Is it so shocking to you that the logical conclusion of "allowing" the "bad guys" to live (how gracious of you
How gracious of
us. We together are corporately/collectively not killing those deserving of death.
), is that the bad guys will kill the good guys?
My point is, I don't know of a single major religion that teaches that there is anything immoral about defending your own, and others' lives. Pacifism may not be immoral, but armed aggression is not, in and of itself, devoid of context, immoral. No major religion teaches what Meshak teaches, and Meshak teaches basing their teaching on their own private interpretation of what the New Testament records as the teachings of quote-unquote Jesus. Meshak's view of the Maker is also variant, rejecting out of hand the One (cf. Eph4:5KJV) Christian faith's, arguably most defining and identifying doctrine; that of the Most Holy and Most Blessed and Undivided Trinity; the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. This naturally therefore colors and taints Meshak's interpretation of the Lord; Meshak is blind, and since Meshak is teaching, Meshak is a blind guide.
Now that's not the ending, is it? When Christ returns, what state do you suppose the world will be in?
Something like pre-modern Plague, World War I and World War II, everyday-is-9/11 and a mass extinction event cataclysmic meteor impact all at once.