Bible question

[Ian Boothby]

In the Bible Jesus says that when struck to turn the other cheek. Does it say anything about what to do if someone strikes another person? Are you supposed to strike back on their behalf or does that go against Jesus’ teachings?

You’re supposed to forgive those who trespass against you, but can you forgive those who do wrong to others? Do you have the right to forgive them?

What got me thinking about this is when someone gets angry online because their views on say gay marriage aren’t tolerated, they usually call those who are upset intolerant. But to me when you vote against people having equal rights you are harming those around me. I don’t feel I have the right to forgive or tolerate someone hurting another person or group. Just curious what the Bible or any other religion’s stand on this was. Is there an obligation to defend your brother or since they should be forgiving those that are wronging them anyway, should you just mind your own beeswax?

Not sure if there are any references to beeswax in the Bible but aside from that…

[Typo Lad]

Well, if we're going by the Torah, then there are indeed numerous commandments, including "Love thy neighbor as thyself."

Plus there's Hillel the Elder's summation of the entire Torah "That which is hurtful to you, do not do to your fellow man (the rest is commentary, go and study it)".

You are required by Torah law to give up your own life to save someone else's.

[Typo Lad]

Just thought of a better point.

Avrohom (Abraham) praying for G-d to NOT destroy Sodom, Ammorah and the other cities of the plains. An entire perek is devoted to him trying to get G-d to not do it, despite the fact that the cities are his antithesis.

(and they weren't destroyed because of Sodomy. That's a bloody retcon)

[Ian Boothby]

Well, if we're going by the Torah, then there are indeed numerous commandments, including "Love thy neighbor as thyself."

Plus there's Hillel the Elder's summation of the entire Torah "That which is hurtful to you, do not do to your fellow man (the rest is commentary, go and study it)".

You are required by Torah law to give up your own life to save someone else's.

To save the life, okay. But what if they are just harming the person, stealing from them, imprisoning them or treating them unfairly?

You can forgive attacks to yourself and should, but can you forgive attacks to others?

[Typo Lad]

To save the life, okay. But what if they are just harming the person, stealing from them, imprisoning them or treating them unfairly?

You can forgive attacks to yourself and should, but can you forgive attacks to others?

There's a Biblical commandment of "Pidyon Shvu'in", redeeming prisoners. Every Jew is commanded to do his utmost to free a falsely imprisoned man.

There are entire Trachtates of the Talmud devoted to ethically treating one's fellow man, including one's employees.

In the case of Sodom, Avorohom was activly praying for G-d to spare the cities (there were several) if he could just find a handful of good men in each city, then a handful in all combined, then just one good man in one city.

Sodom was a hell-hole. It was basically a gated communittee that broke all the laws of Hospitality (a big, big deal in any semitic culture), engaged in acts of rape, and general lawlessness. Yet Avhrohom prayed for them.

[DavidAllred]

There's a Biblical commandment of "Pidyon Shvu'in", redeeming prisoners. Every Jew is commanded to do his utmost to free a falsely imprisoned man.

There are entire Trachtates of the Talmud devoted to ethically treating one's fellow man, including one's employees.

In the case of Sodom, Avorohom was activly praying for G-d to spare the cities (there were several) if he could just find a handful of good men in each city, then a handful in all combined, then just one good man in one city.

Sodom was a hell-hole. It was basically a gated communittee that broke all the laws of Hospitality (a big, big deal in any semitic culture), engaged in acts of rape, and general lawlessness. Yet Avhrohom prayed for them.

Great examples. As near as I can tell the bible is pretty consistent on justice, mercy, and humility-- all in that order. So you can't skip over justice and head straight to mercy, or those who receive mercy have no idea what they are receiving. That's my understanding of how these concepts work in the bible, Jesus offers us a great word about avoiding violence in the passage you quoted, but it's got to be placed alongside the context in which he operated to get the full meaning. My opinions, obviously.

[Tien Long]

To save the life, okay. But what if they are just harming the person, stealing from them, imprisoning them or treating them unfairly?

You can forgive attacks to yourself and should, but can you forgive attacks to others?

I am always amazed at Jesus' concepts of forgiveness simply b/c they were quite revolutionary during this period. Living at a time when Palestine was in control of Roman hands, and where there were numerous calls for the Israelites to fight back, Jesus' call of forgiveness and "turning the other cheek" would have seemed quite strange. However, I do not believe that forgiveness necessarily means doing nothing in response. Indeed, within the Gospels, though each presents a different picture of Jesus, one does see that he is quite active and at times the actions that speak loudest are the least aggressive. For instance, there's the story of him defending the adulterous woman from the stones of a crowd not by physically harming them, but poignantly stating "Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone."

