Friday, December 08, 2006
Turning the Other Cheek
“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 someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.” (Matt 5:38-42)
Imagine these scenarios:
I used to read these verses and not realize how thought-through the examples were. I assumed that they were somewhat arbitrary, but as I prepared for this sermon, I could see that these examples covered different categories of mistreatment. The slap on the face points to physical violence or insults to our personhood or character. Someone suing and taking your tunic cover situations where there are wrongful attacks on our possessions. The third one – someone forcing you to go one mile – relates to the curtailment of personal liberties, or coercion to do something you may not want to do. With these examples, Jesus leaves us very little by which to justify exceptions for disobeying His call to “not resist”.
So where does that leave us? Is Jesus really asking us to be passive?
Some bible commentators imply that Jesus is calling us to be pacifist stance towards mistreatments done to us. But I would suggest to you that Jesus is asking us to take action, rather than being passive. Listen to what Jesus is saying here: Turn your right cheek, give your coat, and go the second mile.
Christ is, in effect, calling us to respond, and in one sense, retaliate. But we retaliate not to return the offence, but with goodness and grace. There is nothing passive here. Sometimes, we approach these passages in the Sermon on the Mount as something to be adhered to, or even look at it as impossible standards that we should be attaining but actually can’t or don’t. We grit our teeth, and feel we need to endure the scourge on our backs. I know that I do.
However, by looking at it this way, we miss the point completely, and this robs the gospel of its full power. I started off preparing for this passage thinking that this was a verse about not taking revenge. But as I opened up the passage more, I discover that at its core, is the gospel story.
Imagine these scenarios:
- A person criticizes you, or ridicules your faith in a sarcastic manner – how do you respond?
- Someone has hurt you in the past. But an opportunity presents itself to help them. Do you freely oblige, or do you think, “I can’t be bothered, why should I help a person that has hurt me?”
- Imagine your employer legislating that Christians can no longer wear crosses, or be able to speak about your faith in the workplace. What should be the biblical response?
- How does one respond to a situation like with what is happening with the Christian Unions in Britain?
With these scenarios, Jesus says to us: do not resist – And this poses us with a dilemma as to whether this an unqualified non-resistance to ill-intent? Is Jesus really advocating absolute passiveness when we are wronged, or when evil is committed against us? Does it mean we have to give up our rights completely, and be a doormat? If you answer ‘no’, where do we draw the line?
Note that this verse is not saying that we should not prevent injustice or defend against what’s done towards us, but when the offence is already committed, the response, and the manner of response becomes important and that is what Christ is saying here. There is a difference between a posture of defense, versus to actualy mount a retaliation against the person who is attacking you – and here, it’s the striking back bit that Jesus is putting a finger on… For most of us, we do not take revenge by physically hurting someone or killing them. By we do so usually in more subtle ways – the cold shoulder, a word here and there against another person’s character, or even not helping when you are in a position to.
Note that this verse is not saying that we should not prevent injustice or defend against what’s done towards us, but when the offence is already committed, the response, and the manner of response becomes important and that is what Christ is saying here. There is a difference between a posture of defense, versus to actualy mount a retaliation against the person who is attacking you – and here, it’s the striking back bit that Jesus is putting a finger on… For most of us, we do not take revenge by physically hurting someone or killing them. By we do so usually in more subtle ways – the cold shoulder, a word here and there against another person’s character, or even not helping when you are in a position to.- “If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles.”
I used to read these verses and not realize how thought-through the examples were. I assumed that they were somewhat arbitrary, but as I prepared for this sermon, I could see that these examples covered different categories of mistreatment. The slap on the face points to physical violence or insults to our personhood or character. Someone suing and taking your tunic cover situations where there are wrongful attacks on our possessions. The third one – someone forcing you to go one mile – relates to the curtailment of personal liberties, or coercion to do something you may not want to do. With these examples, Jesus leaves us very little by which to justify exceptions for disobeying His call to “not resist”.
