"The 'turn the cheek' notion was not invented by Jesus..."
Never said it was; more like it was Jesus (and his followers) who popularized the concept and it was their variation on the theme that got traction in The West.
"...it did not actually refer to the Quaker form of pacifism-----it referred to how jews should react ---most especially to EACH OTHER ---- and only to a lesser extent to their oppressors. It did not include a 'DO NOT FIGHT NO MATTER WHAT' approach..."
That may very well have been the old Talmudic approach (I wouldn't know) but the recorded (and edited?) teachings of Jesus are traditionally perceived as the basis for the Quaker Model.
The teachings and beliefs of Jesus and his followers were, indeed, based upon Jewish tradition and beliefs and law and philosophy, but, even though based upon such things,
those teachings and beliefs were sufficiently different so as to trigger a Schism, early on.
That Schism (differences in beliefs and philosophy and spirituality) between Jew and
Christian exists to this very day; the two positions are Irreconcilable but Tolerant Co-Existence is a good outcome to continue working towards.
Even though Jesus (and his followers) were originally ministering to the Jews of the region, they (especially his disciples, after his death) were certainly targeting Jews, but they were also certainly targeting a much broader Gentile audience, and jettisoning much of the old writings and teachings and law and philosophy and refocusing on a new core.
Jesus and his peeps might very well have been using Old Material, but they appear to
have put their own spin on it, and pitched it in new ways, and to new audiences.
"...I did not believe that Jesus was a quaker type pacifist ----his incursion into the Temple courtyard---- was a VIOLENT ACT OF PROTEST against the roman
shills----the sadducees andagainst Rome..."
While others believe that Jesus was the
ultimate proto-Quaker.
There is a difference between overturning market-tables and chasing merchants and cattle out of a courtyard, in reaction to blasphemy against a deity, versus raising a sword
against an enemy; although I will grant you that this example of the use of physical force is inconsistent with 99.99% of what is taught and perceived about Jesus.
"...The pacifism of Jesus has been over interpreted to the point of absurdity."
Or, looked at from another angle, the pacifism of Jesus is an Ideal to which Believers are asked to aspire and conform; as an aid to the underlying current of peace and love which Jesus and his disciples tried to live and preach.
Doesn't mean that it's always possible - doesn't mean that Believers are always (or even usually) going to match that ideal. It just means that that's the Ideal, and that anything short of that represents a failure (or sin?) on the part of those who fail.
It is that very Pacifism which made it so wildly popular as it spread like wildfire throughout an Empire filled with oppressed Slaves and filled with Freemen of goodwill who wanted something better in this life (and the next) than what their pagan beliefs could offer them.
If the Christian version of Christ's pacifism is an absurdity, then, it is an absurdity that helped to bring down a savage Empire from within, and which survived the trials and
tribulations of Europe and The West over the past 2000 years, and an absurdity which survives to this day - useful as an Ideal to which persons of goodwill can seek to abide by, either under any circumstances, or to whatever extent that may be practicable for them...
An 'absurdity' that does far more good than harm, in the broader scheme of things, and which helps Western Civilization to re-center itself, once it's gone off too far on a tangent to the Left or the Right...