ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Turn Against Evil Doers

Do Christians have a God given right to protect themselves against evil doers or should we turn the other cheek?

Join Our Christian Chat and Take The End Times Signs Bible Quiz
 ---trey on 9/23/19
     Helpful Blog Vote (1)

Reply to this BlogPost a New Blog



Kat453, God bless you.
---JS1234 on 9/30/19


Facetious

treating serious issues with deliberately inappropriate humor, flippant.
"a facetious remark"

See, Cluny's remarks were facetious, which after a while gets under my skin. His sarcasm is flippant and deliberately inappropriate. But then to add insult to insult JS1234 your remark was no better. You were acting just like Cluny, but I bet you thought you were being cute by thinking you were injuring me with your facetious remark that you openly admitted to. You didn't hurt me JS1234, you hurt yourself, just as my retaliation only hurt me.
---kathr4453 on 9/30/19


JS1234, making condescending remarks is every bit insulting ...that you also participate in. You do it in such an innocent underhanded way that maybe many don't notice.

So are you still being facetious, by being again facetious?
---kat453 on 9/30/19


StrongAxe, I was being facetious
---JS1234 on 9/29/19


JS1234, my retaliation to Cluny was wrong. I should just let his insults stand alone. We're all human. When discussing topics , heated debates are fine, but when the only way one can discuss is to make personal insults, and look up every blog you are in to set out some vengeful campaign to trash every blog or question you are currently in....yea, it gets under ones skin.

Sometimes fire with fire works...however with Cluny...it doesn't. He usually then sends Monk Brandon to jump in with his personal attacks afterwards. Cluny from this day forward is dead to me.
---kathr4453 on 9/30/19




JS1234:

One of Jesus' central teachings is The Golden Rule: "Do unto others, as you would have them do unto you". Sadly, all too many Christians are so obsessed with the Old Testament that they forget the New. You constantly hear about people clamoring to put the Ten Commandments up in courtrooms and public places, but I don't remember anyone having similar zeal for the Sermon on the Mount.

If any Christian really enjoys other people hurling insults and abuse at them, then they're free to do so themselves. Otherwise, they should refrain from doing so, even if they feel that it's morally justified.

Jesus was free of sin, so would have been justified in throwing the first stone. We are not.
---StrongAxe on 9/29/19


I don't know, maybe it is okay to insult people whose theology is different from ours. After all, Jesus called the Pharisees white-washed tombs. That was an insult. So maybe it's okay for us. Go for it!
---JS1234 on 9/29/19


Your right Strongaxe, I agree. My apologies. I'm just going to have to totally ignore Cluny and make every effort not to read any of his posts.

Bullies rairly change, especially after so many here have confronted Cluny over the years and no change has resulted.
---kathr4453 on 9/29/19


\\A rabbi during Jesus time was different than a rabbi today. \\

\\Paul did not have a wife or mother traveling with him. There are many online commentaries who believe Paul was in fact married at one time.\\

Play by your own rules, kath.

Give scriptural proof for your assertions.

Btw, I'm not being nasty by not putting your final r, but my computer keeps on auto-correcting it to "Kathy".

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 9/29/19


kathr4453:

By using insults like that, you end up doing exactly the same thing that you despise others for doing. The Golden Rule is "do unto others as YOU WOULD HAVE others do unto you", not "do unto others ars they have done unto you".

As I said, it takes two to tango. If someone flings mud, and you respond in kind, the only result will be that both of you will end up covered in mud.
---StrongAxe on 9/29/19




Strongaxe, those like Cluny who continually feed off the bottom of a conversation to find scum, dirt, misspelled words, ANYTHING to attack and start an argument? Lying in wait for another to do something that gives Cluny some strange kick etc is what it is.....a Bottom feeder. Psalms 10 might be even stronger here. Yes let's go with Psalms 10. Bottom feeder was actually nice compared to Psalms 10....just plain EVIL. OK IS THAT BETTER?
---kathr4453 on 9/29/19


A rabbi during Jesus time was different than a rabbi today. Even the qualifications of most churches for a pastor or minister have changed. Paul, as one who learned under a rabbi could have qualified as a rabbi at that time. Jesus was called rabbi and never went to any formal school of learning.

The early church pastors or bishops only qualifications say nothing about formal education.

