"Turning the other cheek" was taught by Christ to be the attitude of a believer who is personally oppressed because of his virtuous actions. It does NOT apply to nations, not because it wouldn't work (it wouldn't), but because government's purpose is to protect their citizens from evil. Paul, in Romans 13 (I think), said that government was not given the "power of the sword" in vain, but to execute vengeance on evil-doers.
In other words, when Christ said
"Luk 6:27 "But I say to you who hear, love your enemies, do good to those who hate you,
Luk 6:28 bless those who curse you, pray for those who mistreat you.
Luk 6:29 "Whoever hits you on the cheek, offer him the other also; and whoever takes away your coat, do not withhold your shirt from him either. "
...he was not referring to a situation where third parties were in danger, such as a father protecting his family, or a nation protecting it's citizens. Some would also argue that Jesus was using the common Rabinical method of teaching via exaggeration. He certainly followed his own teaching, however, by accepting repeated beatings, lashings and ultimately, crucifixion, although, as Pilate said, "I find no fault in this man."
The proper response of a government to this act is
1) to kill those who have killed it's citizens, (the power of the sword) and,
2) protect it's citizens from further attack
Tench, your discussion was the best so far, that's why I responded to it, to add truth to truth.
I hear Euro markets closed rather flat? (This gratuitous line inserted to keep Mani happy. -- just kidding)
Petz |
