Top 50 ways to live life to its full

[Beanz]

"Broad are ways that lead to destruction, narrow is the way that leads to light"

there is ONLY one way, it is - Jesus.

You related to Andre Ward?

yes, to Ward, Manny , Floyd, Evander, Ray, Roy, and of course, Big George. Winners, so to speak, not looser. R u feeling me here, pal?

As if Jesus would belittle himself and undo all his hard work by condoning violence rather than turning the other cheek, or empower men whose whole persona is wrapped up in the pursuit of money rather than rendering what is Ceasars unto Ceasar. I don't even believe in Jesus but the idea that he is in any way responsible for somebody winning a boxing match is ridiculous and shows a complete ignorance of what he supposedly preached.

Yeah well you are right there: Jesus Christ wasnt even a name back then.
In that area, Yeshua was the real name. Jesus came from the Greek translation a century on. So you wont ever find his adopted name in the records of Romes executed.
In that real sense, I dont believe in Jesus either.

One other meaning lost in other countries translations and ways of turn the other cheek is somewhat different in regards to slave and master. If a soldier or other person struck you on both sides of your face it was a challenge to a dual a fight to the death. If that same soldier or slave owner struck you once, it was in direct ownership of you.So to turn the other cheek could make you equal to them (if they took the offer up in anger).

Just saying; not everything is cut and dried when you localize the history.


Same goes for the thief in the night verse. Thieves in those times came from the desert regions and would come banging swords and screaming into villages, on a desert night you could hear them coming and you could get out of there with plenty of warning.
The thieves wanted your cattle and stuff, not a fight to the death.

So the Lord coming like a thief in the night takes on the old meaning from when it was written not like modern times. It was a warning of the signs that increase prior to an event.

If you want to get all exegetical then perhaps context has an even greater role to play. Don't forget that Jesus was responding to the idea of "an eye for an eye" in Jewish reciprocal justice. A principle that still underlines legal precedents in many countries today. That is not a license for vengeance because the Torah does not call for maiming as a punishment but rather a payment for Damages, Pain, Medical Expenses, Incapacitation, and Mental Anguish. Compensation culture and the exploitation of it by both Lawyers and their clients then will now become another stick with which to bash the Jews.

So rightly like you said turning the other cheek could be seen as demanding equality with the Roman that struck you but the Scripture goes on to say that if he sues you for your coat give him your cloak also, and if he compels you to go a mile with him, go two.

So then Yeshua is urging his followers to go beyond Jewish law and render themselves naked (forbidden) and to cause the Roman to break their own law in compelling a Jew to go further than a Mile, something their own law forbade. He is saying that Love is greater than all of these laws and that what he preaches replaces both. You can interpret it how you like and look at at it as a representing Yeshua as freedom fighter urging his followers to free themselves from Occupied tyranny, but then you have to dismiss everything else in the same Gospels that describe him as a non-violent individual with no record of him resisting the oppressors armed against him. The Gospels contradict themselves as does the Talmud. So really it is neither here nor there. Also your insistence on using Yeshua is a bit pointless unless you want to carry on the rest of the discussion in Hebrew? My brothers are called Khalil and Ibrahim but here they are referred to as Vernon and David because they reside in an English country where English is spoken.