In response to Kaith's questions on the God thread

C

Cliarlaoch

Guest
I've recently had discussions with a rather religious family member, who knows what she's talking about (she did a lot of research), and the original Hebrew translation is "You shall not murder," or more appropriately, you will not kill another person unless you have a just reason to do so (i.e. in self-defense, in service to one's country/nation, etc... how else could the Hebrews have been allowed to wage war and slaughter thousands of people in the Palestine region).

I think Kaith raised a few really good questions... especially with regards to finding ways to avoid conflict with one's martial art choices.

I for one believe that the above translation of the Old Commandments is accurate, and even if one takes the "turn the other cheek" element, as I've said earlier I believe that the most important element of MA training should be that you should never use your knowledge unless you or someone around you or someone you care for is mortally threatened. Make sure you take the "turn the other cheek" bit in context... Jesus also kicked out a whole bunch of people from the temple forcefully when they were desecrating it by trading goods in the place. If you have a just cause, you stand your ground. Another case: Christ was willing to die via cruxifiction (one of the worst kinds of deaths possible at the time, and extremely painful), and if that doesn't mean that he was willing to stand up for what he believed was right, and for the purpose God gave him, then I don't know what does. He was no weakling.

And yet Jesus also had many pacifistic teachings. I don't know where I stand on this one, yet. I'm still working it out myself. But I think you also have to remember that Jesus was a Jew, and as such, he would have known and been aware of the Commandments... what's more, if you believe in him (as I do), then he was really the son of God, so he'd probably be very much aware of the Commandments and the rule about not murdering :p... my point being that the "turn the other cheek" line may have had a different meaning than simply "do not hit back" or somesuch. Note that Jesus never killed anyone or set about doing so, but he stood up for himself and the beliefs he taught to others constantly. For me, at least, that's a sign of being willing to defend oneself and to stand against evils. I don't know... I'm still learning as much as I can, and I'm not entirely sure of everything yet. Good question.

In terms of how it affects my choice of schools or the like... I have problems with some styles that involve discussion of Ki/Chi energy and the like, I admit. Perhaps because some of those teachers who I've talked with about it give it a sense of mysticism
that smacks of occultism. I make no judgments on those who believe in or adhere to ideas like Ki, or Chakra points, etc., but I'm not comfortable with it. I kiyap to frighten an opponent, and because it helps me to put more power into an attack, but not because I'm focusing my Ki or the like. As I said, I'm not quite sure where I stand on all this. I only started researching the Christian faith recently, so I need to do more before I can come to a better understanding of where I stand on these issues.

Anybody else's thoughts? For the questions Kaith raised, check the "God" thread.

--Cliarlaoch
 

Bob Hubbard

Retired
MT Mentor
Founding Member
Lifetime Supporting Member
MTS Alumni
Joined
Aug 4, 2001
Messages
47,245
Reaction score
772
Location
Land of the Free
A couple of side threads to this discussion would be, does your faith help, hinder or have no effect your training?

How does a Christian resolve the 'turn the other cheek' or the Wiccan the 'Harm None' aspects with martial training?

With the obvious 'flavoring' of religions other than your own in the arts, how do you deal with the conflicts between your beliefs and the traditions of the art you study?

Did you select an art based on its 'compatability' with you own belief system?

These are the questions I come up with when I think about thise subject... if anyone would like to pick up any of them for discussion, please start a new thread.

I personally find it interesting that the members of this board cross all nationalities, all races, genders, religions and orientations, and for the most part, can communicate in positive manners.

Just reposting em :)
 
OP
C

Cliarlaoch

Guest
PS: Kaith... how does one quote things on this site? I'm not exactly all that computer literate when it comes to this.

--Cliarlaoch
 

arnisador

Sr. Grandmaster
MTS Alumni
Joined
Aug 28, 2001
Messages
44,573
Reaction score
456
Location
Terre Haute, IN
Originally posted by Cliarlaoch
PS: Kaith... how does one quote things on this site? I'm not exactly all that computer literate when it comes to this.

Look for the "quote" button on the bottom right of each post, or put the material in these tags:

[q u o t e] quoted material gos here [/ q u o t e]

(Omit the spaces, which I'm using only so that you can see the tags.)

