If someone strikes you on one cheek, turn to him the other..

[mubasher1984]

This above mentioned subjected belief of Christianity is neither applicable in this era nor it is being applied and acted upon anywhere in the world. I respect Christianity as a religion, but it was for a limited time period, i.ae. as long as Jesus and his caliphs remained in this world. But, in this era, this teachings is not applicable. Even, Christian nations are not acting upon. Instead, they are using force to those who don't accept their supremacy. For example, after the 9/11, as per teachings of Christianity, USA would say that please come terrorists, and attack other parts of country too. Instead they attacked on Afghanistan and still sending its troops there. This shows that they know that the teachings of Christianity are not to act upon. While, the Koranic teachings are applicable till the end of times. Koran does not says not only to defend of somebody attack, but also to give other a strong answer so that it could not attack such way in future.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 1 by mubasher1984]

As one of JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES I will say we live by the Christian principle of being peacable with all. We do not believe in responding to aggression with agression. No Jehovah's Witness serves in any army or holds any position in the military in any country on earth.

JW


يمتنع شهود يهوه عن المشاركة �ي الاعمال الحربية للاسباب التالية:�

إطاعةً لله.� يقول الكتاب المقدس ان خدام الله «يطبعون سيو�هم سككا ورماحهم مناجل .� .� .� ولا يتعلمون الحرب �ي ما بعد».� —� اشعيا ٢:�٤�.�





Further Reading: Why Don’t Jehovah’s Witnesses Go to War?
https://www.jw.org/en/jehovahs-witnesse ... go-to-war/

For my earlier post on first century Christians and militarism see link
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 183#788183
_________________

[Benoni]

[Replying to post 2 by JehovahsWitness]

So sad. To live in a nation and to benefit all the positive points to include freedom religion and to refuse to serve in the Armed forces. I am retired military and a Viet Nam vet who served 18 months in Viet Nam and a year in S Korea.

There is a time when turning the other cheek is God's will with the other extreme when it becomes a dogma not life.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 2 by JehovahsWitness]

So sad.

No for me or my relationship with God (which is the most important thing). We believe very strongly that we are under command to "love" (not kill) our enemies and that doing so means we are free from bloodguilt in His eyes and in the eyes of many in the world that have lost loved ones to war. We do nothing to impede others from making their own choices on this matter.

Those of us living in free and democratic countries are deeply appreciative of the freedoms that affords, but one of the benefits of living in a free and democratic country is the right to freedom of conscience, the freedom to choose not to take a life and the freedom to practice ones religion as one chooses. I should think anyone that fought for those freedoms would not be "saddened" to see them exercised.

To live in a nation and to benefit all the positive points to include freedom religion and to refuse to serve in the Armed forces.

Jehovah's Witnesses live in all countries so our stand is not dependent on whether it is politically or personally expedient or not. That said Jehovah's Witnesses pay our taxes and contribute to the communities in which we live, so most people accept they have every right to be considered legitimate members of those communities but our Christians consciences will not be compromised on the matter of killing.

Jehovah's Witnesses accept to do alternative community services.


JW

RELATED POSTS

Can Jehovah's Witnesses be accused of "doing nothing" because they refuse
to participate in political wars and violence?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 43#p853543

Does the fact that Jehovah protected his people through divine war mean he (God) is unconcerned with global justice?
viewtopic.php?p=827368#p827368

Are Jehovah's Witnesses cowards and oportunists?
viewtopic.php?p=881988#p881988

[Benoni]

[Replying to post 2 by JehovahsWitness]

So sad.

No for me or my relationship with God (which is the most important thing). We believe very strongly that we are under command to "love" (not kill) our enemies and that doing so means we are free from bloodguilt in His eyes. We do nothing to impede others from making their own choices on this matter.

That is why Jesus died for all men's sin and his blood was shed (It called grace) you make it a law.

This is not your own choice this is a religious dogma in which you righteously turn your back on your nation. So sad.

You should go somewhere like Islam and try practicing this dogma and find out why freedom and defense are what makes this cowardice possible.

[JehovahsWitness]

... This is not your own choice...

This is totally my own choice. No other person can make such choice for another. The cost for such a position can be very high and if one is not personally convinced of what they believe to be true in their hearts before God, then it would be impossible to stand. Indeed, JWs have often had to stand in courts of law when this issue is in fact whether the person is making their own decision or is being controlled by someone else.

Each person is free to decide on this matter and Jehovah's Witnesses do nothing to impede others from making their own decision, just as each one of us has had to do.




JW

[JehovahsWitness]

You should go somewhere like Islam and try practicing this dogma and find out why freedom and defense are what makes this cowardice possible.

Firstly, it is not "cowardice" to take a stand on a matter of conscience, especially when that stand may well cost you your freedom or your life. Jehovah's Witnesses have paid the ultimate price for their refusal to take up arms to kill, and objective observers have testified to their courage when forced to make such choices.

Secondly as I said, Jehovah's Witnesses live in all countries so our stand is not dependent on whether it is politically or personally expedient or not. JWs Witnesses have proved this by remaining neutral in Nazi Germany, North and South Korea, Japan and Stalin's Russia, through two world Wars and countless other conflics, in both the West and in the Islamic world.

In many countries throughout the world currently JWs constitute the highest proportion of consciencious objectors and make up by far the majority of the prison population of that catatory. Our young men are systematically jailed for refusing to learn war. The historical records around the world are testimony of our consistency. We do not boast, it is simply a matter of public record.

Jehovah's Witnesses in the end take our position to please their God, not humans, if God is displeased with our stand to "beat their swords into ploughshares" and "learn war no more", then we are willing to stand before Him the ultimate judge, and let his judgement fall.


JW

RELATED POSTS

Early Christians and military service
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 83#p788183

Do the Divine wars in the bible authorize Christians to participate in human conflicts?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 64#p827364

Are Jehovah's Witnesses cowards and oportunists?
viewtopic.php?p=881988#p881988

Does the fact that Jehovah protected his people through divine war mean he (God) is unconcerned with global justice?
viewtopic.php?p=827368#p827368


What did Jesus mean by "turn the other cheek"?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 50#p773650

[bluethread]

First, the passage is speaking about personal morality, not diplomacy. Second, there is a cultural context regarding the significance of the right and the left. The idea is that a strike on the right cheek would be a backhanded slap and unintentional. Offering the left is equivalent to checking to see if the offense was intentional. So, the passage is not talking about a military threat or being a door mat, but giving people the benefit of the doubt.

[Benoni]

Move to Islam and try this and than come back and debate.

[Benoni]

First, the passage is speaking about personal morality, not diplomacy. Second, there is a cultural context regarding the significance of the right and the left. The idea is that a strike on the right cheek would be a backhanded slap and unintentional. Offering the left is equivalent to checking to see if the offense was intentional. So, the passage is not talking about a military threat or being a door mat, but giving people the benefit of the doubt.

Years ago had a son who was really out of control and hated me because he was so rebellious in his late teens and early twenties. One day i falsely accused him and was totally wrong and he came over my house and started punching me. I would not strike back and turned the other cheek as he kept striking me. I gained a son over that expedience and I give God the glory.

And let the peace of God rule in your hearts........�
Colossians 3:15


God gives us the peace to see his will in this situation. BUT to make a religious law of this is just placing God's spirit to the back of the bus.