Christ advocated turning the other cheek when someone strikes you. wtf is up with that, were his teachings made for those who will be slaves, domestically abused or people who just can stand up from themselves. Anyone who disagrees with my opinion (christians) are welcome to disagree and prove me wrong.
I guess i am asking you to enlighten me on the subject. And the idea that one should take the beating until the abuser is tired can no more, is weak (ripped of Rocky I-V)
Contextually speaking, To backhand Someone was Allowable between a master and a servant, a Roman and a Judean. yet striking someone in the face with the open palm was frowned upon and considered unbecoming. So, when You turn the other cheek, you turn the other cheek after you’ve been back handed, taunting the “master” to strike you with his open palm, and further causing this person who would humilliate you a loss of face.
Christianity is Not so pathetic, at least in the Gospels. It’s Paul and that son of a bitch, St Augustine, who took all the fun out of it.
My first response to this last post was, “what, is Polemarchus trying to be a moderator or something?”
Then I thought, “wait…why the hell shouldn’t he be?” He’s an even-handed cat who clearly knows his stuff; and many of the other moderators don’t even post here anymore.
To make a long story short, Logo, there were technical difficulties coupled with my own incompetence that caused all this. See, somehow I couldn’t figure out how to reactivate my account(passwords and what not), threw my hands into the air, and started up Nanook using a friends e-mail address.
Now, as his(friends) computer is going haywire from the recent hacking(Hero, my nemesis), I cranked mine up again and was able to log on as de’trop. (He had DSL, that’s why I was using his…I got dial-up)
Please, Hero, don’t hack this computer too. I apologize for not being able to die of kidney failure, and if it makes you feel better, I’ve begun smoking two packs a day just for you.
I am not a Christian, but i do believe in “turn-the-other-cheekism” and non-violence. I do not think that violence solves problems, only escalates and starts new problems. One has a right to self defense and self preservation but there are ways to defend one’s self and freedom without violence.
You may think it is cowardly to walk, or run if need be, from a fight, and you may think it foolish to allow some one to beat you while you do not hit them back, but what would fighting solve. A slave could kill his master, that would not make him free, just a killer.
Look at the African American civil rights activists who practiced non-violent resistance and were beaten by police, they exposed the brutality and inhumanism of the system and showed that they were civilized people. Attacking the police would just confirm the racists beliefs that the system was just because blacks were less civilized than whites and didn’t respect the law.
In the end, though, it is up to you to decide what you must do for your rights and life, and what you can live with or die with.
Times of war lead to dead warriors. Times of war lead to death period.
If we had more pacifists there would be alot less times of war.
There can be conflict without violence, just look at these forums. Plenty of conflict, no violence (although if we were actually in a room togethor that might be different).
If we had a second chance at history you would not want the Jews to try to rise up or resist the Nazis? Rather you think it better that 6 million be slaughtered in order to demonstrate to the world the Nazis cruelty and inhumanity?