So where does that leave us? Is Jesus really asking us to be passive?
Some bible commentators imply that Jesus is calling us to be pacifist stance towards mistreatments done to us. But I would suggest to you that Jesus is asking us to take action, rather than being passive. Listen to what Jesus is saying here: Turn your right cheek, give your coat, and go the second mile.
Christ is, in effect, calling us to respond, and in one sense, retaliate. But we retaliate not to return the offence, but with goodness and grace. There is nothing passive here. Sometimes, we approach these passages in the Sermon on the Mount as something to be adhered to, or even look at it as impossible standards that we should be attaining but actually can’t or don’t. We grit our teeth, and feel we need to endure the scourge on our backs. I know that I do.
However, by looking at it this way, we miss the point completely, and this robs the gospel of its full power. I started off preparing for this passage thinking that this was a verse about not taking revenge. But as I opened up the passage more, I discover that at its core, is the gospel story.
Isn’t our own disobedience essentially us slapping God in the face when all He had wanted for us was good things? Aren’t our transgressions against the Lord a curse upon his name? Isn’t the retaliation of mankind the whip that scarred the back of Christ? But yet in all this, God’s response through Jesus was love and sacrifice, not retaliation and judgment. That’s what our Saviour has done. We’ve slapped Him, and He’s offered the other cheek. We’ve hit Him, and He’s embraced us. We’ve taken His tunic, but He’s given us the robes of righteousness. Jesus has not taught this verse; He is the manifestation of this verse. And we cheapen it by treating it like some optional moral core that we have to follow.
I would encourage you to now consider broken relationships in your own lives where there has been mistreatment, perhaps injustice – where there is not only unforgiveness, but also a desire to want to punish the persons involved for something they have done (or not done). I want to challenge you to bring it under the light of this part of God’s word. In the passage, Christ is not merely saying, “don’t take revenge”. He is saying to us: “Don’t withhold good from those who have offended or hurt us.”
This is not merely something we perform externally - this is who we are in faith, and what we have to become in Christ. May we take heed, and stand firm in the wisdom that God gives us in His word in this matter if we are to walk in the way of our Saviour.
“Your attitude should be the same that Christ Jesus had. Though he was God, he did not demand and cling to his rights as God. He made himself nothing; he took the humble position of a slave and appeared in human form. And in human form he obediently humbled himself even further by dying a criminal's death on a cross.” (Philippians 2:5-8, NLT)
-- (Condensed from a talk given at Westminster Chapel, London)
Related Posts:
I would encourage you to now consider broken relationships in your own lives where there has been mistreatment, perhaps injustice – where there is not only unforgiveness, but also a desire to want to punish the persons involved for something they have done (or not done). I want to challenge you to bring it under the light of this part of God’s word. In the passage, Christ is not merely saying, “don’t take revenge”. He is saying to us: “Don’t withhold good from those who have offended or hurt us.”
This is not merely something we perform externally - this is who we are in faith, and what we have to become in Christ. May we take heed, and stand firm in the wisdom that God gives us in His word in this matter if we are to walk in the way of our Saviour.
“Your attitude should be the same that Christ Jesus had. Though he was God, he did not demand and cling to his rights as God. He made himself nothing; he took the humble position of a slave and appeared in human form. And in human form he obediently humbled himself even further by dying a criminal's death on a cross.” (Philippians 2:5-8, NLT)-- (Condensed from a talk given at Westminster Chapel, London)
Related Posts:
Labels: Christian Living, Discipleship, Evil, Forgiveness
Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home / Visit My Current Blog!
I've not thought of them as three differnt treatments either--the slap, cloak, extra mile as you point out. Yes, I agree we are still called to actively love back. Even though I read this in scripture and see how Jesus was silent before hius accusers and those who tortured him, I wonder what his response would have been if it was one of his family or disciples being whipped before him and led to death. Would Jesus have stood idly by and jsut loved the Romans and priests that much more or would he, like when he went to the tmeple and saw the wrong there, have perhaps brought out his whip and fought them back in defence? I don't know for sure. Certainly, it's one thing to lie down your own rightsm nd leave it to God, but another to NOT defend another's--and thus the pro life movement, etc.
