I've already explained what I think about Jesus' comments regarding an "eye for an eye". Such judicial laws apply to a theocrasy, which did not exist while Jesus was here in the flesh. In the end, the principl behind such laws will be executed in the lake of fire when sinners suffer in proportion to their sinfulness.

Jesus' comment that one should turn the other cheek was not said, as you suggested, because the principle of eye for eye was being misapplied, but was rather an expression of the principles by which His own life was led, as the Spirit of Prophecy stated.

You are entitled to your opinion. One thing is certain - He was not debunking an "eye for an eye".

MM, here's the statement again.



Regarding an eye for an eye, I asked you if you realized we would be lost if God followed this principle. I don't think you've answered this question, have you?

From 1 Cor. 13

In a recent post, I asked some questions:

What do you think of the law of divorce? Who instituted that? Why, then, did Jesus say that anyone who left their spouse, other than for adultery was guilty of adultery? Was He contradicting His own law here?

(I'm answering your question with these questions because the same principle applies to both this situation and the "eye for an eye" one.)

Do you acknowledge the point that turning the other cheek was not something Jesus was speaking about doing in special circumstances, but was, in fact, simply a revelation of how Jesus lived His own life (and thus, a revelation of God's character)?

(end of quote from previous post)
-----------------------------------------------------


Please address these questions. I want to address your point about Jesus' "debunking" eye for eye and tooth for tooth, but would like to respond to my questions on divorce to do so.

Also I'm curious if you recognize that when Jesus said to turn the other cheek, He was simply enunciated a principle by which He lived His life. Your saying that I'm entitled to my opinion doesn't really answer this question.

Jesus established the laws regulating divorce and remarriage. They still apply today. He did not change them.

Jesus did not abolish the "eye for an eye" principle when He spoke of turning the other cheek. Both reflect God's character.

I'm sorry, MM, but I'm not understanding either of your answers to my questions. In the OT the Israelites were allowed to divorce if they followed a certain procedure. Are these the laws regulating divorce and remarriage you are talking about? Or are you talking about what Jesus said in the Gospels?

Regarding turning the other cheek, my question to you has been the following:



You write that two different things which are mutually exclusive both reflect God's character, which I suppose could be taken as your recognizing that when Jesus said to turn the other cheek, He was simply enunciating a principle by which He lived His life. However, your statement would also be implying that Jesus lived His life by the principle of an eye for an eye, which is obviously not true.

Tom, I do not make a distinction between what Jesus said in the OT and what He said in the NT. It is the word of God - all of it. Not once did He contradict Himself. What He said about divorce and remarriage in the OT is upheld in the NT.

And "eye for an eye" and turning the other cheek both reflect the love and glory of God's character. Jesus demonstrated these truths all thoughout the OT and NT. It is true, though, while He was here in the flesh, He did not rule as Sovereign of the universe. He came to die our death on the cross. The next time He comes, however, He will unsheath the sword of the Lord.

You should! Jesus did! That's why He said, "you have heard it said X, *but* I say unto you Y." Y was better than X. This is Jesus' point, pretty obvious by the way He spoke. It's hard to miss this in fact.



Jesus said that certain accommodations were made for divorce because of the hardness of their hearts. God is gracious. However, Jesus explained what the ideal was, and God's true idea regarding marriage and divorce.

God hates divorce. That was just as true in the time of Moses as in the time of Jesus. When Jesus came in the flesh, He explained the ideal, which He was able to live out in His life to give more force to.



These are mutually contradictory, dude! You can't both not retaliate against someone (turn the other cheek) and retaliate against him (eye for eye). These are two fundamentally and diametrically opposed modus operandi. The fact that these are different, in addition to being obvious, is brought out by the fact that Jesus said "BUT I say unto you." The "but" highlights that these are different ways to act.



When He comes again, His character will be identical to what it was in the flesh. He wasn't putting on a show, but opening the window to His soul. God is greatly misunderstood, but He is no more a vengeful, militaristic God now than He was then. It sounds like you are enunciating the identical misapprehensions about God that the Jews had.

I can see throughout Jesus' life that He illustrated the principle of "turn the other cheek," but where did He live by "eye for eye"?

The principle of "turn the other cheek" springs forth from agape, the selfless, self-giving love of God. God is agape. God turns the other cheek because He is agape.

In the OT Jesus ordered Moses to kill a Sabbath breaker, the guy caught gatehring sticks for a fire. When did Jesus demonstate this prnciple while here in the flesh?