Skip to main content

Turning the Other Cheek

But I say unto you, that ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.
Matt. 5.39 KJV

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen

This is a topic where some people will have an opinion (and express it), without serious consideration of the subject.

Reaching back centuries into the dusty corridors of my memory... Was it a Dennis the Menace cartoon drawing? Anyway, someone is asking the pastor after a church service, "But what if he punches you in the nose?" Or something like that. Good question.

I have to admit that I was reluctant to use this verse because it is so horribly misused by believers and unbelievers alike. It has been ripped out of its textual, historical and cultural contexts and used to mean that Christians should simply be doormats.

Image before editing, "The Sermon on the Mount" by Carl Heinrich Bloch, 1877
Here is a bit of a conversation in a Facebook post:
Although bad, We are commanded to love our enemies, pray for them, our kingdom is not of this world, there just words, God has abandoned our nation, this shouldn't be surprising! Satan isn't going to fight against his false religions, Jesus said, "The World will hate you because it first hated me" We stand for the truth, but not with hatred. We pray for them and are kind to them, it's like heaping hot coals on there head by not returning evil for evil. Not surprising at all.
I took him to task for praying and not taking action about the topic in question. How can we be salt and light (Matt. 5.13-16) if we do nothing?

Fortunately, some people have a grasp of the bigger picture.

First, the most direct textual context is that Jesus was talking about being slow to retaliate. Look at the context and you will see that he was talking about interpersonal dealings and doing good for those who misuse you.

Next, the cultural context. Did you notice he specifies the right cheek? The natural assumption is that two people are facing each other in an argument. Walter Wink points out that a slap on the right cheek had to be done with the left (unclean) hand. A backhanded slap was done to punish, or to humiliate inferiors. By turning the other cheek "robs the oppressor of the power to humiliate". If he resorted to using his fist, the recipient is no longer an inferior, but has become an equal. The whole point is to stop the insults and violence from rapidly escalating.

Jesus did not answer the question of Dennis (above): "What if he punches you in the nose?" Hopefully, the principle would apply and the Holy Spirit would guide the believer so that he was slow in his response, and not just reacting out of rage.

But nowhere does Jesus advocate standing there and being beaten bloody. Remember, Jesus is the one who made a whip and drove the money changers out of the temple (John 2.14-16). I am not using this as an excuse for myself or anyone else for simply becoming consumed with rage, because that leads to sin (Eph. 4.26).

If a woman is screaming for help in the parking lot of the apartment complex, I most certainly would not say, "I'll pray for you!" No, I would not only call the police, but my nature (and probably the Holy Spirit) would probably have me take direct, physical action if necessary. I have said before that prayer is important, vitally so, but we must do our part as well.

There are times when we must take a stand for what is right, even if it means violence. Otherwise, the weak and helpless are victimized while we stand by with our misunderstanding of a verse or two of Scripture. Addendum: A similar application is with the Answers in Genesis lawsuit against religious discrimination in the state of Kentucky. See "Should AiG “Turn the Other Cheek” Concerning Its Lawsuit?"
  

Comments

covnitkepr1 said…
Turning the other cheek...easier said than done a lot of the time.

Just checking back to read any postings you may have done.

I’ve been following and enjoying your blog for a while now and would like to invite you to visit and perhaps follow me back. Sorry I took so long for the invitation.
It would be easier to be a LaVey Satanist, because they believe in striking back right now, no turning of cheeks at all.

Actually, you did leave your "invitation" before. You must have missed where I declined the offer to follow your Weblog or to promote it because you teach baptism as a requirement for salvation. My response to that is here.
Jn 18:19-23
Jesus was not always silent as some portray Him. Sometimes He turned tables over, sometimes He name-called, and sometimes He was sarcastic. In the passage above, He was not nicey-nice.

We also read of times where the disciples were to "go" with weapons and I don't think it was for the annual knife-throwing contest at the local pub.

Timing. His, not ours.
For that matter, the apostle Paul was not always Mr. Sweetness, either!
No, you're right!
Paul is my hero!
:-)
And I really like Peter too; he's hand with a Sword, even if his timing was a little off.

Popular posts from this blog

Andy Stanley, Frank Turek, and Bad Theology

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen Andy Stanley has been disappointing some people, and causing quite a few to be alarmed by his opposition to the authority of Scripture. (Note: Do not be confused.  Charles  Stanley is his father, senior pastor of First Baptist Church in Atlanta, Georgia, and heard on In Touch Ministries . I've found most of his teachings to be doctrinally sound, and he upholds the inerrancy and authority of the Bible.) Unfortunately, megachurch director Andy Stanley has been saying things that are destructive to the truth, including recommending the false teaching of theistic evolution. Gray wolf image credit: US National Park Service While shooting from the hip can be a good thing, someone claiming the title of pastor should reign himself in . Stanley was disrespectful of small churches, then apologized later . In another instance, " What  did he just say?", Stanley may have used a very bad word in a sermon. When the segment was legally posted on YouTube

Disappointment with Young Earth Creation

by Cowboy Bob Sorensen  First, a note for anyone who is curious. The usual format: introduction with some of my thoughts plus links for useful information, excerpts of featured articles, then links to keep reading. I put my name on it and call it an article when I have more to say. This one will be different. I will reference older articles, then add some thoughts that I hope will prove helpful. There is more following the excerpt and link. So, does anyone remember Ken Keathley? Medal image manufactured at Custom Medal Maker Several years ago, Ken Keathley renounced young earth creationism to accept an old earth view. Apparently, he was disappointed by people in the young earth community. No kidding? Taking Friendly Fire This is where I'm going to open up and get personal with both of my readers. Ken Keathley is not the only one who has been disappointed, and in addition, I've been deeply hurt by the young earth community. Things I have posted on social(ist) media have been &qu

Evaluating Truth Claims in Genesis

Some people try to dismiss Genesis as myth containing spiritual truth using elements from the pagan neighbors of the Hebrews. Others say it is misunderstood, as if the Creator of the universe was unable to communicate with us. With closer inspection, we see that Genesis is a historical narrative. Credit: RGBStock /  Billy Frank Alexander The idea that the early chapters of Genesis are mythological should not be accepted by professing Christians, as there are serious problems that result. (One of these is that Jesus, Peter, Paul, and others referred to these chapters as literal history, so by denying this, one is calling them liars!) Also, there are repercussions with the gospel message. Read some classical mythology, then come back to Genesis and see the difference. Myths are vague and have a different flow, but the Bible is precise. Indeed, even the sequence of creation days is specific — a day itself is defined. Interestingly, many translations have in Genesis 1:5 less accurate by us