So in every sense of the word and definition, Paul was a Rabbi....it simply means TEACHER. Paul was that and more. No need here to disect into another food fight.
---kath453 on 9/29/19


There might be an orthodox and RCC TRADITION, just like their tradition that Mary never had other children ...but that doesn't prove a thing. Actually scripture shows Mary did have other children in spite of TRADITION of the RCC and ORTHODOX.

In the Christian community , our traditional belief is that he was married, as Pharisees were never required to be unmarried.

1 Corinthians 9:5 suggest, as Paul includes himself in the US AND WE, that he didn't say them and they. based on this verse OUR TRADITION believes Paul was at one time married.

But let's be clear TRADITION in and of itself is not the WORD OF GOD.

So Cluny still has not PROVED beyond a shadow of a doubt Paul NEVER MARRIED EVER.
---kathr4453 on 9/28/19


kathr4453:

There is no need to use obviously derisive names like "bottom feeder".


Cluny:

Just because someone may not be aware of a scripture is no reason to reply sarcastically and assume they use a different Bible, and derisively call it the "Reversed Version".


When I first joined these blogs many years ago, Cluny called them the "Piranha Blogs", and with good reason - but it takes two to tango, and it only happens when people on both sides of a debate are eager to chew each other up. We ought to be better than that.
---StrongAxe on 9/29/19


Cluny, there are no rewards for bottom feeders ....except the reward of spitting out the garbage you seem to love to take in. Garbage in garbage out.....

What makes you think you will be rewarded in heaven? Maybe you're reward is hell.

We can also use the same kind of insults towards you. Do you like it? You must.

Thanks for adding to my rewards in heaven....
---kat453 on 9/28/19


There is no evidence that St. Paul was ever a rabbi.

But there is a long standing Christian tradition that he was never married.

---Cluny on 9/28/19

Cluny, yes, you may be right about that.
---JS1234 on 9/28/19


Read These Insightful Articles About Make Money


\\ It's that you, like a carp, are a bottom feeder,\\

Keep on adding to my heavenly reward, kath.

\\
Paul was probably married at some point. If he actually was a rabbi, it was just about a requirement that he be married.
---JS1234 on 9/27/19\\

There is no evidence that St. Paul was ever a rabbi.

But there is a long standing Christian tradition that he was never married.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 9/28/19


2 Corinthians 6:14 - Be ye not yoke together with unbelievers: For what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness ? and what communion hath light with darkness.

Psalm 34:14 - Depart from evil and do good, Seek peace and pursue it,

2 John 10:10 - If anyone comes to you and does not bring this doctrine, do not receive him into your house nor greet him.
---RichardC on 9/27/19


JS1234 I agree. Pauls wife also could have left him after he became a Christian, or maybe she died.

Cluny, you have access to online info like everyone else. Paul never claimed to be a virgin either. And no scripture says Paul was NEVER MARRIED.

But you are free to believe what you want. No one is gonna lose their salvation over whether they believe Paul was ever married at one time or not. And no one but you would make such an issue over a molehill. It's not the molehill though is it? It's that you, like a carp, are a bottom feeder, looking for food no one else will eat or touch because you have nothing else more constructive in your life, but to say AHHH HAAAAA....GOTCHA! Whatever.
---kathr4453 on 9/28/19


==\\There are many online commentaries who believe Paul was in fact married at one time.\\

Where are these commentaries and what makes them credible to you?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 9/27/19


Read These Insightful Articles About Rehab Treatments


Paul was probably married at some point. If he actually was a rabbi, it was just about a requirement that he be married.
---JS1234 on 9/27/19


Poor Cluny creating an issue where there never was one. Paul could have been a widow when he wrote that. It appears at that particular time Paul did not have a wife or mother traveling with him. There are many online commentaries who believe Paul was in fact married at one time. I believe them over Cluny. Maybe she was an unbeliever and she left Paul. Who knows. Maybe she died. We don't have a virgin Paul too do we? Peter was married. Let's use Peter then...WOULD PETER FIGHT AND DEFEND HIS WIFE AND MOTHER? I say yes.
---kathr4453 on 9/27/19


Our protection is a part of our salvation. Either we trust that fact of we don't. Psa 37:39 - The salvation of the righteous is from the LORD, he is their refuge in the time of trouble. The righteous are told to lay hold of His protection, to make peace with Him. Isa 27:5 The Father is my strength, my protector, it is He who saves me from violence. In Him I will trust rather than any thing i can do.
---joseph on 9/27/19


\\Please back up with scripture that explicitly says Paul was not married. //


Are these verses not in your Reversed Version of the Bible?


