Is being a pacifist Christian the final redpill??

...

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=OJJY_1jtO4U
youtube.com/watch?v=amY1GABiiyY
youtube.com/watch?v=Q_WQfCusWEo
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

"Turn the other cheek." is not a bid for pacifism.

>The verse specifies the striking of the right cheek.
>Jews would only ever strike people with their right hand because they wiped their asses with the left.
>Striking one with your left hand would be a declaration of war, noting the aggressor is an enemy.
>To strike the right cheek with the right hand, one would have to backhand them.
>This was twice as damaging to one's pride, but still confirmed the person who struck you was a neighbor and has no intention to mortally wound you.

The verse is about not bickering with your own kind. In a modern context this applies to fellow Christians & countrymen. Eye for an eye is still in effect for those who genuinely wish to take your life and possession, such as radical Islam.

being a pacifist christian is the final form of cuckoldry and falling for jewish tricks.

>Jesus
>pacifist

no its the cuck pill

Better resolution

>jew on a stick
>"redpilled"
>watching impotently as the world slowly turns into a muslim shithole
>"redpilled"

No, being a militant christian is

>christian
>pacifist

pick one

Basically, didnt knew about the reason with the designated shitting hand, but the rest is basically what i believe too. If someone bitchslaps you thats no reason to let it escalate and let it become somethingserious, maybe that slap was just needed to let off some steam and then be able to discuss things reasonable.
Jesus is also the guy that chased out jews that were fucking around in the synagouge out with a whip. Turn the other cheeck means you should choose your battles wisely, not engage in every minor provocation. Give the other guy a chance to redeem himself before you have to redeem yourself as well first because of some minor provocation that got to you

>be God
>spank people with wires in inferior human form instead of striking them with a lightning bolt for instance

even christian symbolism sucks, its like
we are forever children and get spanked if we are mean.

When will you finaly renounce the false God?

>file no longer exists

>Is being a pacifist Christian the final redpill?
No, Tanya von Degurechaff is the final redpill

...

...

...

...

...

Pretty much yes

what, really?

so basically modern interpretations of the statement don't take it literally enough

Ancaps are the true chosen people for sure

kys

They dont think it through. You turn the other cheeck, give him a chance to behave normally, he slaps again and then what? You ran out of cheeks. Go back to the first? Or make him stop slapping?

It is. Accepting the fact that imperfect man cannot end suffering on earth and all his attempts to do so will only bring about new and augmented suffering is the true red pill.

Unfortunately many guys are like this who are too obsessed with petty grudges and wordly issues to focus on Christ and will get their reward.

There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.

>Applying the old testament laws outside of the 10 commandments to Christianity

>Jesus killed anyone
ffs he let himself be executed.

If Jesus wanted you to fight wars for him, he would've said so.
If Jesus needs you to fight wars for him; why worship him?

youtube.com/watch?v=OJJY_1jtO4U

The Christian scriptures aren't about being a pacifist, it's about following a General or King's orders.
I can't think of the verses off the top of my head but in the scriptures the Jews were told to go to war against a group, but they they didn't go because they were scared. So God told them to forget it. He told them not to go because he wouldn't help them this time. They thought they upset him and decided to go fight. They didn't listen to the orders they that they were given either time and when they went to fight they all died. His orders to not go were not about being anti-war. It was for tactical purposes.
The orders Christ gave were the orders given to Christians. Specifically for those who understand the end days prophecies. Those who rely on their own power and disobey the King of Kings are like those who don't listen to the orders of a General. If a General tells you to wait until he gives the order, it's not about being a pacifist. He's telling you to wait. The things Christ taught will allow Christianity to survive though the toughest of times. Maybe you don't like waiting, but those are the orders he gave.

He doesnt want us to fight wars, he wants us to fight ourselves, fight satan, fight the evil. This can be done without wars. Maybe there is even a way without bloodshed to bring justice, but bloodshed is a possibillity, but should be the last one we use.
Jesus doesnt need us to fight a war, or fight at all, but we will have to choose a side eventually. Do you choose your own side, fall for egoism and greed, for satans temptations, or do you choose the side of humanity, of good, of love.
6 is the number of man and his weaknesses like greed, egoism, fear, hate, and i believe of this plane of existence in general. 666 is the mark, going over the top and give in to these weaknesses, to satan and his temptations. Those that choose this side are lost, the others will be saved or maybe even will save themselves if enough people choose so.
However this is just my interpretation of what i have read, i could be very wrong, and think everyone should make up his own mind about this since i dont want to be the cause for someones damnation because i shitposted too much this one time.

>Those who rely on their own power and disobey the King of Kings are like those who don't listen to the orders of a General. If a General tells you to wait until he gives the order, it's not about being a pacifist. He's telling you to wait. The things Christ taught will allow Christianity to survive though the toughest of times. Maybe you don't like waiting, but those are the orders he gave.

I think that guy up there ^^^ got it right.
There have been no orders given for a very, very long time now; but that doesn't mean you go against the ones given last.

Jesus' mythology is more interconnected with humanity because he was born into human flesh and bore his cross, he's not a primitve abstraction of natural phenomena like thunder.

