“Turn the Other Cheek” – Brad Jersak

Please follow and like us:
fb-share-icon
Tweet

“Turn the Other Cheek”

In Jesus’ foundational “Sermon on the Mount,” we read his stunning command (for that is what it is):

“You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also.” 
—Matthew 5:38-39 

On the face of it (accidental pun), Jesus’ injunction is visceral because we can imagine the pain and the shame of a full-force, stinging slap. And despite every impulse in our flesh to retaliate in kind, and even contrary to God’s Law in Exodus 21:24, Jesus tells us—he doesn’t ask, doesn’t suggest, doesn’t invite—he says, “Here’s what you are going to do. You are going to offer the other cheek for a second blow rather than striking back.”    

We don’t like that. Some feel it is humiliating. I know some who say it’s naïve, impracticable, or ineffective. Others claim it is cowardly. I’ve even heard Christians directly call the words of Jesus ‘too weak and too woke,’ deriding these words as “hippie Jesus” even though he actually said them! In all these cases, the reader believes Jesus is somehow wrong and refuses to obey him. “Well, I would hit back,” they say, some justifying it and others simply admitting disobedience. It’s not too surprising, given that God’s grace is available for real-life experiences, not for imaginary situations.

A Contrived Context of Defiance

But others who are intent on obeying Jesus think we’ve just misunderstood him (literally 100s of articles on the internet offer alternatives). They cannot accept “turning the other cheek” as an act of cruciform humility, much less compliance to the oppressor. And they’re right to resist its misuse in cases of domestic violence. But then they posit a scenario in which the command is not scandalous but clever, defiant, and resistant—that leaves one’s pride intact and shames or humiliates the opponent, even if non-violently. 

Indeed, one very popular theory purports that in its ‘original historical context,’ turning the other cheek would force the offender to switch from an initial insulting backhand blow to palm-first for the follow-up, and somehow this would shame them because in that culture… yada, yada, yada. The problem with this theory is that it has no historical or cultural precedent and is nowhere to be found in any ancient document.

As best I can tell, Walter Wink (who I admire) contrived it as a theory in his Engaging the Powers series of books but didn’t claim to be citing first-century sources. He was simply speculating, offering a creative reconstruction… then those activists who resonate with subversive ways to overcome evil (as I do) began circulating Wink’s lively conjecture as the deeper meaning of the text. But let’s at least be honest: he made it up.

Still, we need not rely on arguments of silence in historical documents. The real problem is how this theory ignores and even defies the immediate context and stated intent of Jesus’ sermon. If we don’t yank verses 38–39 out of their sermonic setting, what Jesus is up to is surprisingly straightforward… and sure, offensive. Let’s work our way outward from the verse itself:

The Command in Canonical Context 

  1. “You have heard it said… but I tell you.” Jesus uses this formula five times in Matthew 5 (in verses 21, 27, 33, 38, and 43). In every case he cites a Jewish law or tradition, then doubles down on by internalizing the heart of the law with a more rigorous righteousness of inner transformation. You shall not murder includes expunging malice in our hearts and our speech. “You shall not commit adultery” is internalized to root out lust and leering. The law forbidding oath-breaking now demands levels of integrity that even forbid oath-making. And the great command, “Love your neighbor” is expanded and deepened to “love your enemy.”

In that same series, “An Eye for an Eye” recalls the law of proportional retribution, employed across Babylonian, Greek, Roman, Jewish, and later, Islamic law codes.

But Jesus doubles down once again. The Jesus Way of discipleship calls for a greater righteousness and deeper transformation that forbids any retaliation—even proportional payback. If the murdered cannot even exercise hatred, the adulterer cannot even play with lust, then the parallel principle here is that those prone to retaliation cannot employ payback. Jesus’ radical statement forbids resistance that strikes back—physically, verbally, emotionally—including, I would suggest, clever shaming. It’s not just nonviolence—what Jesus goes on to describe as part of his new law is more than passivity to the evildoer, but active kindness. He continues:

  • “And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. 41 If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you” (vss. 40-42). 

