You have two issues. First an eye for an eye is rejected in the scripture quoted. Secondly, if the gospel of Jesus Christ is not based upon christian principle, then what?
My point? America didn't fight the revolutionary war while turning the other cheek to the brits. A foundation of the gospel of Christ as quoted by matthew is to love thy enemy as thyself and to turn the other cheek for him to smite thee yet again.
Fighting the revolutionary war was hardly the "christian" thing to do.
Perhaps there is a time where Jesus said his followers are permitted to stand up to and slaughter their enemies?
Too many mixed signals I guess.
"Eye for an eye" is in fact the basis of the tort system, irrespective of the scripture quoted. Which I'm told doesn't reject it, rather rejects the extremes, as in actually taking an eye for an eye.
the revolutionary war was hardly the "christian" thing to do....Too many mixed signals I guess.
Perhaps the problem isn't mixed signals, rather attempting to base governing on scripture, as the CP attempts.