-Arnisador
-MT Admin-
 
OP
Y

yilisifu

Guest
Your friend is absolutely right about the commandment, "Thou shalt not murder." It IS "murder" rather than "kill."

On the eve of his arrest, Jesus asked his disciples if any of them owned a sword. Only one owned a large knife. So he told them, "Then sell your cloaks and buy one." Clearly, Jesus did not advocate pacifism; he strongly believed in one's right to defend oneself.
And as you noted, he himself physically whipped and threw the money changers out of the Temple.

And David, whom it is said that God loved very much and who had a very close relationship with God, was not only a king, but a warrior who had killed many men personally; so many, in fact, that God would not let him construct the first Temple (he told David that one of his sons, who had no blood on his hands, would do it). So I think that it is pretty clear that God (the Father aspect of the triune godhead) as well as Jesus (the son aspect) do not look down on warriors and even advocate defense of oneself, one's family, and one's nation.
 
OP
C

chufeng

Guest
Two comments regarding qi...

...qi is supported in the new testament...

1) ..and a woman reached out and touched His robe and he stopped and turned saying..."Who touched my robe...I felt virtue (King James version)/ENERGY (New International version) leave me..."

2) Jesus told his disciples that they would do wondrous things (even greater things than he had done)...they simply had to believe.

There are those who develop cults around a belief in qi...
But, don't ignore the truth of its existence for a few misinformed people...

Does one need to be Chritsian to experience qi???
No...
...and this is not intended to be slam on anyone who practices qigong...just a note to show that this is supported in Christian literature as well as Hindu and Buddhist and...


:asian:
chufeng
 
OP
C

Cliarlaoch

Guest
Good point on yilisifu's part... and probably better than my own understanding. Christ did allow for violence IF JUSTIFIED... as always that's key. And those schools that I consider worthwhile (as opposed to a McDojo or the like) are those that incorporate the idea that you do not use the techniques unless you have moral justification for the technique... as in life threatening situations, defense of country, etc.

As for qi... I don't know on that point... On the one hand, yes, the Bible mentions energy flowing from Christ, but I do not know if that is qi energy, or the energy of the Spirit moving through him. And even then, how does one define the Spirit? I mean, I define it, and I may be wrong, as the power of God itself. It is the power, the ability, to speak things into being, that is, to command things to occur(witness Peter's healing of a blind man--or leper, can't remember exactly-- through verbal command in Acts) and one would assume it covers the transmission of energy described by chufeng and present in the Bible itself... I suppose one could view it many ways. Thank you for the comment, though, Chufeng, since it has helped give me a fresh perspective on the subject. I'll have to think about it, and continue to search for some form of truth in the matter.

(And if I really wanted to be typical of the philosopher that I am learning to be, I'd then ask how one defines truth... now THERE's a question for this or another thread!!!)

--Cliarlaoch
 
OP
F

fringe_dweller

Guest
When Jesus was asked what the two greatest commandments were he responded "Love the Lord your God with all your heart, all your soul and all of your strength. Also, love your neighbour as yourself."
What exactly does that tell us? That we should base our actions upon these two thoughts. So if you do get into a fight, what are you doing - trying to hurt the other person or defend your neighbour. I would say that it comes down to intention.
 
OP
C

Cliarlaoch

Guest
True... considering the Bible has many teachings about how intent is as real as action, that's a good point. How you go about doing what you do is important, and therefore how you use your MA training determines how just your actions are. Makes sense... just condensing things in my head and summing up.


And by the way, thanks to Kaith and Arnisador for telling me how to quote on the page. Thanks!

--Cliarlaoch
 
OP
A

Abbax8

Guest
From The Catechism of the Catholic Church-pgs 545 - 546
Article 2263 The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that constitutes intentional killing. "The act of self defense can have a double effect: the preservation of one's own life; and the killing of the aggressor..... The one is intended, the other is not." St. Thomas Aquinas

Article 2264 Love towards oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one's own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal the aggressor a lethal blow: If a man in self defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful..... Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one's own life than of another. St. Thomas Aquinas

Article 2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their responsibility.


Peace
Dennis
 

Latest Discussions

Top