Should we turn the other cheek?

There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.
manolo
Posts: 1582
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 4:46 pm

Should we turn the other cheek?

Post by manolo »

Folks,

Considering some events happening in the world these days, I am wondering if we should always 'turn the other cheek' when confronted with violence.

Jesus said,
"..Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also."
Luke 6:27-29

Now, I know that there have been a number of attempts to avoid interpreting these words literally, but given the words as they stand I'm not sure we should always follow the injunction. Maybe there will be circumstances in which even a Christian is justified in standing up to violence?

Alex.
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Should we turn the other cheek?

Post by Mr. Perfect »

I'll put in my 2 cents.

Jesus said "turn the other cheek", he did not say "allow people shoot you with guns (or the preferred weapon of choice for the time period)". I think obviously it means don't let petty squabbles escalate, be the bigger person, etc. I have no idea how it could interpreted as blanket pacifism.

Additionally, Jesus had no problem at all being confrontational or combative as we see with the Pharisees and Sadducees. Granted I'm not aware of "violence" being involved, but a common tactic by non Christians is to tell Christians they must be weak submissive carpets and roll over on command.

Anyone who follows the example of the master won't fall for it.
Censorship isn't necessary
noddy
Posts: 11326
Joined: Tue Dec 13, 2011 3:09 pm

Re: Should we turn the other cheek?

Post by noddy »

i thought you are where agnostic/atheist.

whos 'we' ?
ultracrepidarian
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
Posts: 6170
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Should we turn the other cheek?

Post by Nonc Hilaire »

manolo wrote:Folks,

Considering some events happening in the world these days, I am wondering if we should always 'turn the other cheek' when confronted with violence.

Jesus said,
"..Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, pray for those who mistreat you. If someone slaps you on one cheek, turn to them the other also."
Luke 6:27-29

Now, I know that there have been a number of attempts to avoid interpreting these words literally, but given the words as they stand I'm not sure we should always follow the injunction. Maybe there will be circumstances in which even a Christian is justified in standing up to violence?

Alex.
This verse is not about standing up to violence. It is about avoiding the sins of revenge, anger and pride. There is a big difference between a slap on the cheek and a punch in the mouth.

The pericope also restates the basic teaching of "do unto to others". And the overarching Christian theme of transforming suffering into glory is always relevant.
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
manolo
Posts: 1582
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 4:46 pm

Re: Should we turn the other cheek?

Post by manolo »

Mr. Perfect wrote:I'll put in my 2 cents.

Jesus said "turn the other cheek", he did not say "allow people shoot you with guns (or the preferred weapon of choice for the time period)". I think obviously it means don't let petty squabbles escalate, be the bigger person, etc. I have no idea how it could interpreted as blanket pacifism.

Additionally, Jesus had no problem at all being confrontational or combative as we see with the Pharisees and Sadducees. Granted I'm not aware of "violence" being involved, but a common tactic by non Christians is to tell Christians they must be weak submissive carpets and roll over on command.

Anyone who follows the example of the master won't fall for it.
Mr P,

Do you love your enemies? (If you have any of course).

Alex.
manolo
Posts: 1582
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 4:46 pm

Re: Should we turn the other cheek?

Post by manolo »

Nonc Hilaire wrote: There is a big difference between a slap on the cheek and a punch in the mouth.
Nonc,

I would find it hard to advise a person to turn the other cheek when they have just been slapped in the face (for whatever reason). This is a legal assault and there is recourse to law in such cases. If discernable damage is done to the face then here in the UK that is ABH (actual bodily harm) and could invite a custodial sentence in the magistrates court. Much the same with a punch in the mouth.

At home we have just been watching a documentary about the killer Oscar Pistorius, who gunned his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp to death through the toilet door of their apartment. Reeva's parents were interviewed and tried hard not to blame Pistorius for killing their daughter. It was strange to watch those folks, hurting so much and trying to make sense of what happened. Reeva's father said "I just want to talk to him face to face."

I felt for the guy.

Alex.
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
Posts: 6170
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Should we turn the other cheek?

Post by Nonc Hilaire »

manolo wrote:
Nonc Hilaire wrote: There is a big difference between a slap on the cheek and a punch in the mouth.
Nonc,

I would find it hard to advise a person to turn the other cheek when they have just been slapped in the face (for whatever reason). This is a legal assault and there is recourse to law in such cases. If discernable damage is done to the face then here in the UK that is ABH (actual bodily harm) and could invite a custodial sentence in the magistrates court. Much the same with a punch in the mouth.