Thus, I believe that forgiveness doesn't necessarily mean you simply let the other's actions go uncalled. However, one should not meet conflict with more conflict, or anger with more anger. In terms of Buddhism, since we are all interdependent upon one another and due to the law of karma, where every action will have a consequence, these negative aspects will come back to us. Rather, one must meet conflict and ignorance with understanding, which isn't weak by any means. Indeed, I find that those who practice understanding have a very strong resolve.

[JamesRitcheyIII]

Tikune is an ancient qabbalistic concept, which mirrors karmic law. The gist is, harming others is harmful to yourself, since we're all 'sparks from the flame (to use a Sufi phrase)' of what people call God.

Jesus also taught "Blessed are the Peacemakers--for they shall be called the children of God.". I'd say the definition of Peacemaker would likely encompass mebbe not torturing strangers because you're afraid. There seem to be two Gods in the 'old testament'--one a petulant monster, the other a loving Father. The God I feel in my heart is the latter--and i feel a responsibility to act as much like Him/Her as I humanly can.

On a humanist level, sociopaths and sadists seek power, the way a child molestor seeks work at a school or church. It's best for the rest of us to rat out assholes at every opportunity.

[Buzz Dixon]

Personal insult and injury should go unavenged and, if at all possible, forgiven.

We are legally obliged to do everything in our power to prevent harm from befalling others. If someone is about to assault a third party and it's possible to restrain them without causing harm, that's okay. If they are about to commit a fatal harm (say they're shooting at someone) and the only way to protect the defenseless third party is by inflicting harm on the actor, that is permitted.

Ideally those in civil authority (police, etc.) should be the ones to act as they have the recognized authority of the state backing their actions, but individuals may act directly if need be. The righteous act would be the one that does the least harm while preventing harm from happening to others.

Enabling is not a righteous act.

[Buzz Dixon]

There seem to be two Gods in the 'old testament'--one a petulant monster, the other a loving Father.

No, there is only one God, but there are several cultures that report their interactions with Him.

The first is a loose band of nomads.

Then comes a refugee nation of 12 tribes fleeing an oppressive culture with a pagan theology.

Then comes a more stable nation of 12 tribes but not centrally governed that is under constant attack by neighboring nations.

Then comes a nation with a strong central government.

Then comes a nation with a weak central government that splits into civil war and ends up being manipulated by nations and empires around it, often veering away from its traditional monotheism into paganism and polytheism.

Then comes a nation of slaves.

Then comes a reborn nation with a central government but no powerful king.

Then comes a client state of a larger empire, which rebels and is re-conquered.

Then comes a client state of an even larger empire, with a radical splinter religious group defying thousands of years of tradition.

Then comes a split between the traditional culture, which is subsequently enslaved yet again, and the rapidly growing radical splinter group.

Each of these cultures dealt with the same God, however, they saw Him through the lens of their immediate circumstances. Small wonder the cultures under constant attack saw a powerful, vengeful God, the cultures enslaved by others saw a righteously punishing God, and the cultures that prospered peacefully a loving God.

[Typo Lad]

Interesting take. I disagree, but interesting.

[Shisho]

This peacenik talk is all fine and good, but I seem to remember a messiah who took the whip to some money changers in the temple. Just sayin'

I love that story.

[John Hays]

This peacenik talk is all fine and good, but I seem to remember a messiah who took the whip to some money changers in the temple. Just sayin'

I love that story.

Haha, well it says he cast them out, not that he beat them or anything. But yeah, Jesus was bold when he needed to be, but not physically violent to others.

[DavidAllred]

Haha, well it says he cast them out, not that he beat them or anything. But yeah, Jesus was bold when he needed to be, but not physically violent to others.

The real interesting part of that story often goes unnoticed. It says he "made" the whip. I don't know if anyone has ever looked at how much effort has to go into making a whip, but it likely took him several hours. Point being, it wasn't like he lost his temper on the fly, Jesus measured his response. I picture him sitting under a tree in the shade braiding his whip and watching people go in and out of the temple getting taken advantage of.

Any court of law would have deemed it "premeditated" action. I guess for me, I see it as a caculated intervention into a corrupt power structure. An amazing lesson I think for any of us fighting the good fight.

[Shisho]

Haha, well it says he cast them out, not that he beat them or anything. But yeah, Jesus was bold when he needed to be, but not physically violent to others.

I don't know, have you ever tried to use a whip? It's not something you just pick up and get your casting-out on if you've never done it before. Sounds to me it wasn't JC's first time at that rodeo, you know? Just something to think about.

The real interesting part of that story often goes unnoticed. It says he "made" the whip. I don't know if anyone has ever looked at how much effort has to go into making a whip, but it likely took him several hours. Point being, it wasn't like he lost his temper on the fly, Jesus measured his response. I picture him sitting under a tree in the shade braiding his whip and watching people go in and out of the temple getting taken advantage of.

Any court of law would have deemed it "premeditated" action. I guess for me, I see it as a caculated intervention into a corrupt power structure. An amazing lesson I think for any of us fighting the good fight.

What he said.