1 Corinthians 7:7-8 says, For I would that all men were even as I myself. But every man hath his proper gift of God, one after this manner, and another after that. I say therefore to the unmarried and widows, It is good for them if they abide even as I.

For someone who's always demanding Biblical proof, you surely are ignorant about the Scriptures, k.

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 9/26/19


Send a Free Special Occasion Ecard


Samuel I agree.
---kathr4453 on 9/26/19


Whether you turn you cheek depends on the situation. If a person slaps you to show their contempt. Yes turn your check. If a person is trying to murder you. Put up a fight.
---Samuelbb7 on 9/26/19


Cluny:

You wrote: St. Paul was not married, remember?

kathr4453 was suggesting a hypothetical situation. He was not married. So what? He DID have a mother. Nobody tried to murder or rape his wife or mother. But what if he WERE married and/or his mother was still alive, and the situation happened? Would he have been justified in defending them?

I know that you don't have kids, but IF you did, and IF someone attacked them, would you use force to defend them, or would you turn the other cheek?


kathr4453:

How do these discussions get so far off track?

You've been here for years. You should know this is common practice here.
---StrongAxe on 9/26/19


Please back up with scripture that explicitly says Paul was not married.

We do know Paul had a mother.
---kathr4453 on 9/26/19


Read These Insightful Articles About Stocks


\\But I will say if someone tried to rape or murder Pauls Mother or wife...he would have every right to defend and protect his family.
---kathr4453 on 9/25/19\\

St. Paul was not married, remember?

Glory to Jesus Christ!
---Cluny on 9/26/19


No JS1234 we can't know can we. But I do find it interesting that in this Christian nation the belief to own a gun and the freedom Christians have to protect life and limb came from somewhere. Praise God the Majority of us will never know what that is like in reality if attacked.

Wanting your Job, your Car, your food etc is one thing....wanting your life ..that's another. Road rage..turn the other cheek please.
---kathr4453 on 9/26/19


True, Paul did not use physical force, and neither did Jesus. At times He (Jesus), used strong words, mostly directed at religious leaders.

Constitution may give rights but there is still choice whether to own and/or use guns.
I've wondered how effective owning guns may be if locked away when 'needed' in a moments time, but think locking them away can be critical, aware of children having been injured or killed because of access.

Yes, Paul stood, and his defense was the LORD, and even when attacked he continued to praise, preach, give forth testimony, more...resulting in things like a jailers conversion. Some were further incensed. God saw him through, even until his time
---chria9396 on 9/26/19


We can never know what somebody would have done if it was never done
---JS1234 on 9/25/19


Read These Insightful Articles About Diabetes


Who said anything about Paul using physical force against anyone. He stood up for his legal rights as a Roman citizen when force was used against him.

How do these discussions get so far off track?

If one is asking if one has a right to own a gun and protect themselves and family against invaders, rapists or thieves, I believe under our constitutional law we do. God never asks us to turn the other cheek while some violent person is raping your wife or daughter. But I will say if someone tried to rape or murder Pauls Mother or wife...he would have every right to defend and protect his family.
---kathr4453 on 9/25/19


Paul never used physical force against anyone as far as I know.
---JS1234 on 9/25/19


Paul gives a perfect example of using his right as a Roman Citizen to object to being put in prision with out due process. If Paul just rolled over, he would have died in that Roman Prison the first time he was there.

I believe as Christians we are covered under our laws like anyone else. I also believe if the Jews fought back in Germany during the 2nd WW, ( some did) maybe it wouldn't have been so easy for Hitler. They were German Citizens with rights.

I also believe those verses in Matthew are addressing the 1000 year reign when Jesus will be here and swiftly addressing evil so that we don't have to.

If someone broke in my home and did damage.....id press charges. Without doing so encourages lawlessness.
---kathr4453 on 9/25/19


And thank goodness for Buleah May Donald who sued the KKK and won and put the Alabama KKK out of business. Thank goodness she endured and had the first white men arrested for killing blacks and sentenced for their terror. Just walking away and letting evil run rampant is not what God meant in Matthew.
---kat453 on 9/25/19


Read These Insightful Articles About Depression


This is in the bible concerning turning the other cheek:

"You have heard that it was said, Eye for eye and tooth for tooth. But I tell you not to resist an evil person. If someone slaps you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also, if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well,"

Mt 4:38-40
---chria9396 on 9/23/19


Which evildoers do you have in mind?
---JS1234 on 9/23/19


Copyright© 2017 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.