News, Gang Rape Victim Is Church-Going Honor Student.

[revrandy]

Originally Posted by MysticPhD

I don't know what qualifications support your title Rev . . . but your understanding and knowledge of scriptural exegesis and interpretation is seriously twisted . . . no disrespect intended. I just can't let it stand unchallenged for the sake of the lurkers.

Not my interpretation.

Historical background on the text was drawn primarily from Social-Science Commentary on the Synoptic Gospels, pages 46-47, 380-81. It can be found here

[Ironmaw1776]

Originally Posted by revrandy

Not my interpretation.

Historical background on the text was drawn primarily from Social-Science Commentary on the Synoptic Gospels, pages 46-47, 380-81. It can be found here

I have read about that interpretation of the teaching of turn the other cheek before ...

It is very interesting, but what it does not take into account is that the context in which Christ was speaking, which was of loving your enemies. He was making a comparison between eye for an eye and turn the other cheek.

One turns the other cheek in love of ones enemy, and not in desire to save face or preserve personal power.

One "goes the extra mile" for love, and "gives the shirt of his back also" for love, and "blesses those who persecutes him" for love ... That is what Christ is saying.

And one must know this love for all people in order to be the children of the father, and to be complete in love as the father and the lord Christ are complete, even as Christ is the express image of the father and did make example of such perfect love when he offered himself on the cross for his enemies.

This is what "overcoming evil with Good" is about, and what is meant when it is said, "do not resist an evil man" ...

And when people cannot understand the message of the gospel which is Love for all people, then this is what Christ means when he says, "Yet I hold this against you: You have forsaken the love you had at first."

[MysticPhD]

Originally Posted by revrandy

Not my interpretation.

Historical background on the text was drawn primarily from Social-Science Commentary on the Synoptic Gospels, pages 46-47, 380-81. It can be found here

Ah . . . I am familiar with both authors . . . they are not social psychologists . . . but they are respected theologians. That explains the twisted non-social psychological understanding inferred from their cultural anthropological efforts. Sorry I attributed it to you. It is still wrong psychologically.