Meant to link to this comment

ok, but lets talk about the wiping symbolism.
At least from my point of view, it is punishment for children.
Or am I lacking some historical conext?

But what about my post went against the last orders? Or did you mean to link my post second?
Gods orders were basically be good humans, dont sin, dont fall for satan lies or did i miss something?

It was just a simple and relatively gentle way to remove merchants from a sacred place, tables were turnt, guys got whipped. It wasn't a punishment but a cleansing.

>Maybe there is even a way without bloodshed to bring justice, but bloodshed is a possibillity, but should be the last one we use.
^^That was the line, to me. Maybe I misinterpreted what you were trying to say with it in the context of the rest of your comment.

I think the point is that involving money in religious and spiritual matters corrupts the heart of the faith and leads it away from God into idolatry, sin, and worship of worldly and material things. You saw it with the Catholic church in Luther's time and you see it today with megachurch pastors and televangelists. They're corrupted by greed and a lust for more material possessions than they need and lose track of the spirit of the faith.

>Is being a cuck the final redpill?

I meant that if you can stop evil by killing someone when no other option is available, than its okay. For example you see some guy with a knife attacking some chick, and there is no way you get the distance in time you can shoot him for example. I dont speak about a new crusade, im just saying we have the right to defend ourselves and others with (lethal) force if there is no other way

No it's the blue pill that destroyed Rome.

Yes, that will you will die out for sure and won't have to deal with this shit anymore.

But don't you know user. According to every christcuck i have even met we are all one kind and there's only one race the human race we are all one natiin under god. Everyone is legal refugees welcome what would jesus do....

"Do onto others as you want them do to you" is the brst part. I i turn out to be a psychotic serial killer, or worse, a politician than i want others to stop and if needed kill me. If i am nice to people, i expect them to also be nice to me

The final redpill is a militant Buddhist.

That makes sense; could also be extrapolated into a war or another crusade type scenario though.
Slippery slope; I wish we could get some updates or clarity from the Source Himself now & then.

Then you become a martyr and go to heaven while the guy who bitch slapped you rapes your wife and daughter. Dont worry though your son will soon meat you there. Yay heaven! yay christcuckism!

The final redpill is deeply spiritual militant christianity.

so you should worship uncertain afterlife instead of wordly things like might, strength, beauty etc?
I know you mean stuff like property etc. witch isnt supposed to be worship, property is a tool for greatness. I explicitly ask about beauty,might and strength etc.

ok, I see. People like you basicly confirm to me that christianity is some sort of positive domestic control.
However I cannot like that, as the core still remains controll, no matter what the rules are.

>slaps again and then what?
You kiss their feet and accept your new masters.

the crusaders had it right desu

It's a religious rite you idiot

part 2 because 4ch thinks its spam

But such rules make ethic prgoress according to the devine laws of nature impossible, but we need that social progress, I do not like faggotry etc and it must be purged however saying that all ethic progress if its not according to the bible is plain wrong as a book cannot overrule nature herself!

And it doesnt matter if you think that god created nature or not, why would he write a book that is contrarian to the world he created?

>he doesnt get it

A bitchslap is not a murder, or a harmfull act at all. If someone outright violantly attacks you with intention to seriously harm you of course you are supposed to defend yourself. Just dont escalate things without a reason. Give someone who mistreated you a chance to make up for it

Everything can be interpreted in all kinds of ways. I thing jews even developed some special school of interpretation just to make talmud and torrah passages mean whatever they want them to mean. Thats why everyone should read for themselves and not listen to what others say a passage means. Thats why i try to never make something sound absolute when discussing these things as i want people just to think about it and not just believe what i say because i might be very wrong. This is also why i like religion itself, but institutionalized religion like the church, vatican or the others are a cancer on humanity because they try to tell you what those words you believe in actually mean instead of letting yourself find it out themselves and thus already are subject to corruption
As for updates, they would be indeed nice, but i guess it would be a too easy test if we just get everythibg told. Also spoilers can ruin a story (even though the outcome is already told of).

I wouldn't reduce it to domestic control or child spanking or whatever. The profane has to be kept from sacred in every religion, refusing that someone is shitting where you eat is a defensive standpoint and not in the dimension of control and oppression.

>Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.
Taking the high road when someone insults you or bitch slaps you isn't the same thing as allowing sodomites to gain access to the nuclear codes.

>pacifist Christian
It is impossible to be passive in the face of evil and still be Christian.

Appreciating their value is one thing. They were given to us by God and we should appreciate what He's given us. But worshiping them is idolatry and mixing them with the church corrupts the faith and turns it into something ugly and unrecognizable. Using my own examples, in Luther's day, you had Catholic priests selling redemption and saying that your place in Heaven could be secured through monetary means rather than through God and Christ. Today, you now have megachurch pastors and televangelists selling you worthless crap and taking donations made by honest, hard-working faithful to buy themselves multi-million dollar personal jets. These are not men of God that are honestly trying to save people's souls from damnation. These are hucksters and charlatans turning the faith of their followers into a money-making machine and it's disgusting.

