Sorry, but it appears that you have confused evidence in a criminal trial with the way history is done. You might want to read up on that as I do not have the time to instruct you. Secondly, I did not provide an appeal to authority. I provided an example that confirms the interpretation that you dismissed. You seem to think that dismissal is refutation which it isn't. Maybe you are reading too much of the four horse's asses of atheism,
Regarding the verse you mentioned no Greel scholar, liberal or conservative, that I am aware of holds the JW interpretation. You might want to look into these things before you post.
I am not looking for, nor do I need, your instruction. I actually was being polite by not initially laughing uproariously at your "evidence" of what Jesus meant by turning the other cheek. It was so convoluted and required such a stretch of imagination that I thought I would point out how your evidence is not evidence. Occam's Razor...most often the simplest answer is the right answer. You don't need to be a bible scholar or historical philosopher to understand what Jesus said: Turn the other cheek. So do it. If you choose to come up with a complicated workaround so that you can justify why Christians are willing to go to war and kill, go ahead. I am not the one who has to explain it to God, you do. For me I see it as hypocrisy.
As far as the verse I mentioned, I used it as an example of how the JW's get caught up in minute details to support a doctrine that they have. You are no different. You need a convoluted workaround in order to justify a view that you have, so you use convoluted logic and unreasonably complicated explanations to make it work for you. No problem. Like I said, I am not the one that has to explain it, you do.
I did not provide an appeal to authority. I provided an example that confirms the interpretation that you dismissed.
Thank you for confirming my original issue. What you provided was an interpretation (or spin). There was no confirmation of the interpretation, it was a theory and a hopelessly blurry one at that. My original observation still stands: Christianity has core problems, especially modern Christianity, with the interpretation and obedience of Jesus' words. I think StoneWall has raised a very strong and fundamental topic. It seems to me that Christians have a really difficult time with these core issues and they would rather avoid them and think about the fluffy clouds of heaven and the personal relationship with the Lord, rather than focus on the fundamental problems of the Christian belief. It's called sticking your head in the sand. I did that for 35 years with the HoHo's. I won't waste any more time in fantasyland.