eye for an eye? or turn the other cheek?

Question

all yall talking about God and how u believe in him, but i bet 80% woud agree that it is actually and eye for an eye..

so which one is it??

Answer 1

Both are correct.

Eye for an eye was in the Old Testament for Judges to go by... man wasn't supposed to take matter into his own hands for that... but it was a measure of righteousness, and a guideline.

If a man stole a sheep from another man... it would go to court and, eye for an eye... the man would have to give a sheep back.


Turning the other cheek was in reference to being pursued and chased, for being a Christian... and being insulted... beat up... thrown in jail... etc.

Answer 2

The eye for an eye (Exodus 21:24, & Leviticus 24:20) was actually under the Mosaic law & it have been taken totally out of context as it dealt mainly with the laws & regulations that was to be presented 2 Israel. These was the laws that the courts at that time were commanded 2 follow. For example. Today, a Judge can sentence a person found guilty of murder 2 the death penalty. But it doesnt mean that the ordinary person can legally kill someone.
By the time that Jesus came, the priests & lawmakers of the land had totally perversed the rules that God had set & everything was taken out of context & the people, lots of whom were uneducated, were just believing everything. (This was part of the reason that Jesus came. To create an alternative way for believers 2 be saved other than wholly thru the Church which had failed God & the people.)
So, in the sermon on the mount (Matthew 5:1-48), Jesus sought 2 set the record straight & dispell all the confusion that had came about thru-out the thousands of years since the law had been set down. Matthew 5:38,39 is when he straighten out the misconception of an eye for an eye & a tooth for a tooth.

Answer 3

Well, this is a very complex question so I'll try to be as honest as I could. An eye for an eye is a natural human instinct where as to "Turn the other cheek" is a virtue and as usual the SOURCE of all virtues is God.so the more we get closer him the more we start reflecting his qualities within us that is with or without our knowledge And again this is by no means our OWN ACHIEVEMENT but more of HIs because He is such a divine, magnificent and undeniable force, anything and everything that comes near to him could never possibly deny his influence.

So as you've said we all talking about God and how we believe him and so on and I think you're right because to believe in God is EASY but to reflect him is difficult. And yet in our entire life we could never reflect him that completely either though some of us may just come only a bit close to it. But even so to do this we need His help. we need a personal bonding with him, a sincere fellowship with him and only then he would allow some of his lights to reflect through us.

So now going back to your question as far as I'm concerned to be honest I don't know. All I can say is I hate to take revenge and this is simply NOT my type and so I usually don't mostly because for my own peace of mind.So when I feel being wronged the most I do is just bluntly express myself and put my point just as it is and that's all I do and the rest I always leave up to God !!

Answer 4

It is both. You have ears but do not hear. You have eyes but you do not see.

One directive is taken from Levitical law and governs criminal justice. That would be an eye for an eye. Under this directive it is incumbent on the government of the people to hold accounatable those responsible for crimes and punish them appropriately.

The other directive, "Turn the other cheek", governs social law. If someone offends me I am to turn the other cheek to him and, ultimately forgive him. This directive was demonstrated beautifully by the Amish in the recent killing spree which occured in one of their schools. Remember, forgiveness is more for the victim than the perpetrator.

These two directives may seem to be opposing each other but, in reality, provide the best way to resolve issues. The person commiting the offense is held accountable for their actions while the victim gains freedom from the need to get vengence and receives, instead, peace. To do anything else condemns the victim to being stuck in bitterness and hatred. What a sad life that would be.

Answer 5

Here we go again. The "eye for eye" law, A.K.A. law of retaliation, was part of the OLD law. It is NO LONGER in effect.

Ephesians 2:15 Through his body on the cross, Christ put an END to the LAW WITH ALL ITS COMMANDS AND RULES. He wanted to create one new group of people out of the two. He wanted to make peace between them.

Colossians 2:14 He wiped out the written Law with its rules. The Law was against us. It opposed us. He took it away and nailed it to the cross.

Galatians 2:16 ...No one can be made right with God by obeying the law.

Galatians 2:21 ...What if a person could become right with God by obeying the law? Then Christ died for nothing!

Galatians 5:4 Some of you are trying to be made right with God by obeying the law. You have been separated from Christ. You have fallen away from God’s grace... The ONLY verse that talks about falling from grace, and they did it by trying to follow the law!