I wonder if I had beeen a beliveing Jew in Warswa in WWII and seen my fellow Jews being led off to slauther or mercilessly killed if I should just love those NAzis more or teach them a lesson any one I can by resisting them? Was it wrong for Britan and America to go to war against the Nazi machine, taken to the State level? I suspect not. I feel that when evil is done to someone innocent it is better to strike bakc, if in our power, then to let it happen. I might be wrong, but I know if it was my wife or kids being abused physically, I sure as anything would willingly hit back rather than let them be tortured in such a way, say.
Your thoughts on this?
I wonder if I had beeen a beliveing Jew in Warswa in WWII and seen my fellow Jews being led off to slauther or mercilessly killed if I should just love those NAzis more or teach them a lesson any one I can by resisting them? Was it wrong for Britan and America to go to war against the Nazi machine, taken to the State level? I suspect not. I feel that when evil is done to someone innocent it is better to strike bakc, if in our power, then to let it happen. I might be wrong, but I know if it was my wife or kids being abused physically, I sure as anything would willingly hit back rather than let them be tortured in such a way, say.
Your thoughts on this?
Your examples-
(1) Britain & US going to war against Nazis
(2) Wife & kids being physically abused
(3) Jesus turning the tables on the tax collectors and merchants in the temple -- this was not really an attack, but just righteous anger. Christ was not repaying evil for evil.
For 1 and 2, I agree that you would need to take action to protect the people/ nation whom you care about. Defence is not necessarily repaying evil for evil, and so Jesus' principle of "not punishing enemies" still stands.
Yes, if one's loved ones are harmed or attacked, we ought to do everything in our power to stop evil being committed against them.
However, if we hold hatred in our hearts against these attackers and wish the same punishment for them (or worse), that is what Matt 5:38-42 is getting at.
I find the recent stance made by Norman Kember interesting.
They were taken captive by Iraqi militants. But they have chosen to not retaliate (by not testifying) even though now they are in a position to -- because they know that by testifying, these militants will be put to death. Instead, they have said that they forgive them. Their words are powerful:
"What our captors did was wrong. They caused us, our families and our friends great suffering. Yet we bear no malice towards them and have no wish for retribution."
(1) Britain & US going to war against Nazis
(2) Wife & kids being physically abused
(3) Jesus turning the tables on the tax collectors and merchants in the temple -- this was not really an attack, but just righteous anger. Christ was not repaying evil for evil.
For 1 and 2, I agree that you would need to take action to protect the people/ nation whom you care about. Defence is not necessarily repaying evil for evil, and so Jesus' principle of "not punishing enemies" still stands.
Yes, if one's loved ones are harmed or attacked, we ought to do everything in our power to stop evil being committed against them.
However, if we hold hatred in our hearts against these attackers and wish the same punishment for them (or worse), that is what Matt 5:38-42 is getting at.
I find the recent stance made by Norman Kember interesting.
They were taken captive by Iraqi militants. But they have chosen to not retaliate (by not testifying) even though now they are in a position to -- because they know that by testifying, these militants will be put to death. Instead, they have said that they forgive them. Their words are powerful:
"What our captors did was wrong. They caused us, our families and our friends great suffering. Yet we bear no malice towards them and have no wish for retribution."
Post a Comment
<< Home / Visit My Current Blog!
Subscription service
Enter your email address below to subscribe to Reflections on Life and Spirituality blog!(NOTE: Please be assured that this will not be used for spam or unsolicited communications)
![[Valid Atom]](http://photos1.blogger.com/img/5/5559/400/valid-atom.jpg "Validate my Atom feed"){kind=small}