At home we have just been watching a documentary about the killer Oscar Pistorius, who gunned his girlfriend Reeva Steenkamp to death through the toilet door of their apartment. Reeva's parents were interviewed and tried hard not to blame Pistorius for killing their daughter. It was strange to watch those folks, hurting so much and trying to make' sense of what happened. Reeva's father said "I just want to talk to him face to face."

I felt for the guy.

Alex.
The context of a slap in the first century honor/shame based society was different from contemporary society. Koine Greek can adequately describe a violent assault, and that simply isn't present in the text.

The text does not preclude self-defense or legal justice. Books are written on the Sermon on the Mount (or lake). It's too much for a single sermon. There is a lot of wisdom in the whole speech, but it needs careful reading and prayerful reflection.
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
manolo
Posts: 1582
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 4:46 pm

Re: Should we turn the other cheek?

Post by manolo »

Nonc Hilaire wrote: The context of a slap in the first century honor/shame based society was different from contemporary society. Koine Greek can adequately describe a violent assault, and that simply isn't present in the text.

The text does not preclude self-defense or legal justice. Books are written on the Sermon on the Mount (or lake). It's too much for a single sermon. There is a lot of wisdom in the whole speech, but it needs careful reading and prayerful reflection.
Nonc,

I respect your view. However, Jesus doesn't just talk about a 'slap'. He talks about 'enemies', 'hate' and 'mistreatment'. In the context of the old testament Middle East I think we can safely assume that he wasn't talking about chivalry.

Jesus faced a crucifixion at the hands of those who did not wish the best for him. Maybe this is the kind of mistreatment that was on his mind. Looking at Reeva Steemkamp's parents struggling with the killing of their daughter, my feeling is that the Christian message was meant for them. Indeed, Reeva's mother talks specifically about 'hate' and how keeping it in her heart will do her no good and a lot of harm.

She is able to say (with difficulty) that she does not want to hate her daughter's killer, but nowhere in the interview does she say that she might be able to love him. IMHO this is the depth of suffering that Jesus addresses.

Alex.
User avatar
Parodite
Posts: 5643
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: Should we turn the other cheek?

Post by Parodite »

The nature of violence is that it easily escalates. Escalation is the nature of violence. Sometimes a passive response of non-violence works; playing dead is a tactic many animals use to survive an attack. If that doesn't work.. run as fast as you can. If that doesn't work.. fight. If that doesn't work.. pray. :P
Deep down I'm very superficial
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
Posts: 6170
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Should we turn the other cheek?

Post by Nonc Hilaire »

manolo wrote:
Nonc Hilaire wrote: The context of a slap in the first century honor/shame based society was different from contemporary society. Koine Greek can adequately describe a violent assault, and that simply isn't present in the text.

The text does not preclude self-defense or legal justice. Books are written on the Sermon on the Mount (or lake). It's too much for a single sermon. There is a lot of wisdom in the whole speech, but it needs careful reading and prayerful reflection.
Nonc,

I respect your view. However, Jesus doesn't just talk about a 'slap'. He talks about 'enemies', 'hate' and 'mistreatment'. In the context of the old testament Middle East I think we can safely assume that he wasn't talking about chivalry.

Jesus faced a crucifixion at the hands of those who did not wish the best for him. Maybe this is the kind of mistreatment that was on his mind. Looking at Reeva Steemkamp's parents struggling with the killing of their daughter, my feeling is that the Christian message was meant for them. Indeed, Reeva's mother talks specifically about 'hate' and how keeping it in her heart will do her no good and a lot of harm.

She is able to say (with difficulty) that she does not want to hate her daughter's killer, but nowhere in the interview does she say that she might be able to love him. IMHO this is the depth of suffering that Jesus addresses.

Alex.
I don't know the story or film you are talking about. The amazing thing about scripture is not that it a collection of old writings but that it has the power to transmit revelation in the present. As you describe it, I'm confident your reception of the scriptural revelation is 100% correct.
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
User avatar
kmich
Posts: 1087
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014 11:46 am

Re: Should we turn the other cheek?