It's the opposite. Larping pagans don't understand christian culture and virtues. Pic related

No, no its not opression, this is what I meant.
However it is a strict rule book to control people, you cannot denie that.

>love thy next is the best example.

ok ok, I agree but that is not the answer to my question.
Read again please

if your tradition tells your main guy to kiss negro feet, then there is something wrong with that rite.

Being a pacifist is the bluest pill of them all

"Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword."
- Matthews 10:34

Bringing us a sword doesnt mean we should attack though. A sword can also be used to defend yourself. He came so we are not defenseless against the evil, to let us know good will come, justice will be done, give us a reason to stay on the good side. This is our sword against satans temptations of greed egoism. We were defensless, naked against the evil, didnt have a reason to resist, but now we have. Not everyone needs such a reason to do so, but it makes itbeasier for a lot of people

I don't think christianity is a strict rule book, that's more of a protestant perspective, there is always room for interpretation when it comes to mythology. But yes, in essence it's mostly strict tradition and practice, and I agree, for many people the existence of norms and standards is oppressive.

>ffs he let himself be executed.

You mean his subjects murdered him...

youtube.com/watch?v=amY1GABiiyY

youtube.com/watch?v=Q_WQfCusWEo

so why you as a germanic accept christianity, submission is not according to germanic virtues.

Pacifism is for people that don't mind when their wife and children are raped by Tyrone and Muhammed.

you're wrong, you have in the mind that society progress it's only about faggots or else, i think in a different way as example flying cars, lab created food, etc.

Books was writted by men what do you expect?

you're a progressive larper not a pagan larper and no one told in the bible to kiss negro feet, is just that faggot acting like communist who is.

>submission is not according to germanic virtues.
I don't know about that, prussian virtues and Nibelungentreue for example take obedience to an extreme. I just like Christianity because of its aesthetic, beauty and rituals, it's complementary to my life and I don't question it much, because it seems natural to me like brushing your teeth and wearing underwear.

So Ancap Christianity?

Nope

this

No, militant fundamentalist Christianity is the final redpill.

From My professor about this topic

>5:38–42 Jesus next alludes to Exod 21:24 and Deut 19:21. Again he formally abrogates an Old Testament command in order to intensify and internalize its application. This law originally prohibited the formal exaction of an overly severe punishment that did not fit a crime as well as informal, self-appointed vigilante action. Now Jesus teaches the principle that Christian kindness should transcend even straightforward tit-for-tat retribution. None of the commands of vv. 39–42 can easily be considered absolute; all must be read against the historical background of first-century Judaism. Nevertheless, in light of prevailing ethical thought Jesus contrasts radically with most others of his day in stressing the need to decisively break the natural chain of evil action and reaction that characterizes human relationships.48
Antistēnai (“resist”) in v. 39 was often used in a legal context (cf. Isa 50:8) and in light of v. 40 is probably to be taken that way here. Jesus’ teaching then parallels 1 Cor 6:7 against not taking fellow believers to court, though it could be translated somewhat more broadly as “do not take revenge on someone who wrongs you” (GNB). We must nevertheless definitely resist evil in certain contexts (cf. Jas 4:7; 1 Pet 5:9). Striking a person on the right cheek suggests a backhanded slap from a typically right-handed aggressor and was a characteristic Jewish form of insult. Jesus tells us not to trade such insults even if it means receiving more. In no sense does v. 39 require Christians to subject themselves or others to physical danger or abuse, nor does it bear directly on the pacifism-just war debate.

Verse 40 is clearly limited to a legal context. One must be willing to give as collateral an outer garment—more than what the law could require, which was merely an inner garment (cf. Exod 22:26–27). Coat and shirt reflect contemporary parallels to “cloak” and “tunic,” though both of the latter looked more like long robes. Verse 41 continues the legal motif by referring to Roman conscription of private citizens to help carry military equipment for soldiers as they traveled.
Each of these commands requires Jesus’ followers to act more generously than what the letter of the law demanded. “Going the extra mile” has rightly become a proverbial expression and captures the essence of all of Jesus’ illustrations. Not only must disciples reject all behavior motivated only by a desire for retaliation, but they also must positively work for the good of those with whom they would otherwise be at odds. In v. 42 Jesus calls his followers to give to those who ask and not turn from those who would borrow. He presumes that the needs are genuine and commands us not to ignore them, but he does not specifically mandate how best we can help. As Augustine rightly noted, the text says “give to everyone that asks,” not “give everything to him that asks” (De Sermone Domine en Monte 67). Compare Jesus’ response to the request made of him in Luke 12:13–15. It is also crucial to note that “a willingness to forego one’s personal rights, and to allow oneself to be insulted and imposed upon, is not incompatible with a firm stand for matters of principle and for the rights of others (cf. Paul’s attitude in Acts 16:37; 22:25; 25:8–12).” Verses 39–42 thus comprise a “focal instance” of nonretaliation; specific, extreme commands attract our attention to a key ethical theme that must be variously applied as circumstances change.

You know you fucked up when BUDDHISTS want to kill you

being a Non-Aggression Principle - abiding Christian is

GOD nor JESUS was pacifist. Oh, the lies! Bring us LIES you Old corrupted viper. =:)