Jesus said he didn’t come to destroy the law, but to fulfill it. (Matt 5:17) The effect was the same. Once fulfilled it was no longer in effect. The very next verse, Matthew 5:18, looks forward to the time when the law would be set aside. "...Not even the smallest stroke of a pen will disappear from the Law UNTIL EVERYTHING IS COMPLETED." IF the law were intended to be permanent, the "UNTIL..." clause would be meaningless.

On the cross, Jesus' last recorded saying, "It is finished," is an important milestone. Because of Jesus life, Satan had been defeated. The law was finished and would no longer stand between God and mankind.

The 10 commandments along with the rest of the law ("commands and rules" from Ephesians 2:15) were "set aside" when they were fulfilled or completed at Jesus' resurrection. We are no longer bound by that law.

Answer 6

In truth, both of these principles should apply. But most people feel that an eye for an eye amounts to vengeance. There is even a well-known saying “an eye for an eye and the whole world goes blind.” Those who say such, however, seem to have missed the point of the law.

The law regarding eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand and foot for foot is found in the Mosaic law covenant and underscores the need for justice in applying punishment. To illustrate, we would not put someone away for life if he stole a loaf of bread to feed his family. By the same token, one who deliberately murdered another human being was himself to be put to death. God insisted that the punishment meet the gravity of the crime.

At Matthew 5:39-41, we find these words: “Do not resist him that is wicked; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other also to him.” Do we really think this means if someone hits us, we are to offer him the other cheek to hit also? No. Certainly humans have the right to defend themselves from physical harm.

A slap on the face is not designed to hurt usually – it is designed to insult and designed to provoke the one slapped. What advantage is there in retaliation? Wouldn’t I be playing right into the hands of the one who slapped me – the one who wants to start a fight? It’s much like making a derogatory remark about one’s mother. It’s designed to provoke. The wise course is to ‘turn the other cheek,’ ignore the insult. Generally this ends the whole thing for, according to Proverbs, when there is no fuel, the fire goes out.

Hannah J Paul

Answer 7

2 eyes for one eye!

I'll punch the guy's left eye first, and then make him ( Is it politically correct to use he/she, him /her here? :-P)turn the other cheek, and give him a nice shiner on the other eye as well. That way no one messes with me again!

MODIFY: Oops! Was this a serious question? Sorry! But the fact is, the law of retaliation is in nature. Every action should have equal reaction, or the world is on a tilt. This eye for eye is about us trying to make our lives better, and safer by punishing someone with enough force to make sure that they don't hurt us again.

IF you have two children,and a murderer kills one, would you
a> Call for punishment
b> Forgive and forget, hoping that he doesn't kill any one, or that God will punish him one day
c> Turn the other cheek, and offer him/her the life of your other child as well?

****! Now i have done it!Sorry for crossing the line, If my answer bothers anyone, plz mail me, and i'll remove it. No need to turn the other cheek!

Answer 8

Both.

The "eye for an eye" comes from the book of Exodus where God is laying out sentencing guidelines for judges in courts. He states that the sentence for a case in which a person's property or person is damaged should not exceed the amount of damage done. If you killed a cow, you replaced the cow. If you caused them to lose a tooth, you paid the value of a tooth. If you caused them to lose an eye, you paid the value of an eye. You were not to be executed for knocking out someones tooth or to have all your property impounded for killing a cow.

While the "turn the other cheek" is instruction to individual people about how to conduct their personal lives.

I certain hope that courts are not going to start "turning the other cheek" and simply let murders and rapist walk away free. And that individuals are not going to start taking the lw into their own hands.

Answer 9

It's both.

people will say eye for an eye because people lack the Grace of His Forgiveness.

only the creator has the authority to punish. All who try in his name, to take what is His, have an ego problem.

"Vengeance Is Mine" saith the Lord.

it's pretty clear to me what that message is. The truth is Turn the Other Cheek if you are to choose between Turn the other cheek or Take eye for an eye.

Answer 10

If anyone ever bother to take a good, honest look at 'eye for an eye', especially in the original language, it becomes quite apparent that the bible is speaking of monetary damages.

As for 'turn the other cheek'...what happens when one runs out of cheeks?