These verses are not separate from the “eye for an eye” commentary but an extension of it. The fruit of a transformed, Spirit-led, Jesus-follower is to return cruelty with kindness and then to double down on that. Not only do you “turn the other cheek” when slapped, but you also double down on what you’ve been sued (e.g., to the stolen shirt, volunteer your coat as well). When forced to go a mile, “go the extra mile” (a common metaphor today). When intruded on for a loan, help out the borrower but then throw in a gift. 

The purpose, then, is not to outmaneuver your oppressor by messing with their mind but to use the opportunity for your own inner transformation and to testify in real-life situations to the reality of grace by paying forward the mercy you yourself have received. 

In turning the other cheek, the enemy becomes a blessed ally in our transformation—the crucifixion of our self-will—offering what our friends or family would be unwilling or unable to contribute (because they like us too much). 

  • But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous (vss. 44-45).     

“Turn the other cheek” then is not only about non-resistance. In context, it’s part of Jesus’ broader call to ‘enemy-love.’ It is a first step toward being children who emulate the indiscriminate kindness of our heavenly Father. Turning our cheek, however painful and even humiliating it may feel at first, is a tiny act of following that leads to loving, blessing, and praying for those who persecute us… the seeds that we see in full bloom when Christ says from the Cross, “Father, forgive them” and when Stephen says, “Father, don’t hold this against them” while being stoned. 

And where there are blooms, the fruit follows. The fruit of repentance we see in Paul the persecutor did not grow from Stephen conniving to shame him but by loving him enough to intercede on his behalf. 

So, no. I don’t buy the recent theory that Jesus has calculated a cunning ploy to confuse and confound our persecutors. Rather, we’re seeing what cruciform love looks like in a Christlike disciple. 

Idealism, Utility or Wisdom?

The question then often devolves into a debate about whether “turn the other cheek” and nonviolent responses “work” or not. In one ditch, you’ll find those who argue that Jesus’ commands on enemy-love are idealistic and naïve—that it doesn’t work in the real world of violence with truly wicked people. They actually believe the myth that striking the bully ends the bullying. NO. Almost never. It either escalates the violence, or you become the new bully.  

Others will say, “It doesn’t matter. It doesn’t need to work. This is about faithfulness, not utility. Stephen went to his martyrdom, not as a naïve idealist, but as a faithful follower of Jesus.” The call, in this case, is not to ‘win’ but to the greater love that lays down our lives rather than taking the life of another. 

 We could add the question, “Who’s to say Jesus’ ways don’t ‘work’?” If we consider the conversion of Paul in the aftermath, Stephen’s death was neither idealistic nor naïve. History shows us that “the blood of the martyrs is the seed of faith” (Tertullian, 197 AD) that overcame the Roman Empire and generated a global harvest of Jesus-followers. 

Further, I do believe in the practical wisdom of the Jesus Way. Nonretaliation in the face of violence understands the horrific law of escalation. NOT turning the other cheek doesn’t end violence. It means the next blow comes with a sword or a gun. If the oppressor is truly wicked, they are also likely to outgun and overpower you with even greater malice and violence when provoked. Striking back is the true naivety in that scenario. We have millennia of conflicts to prove it. And speaking from my experience as a violent man in recovery, I would implore readers to try Jesus’ way before dismissing it. For “everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock.” (Matthew 7:24).

Turning Our Cheek toward Christ – Justice  

As a postlude to this article, I’ll share a conversation I had with my son Justice. He began with the importance of inner transformation, “To ‘turn the other cheek’ and not the heart is merely resentful pacifism.”

I affirmed his insight and replied with the call to obedience in practice, “YES! Though that said, while resentful pacifism is not the righteousness of a transformed heart, I suspect it still beats the myth of ‘noble violence.’”

To which he responded with this beautiful mic. drop, worthy of the last word in our discussion and this article: “To turn the other cheek is to turn our faces from past pain and toward the face of Christ.”

Amen.

We hope that our articles and resources bring comfort, hope, encouragement, and healing to our readers. If you’re experiencing that, please subscribe freely, share freely, and, if you’re able, please consider donating freely toward paying it forward by clicking the blue giving at the top of your screen.