turn the other cheek, apparently the opposite of what Jesus said. My question is this, should we just lay down and die in the modern day coliseum?
It is always tempting to take the foolish, weak God and refashion Him into something we want, something that meets our needs. We don't want to die, we don't want to be weak. We don't want to be humbled. We don't want to suffer, be mocked. We don't want the bad people to be forgiven, we want justice our way. We want the bad to be punished, and the good (which is always us, of course) to be rewarded.Quote:
For the message of the cross is foolishness to those indeed perishing, but to us being saved it is the power of God. For it has been written: I will destroy the wisdom of the wise; and the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate." Where is the wise man? Where is the scribe? Where is the debater of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? For since in the wisdom of God, the world through its wisdom did not know God, God was pleased through the foolishness of the proclamation to save those believing.
Forasmuch as both Jews ask for signs, and Greeks seek wisdom, we, however, preach Christ crucified, a stumbling block indeed to the Jewish and foolishness to Gentiles, but those called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. For the foolishness of God is wiser than men, and the weakness of God stronger than men
It immediately reminded me of 1 Peter 2:21-23:Quote:
What gospel are you reading, friend? He never let them walk all over Him? He died the most shameful, horrible death. Naked, alone, beaten, mocked, scourged, spit on. Fully one third of the totality of the gospel accounts focus on the Passion of the Lord where He absolutely lets people walk all over Him, and forgives them as they do it.
You know, it is weird, but as a younger Christian and person I always tried to fight back. Now I just smile, say God bless you, and let God handle it. God does a much better job than I ever did. And when I think of all the time I wasted being angry, I was the loser.PacifistAg said:It immediately reminded me of 1 Peter 2:21-23:Quote:
What gospel are you reading, friend? He never let them walk all over Him? He died the most shameful, horrible death. Naked, alone, beaten, mocked, scourged, spit on. Fully one third of the totality of the gospel accounts focus on the Passion of the Lord where He absolutely lets people walk all over Him, and forgives them as they do it.
21 For you have been called for this purpose, since Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example for you to follow in His steps, 22 who committed no sin, nor was any deceit found in His mouth; 23 and while being reviled, He did not revile in return; while suffering, He uttered no threats, but kept entrusting Himself to Him who judges righteously
He left an example for us to follow...when reviled, don't revile in return. When suffering at the hands of another, don't even utter threats.
Quote:
There's no specific stature indicated here. There's no passive-aggressive message. Now, you're right - a blow to the cheek is an insult. But this has to be read in context of the sayings of Jesus. Christ says, don't be angry with your brother without cause, don't call him a fool or be in danger of hellfire. Here, it's even a stronger - when you are struck, and not only struck but struck insultingly, restrain yourself. Again, praos is a hugely strong concept here, isn't it? Restrain yourself, and in gentleness offer the other cheek. Not as a prideful, insolent, social-stature power move, but as a gentle and meek rebuke of the act of violence.
Quote:
10 This day you have seen with your own eyes how the Lord delivered you into my hands in the cave. Some urged me to kill you, but I spared you; I said, 'I will not lay my hand on my lord, because he is the Lord's anointed.' 11 See, my father, look at this piece of your robe in my hand! I cut off the corner of your robe but did not kill you. See that there is nothing in my hand to indicate that I am guilty of wrongdoing or rebellion. I have not wronged you, but you are hunting me down to take my life. 12 May the Lord judge between you and me. And may the Lord avenge the wrongs you have done to me, but my hand will not touch you. 13 As the old saying goes, 'From evildoers come evil deeds,' so my hand will not touch you.
