Skip to main content

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Human nature is eye for eye. In most instances I try to turn the other cheek at first. You know, "fool me once ..uh....shame on you......fool me twice ,,  uh .... uh....you can't be fooled a second time"

I tend to take it for a while, but once I've had enough, then I've had enough.

I voted for cheek , but that is qualified.

Semi asks "What kind of reactor are you to a BAD situation?"

 

My careers’ experiences have taught me that those who turn their cheeks as a defense mechanism in bad situations wind up becoming professional victims. There are times when turning ones cheek is preferable to a "eye for and eye" reaction, but a bad situation as I define it isn’t one of them.

 

BTW, I don’t define "turning the other cheek" as necessarily being meek. Out of legal necessity LEOs do it most of the time else our hospitals and graveyards would be overflowing instead of our prisons.

An interesting history to this:

 

A literal interpretation of the passages, in which the command refers specifically to a manual strike against the side of a person's face, can be supported by reference to historical and other factors.[3] At the time of Jesus, striking someone deemed to be of a lower class with the back of the hand was used to assert authority and dominance.[4] If the persecuted person "turned the other cheek," the discipliner was faced with a dilemma. The left hand was used for unclean purposes, so a back-hand strike on the opposite cheek would not be performed.[5] The other alternative would be a slap with the open hand as a challenge or to punch the person, but this was seen as a statement of equality. Thus, by turning the other cheek the persecuted was in effect demanding equality.

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×