Post by kmich »

It is important to remember that Jesus is not advocating passivity when confronted with evil. As M. L. King said, "Nonviolence is absolute commitment to the way of love. Love is not emotional bash; it is not empty sentimentalism. It is the active outpouring of one's whole being into the being of another... Nonviolence is a powerful and just weapon. which cuts without wounding and ennobles the man who wields it. It is a sword that heals." Those who have advocated for centuries that violence is the more realistic and necessary response to evil have a hell of a lot of blood and suffering to answer for.
User avatar
Parodite
Posts: 5643
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: Should we turn the other cheek?

Post by Parodite »

If we take all the words seriously that people have put into Jesus' mouth or have spoken in the name of the same God as found in the new testament, it is clear that violence and judgment... is actually being outsourced to God Almighty. This exorcism of evil and violence allowed people to try and learn the new ways of love, peace, forgiveness, sharing, happiness; the brotherhood of man. It doesn't say there should be no courts, no police force or exactly what to do in the millions of possible situations we can be faced with.

But what about the Christian who turns the other cheek... but at the same time can't wait for God to throw back that exorcised demon of violence back to the earth to destroy the enemies of the faithful? Moral schizophrenia...
Deep down I'm very superficial
manolo
Posts: 1582
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 4:46 pm

Re: Should we turn the other cheek?

Post by manolo »

Nonc Hilaire wrote: I don't know the story or film you are talking about. The amazing thing about scripture is not that it a collection of old writings but that it has the power to transmit revelation in the present. As you describe it, I'm confident your reception of the scriptural revelation is 100% correct.
Nonc,

It's not a story or a film but an actual (current) court case involving the South African athlete Oscar Pistorias. Obviously the power of the example comes from its reality. My suspicion is that Reeva's parents are Christians, although it did not mention this in the trial or the documentary about the trial.

Yes, it does seem to me that there is a universal truth in the words of Jesus which is alive in the emotional struggles of Reeva's parents. Recommended viewing IMO, but only for those who want to go there.

Alex.
manolo
Posts: 1582
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 4:46 pm

Re: Should we turn the other cheek?

Post by manolo »

Parodite wrote:If we take all the words seriously that people have put into Jesus' mouth or have spoken in the name of the same God as found in the new testament, it is clear that violence and judgment... is actually being outsourced to God Almighty. This exorcism of evil and violence allowed people to try and learn the new ways of love, peace, forgiveness, sharing, happiness; the brotherhood of man. It doesn't say there should be no courts, no police force or exactly what to do in the millions of possible situations we can be faced with.

But what about the Christian who turns the other cheek... but at the same time can't wait for God to throw back that exorcised demon of violence back to the earth to destroy the enemies of the faithful? Moral schizophrenia...
Parodite,

Not sure I understand what you're saying but I would like to. Your last sentence is particularly interesting.

Alex.

PS - I wonder if this might be one of those threads where we actually learn something together rather than having a bunfight? They do happen. :)
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
Posts: 6170
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Should we turn the other cheek?

Post by Nonc Hilaire »

I hope Parodite fleshes out his observation a bit more as well.
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
User avatar
Parodite
Posts: 5643
Joined: Sun Jan 01, 2012 9:43 pm

Re: Should we turn the other cheek?

Post by Parodite »

manolo wrote:
Parodite wrote:If we take all the words seriously that people have put into Jesus' mouth or have spoken in the name of the same God as found in the new testament, it is clear that violence and judgment... is actually being outsourced to God Almighty. This exorcism of evil and violence allowed people to try and learn the new ways of love, peace, forgiveness, sharing, happiness; the brotherhood of man. It doesn't say there should be no courts, no police force or exactly what to do in the millions of possible situations we can be faced with.

But what about the Christian who turns the other cheek... but at the same time can't wait for God to throw back that exorcised demon of violence back to the earth to destroy the enemies of the faithful? Moral schizophrenia...
Parodite,

Not sure I understand what you're saying but I would like to. Your last sentence is particularly interesting.

Alex.

PS - I wonder if this might be one of those threads where we actually learn something together rather than having a bunfight? They do happen. :)
What I said.. ehm.. rephrased: turning the other cheek as advised by Jesus, the way I read it, makes sense in some sort of general sense. Just on the human level. I think Mr. P. also said it well.

But then... it can become problematic on a much deeper level when the issue is mystified again, or I'd say "de-humanized"... when God and the magic of "revelation" enters the equations. You only have to read Revelations of John to know what I mean; the Grand Operator behind the scenes who sent Jesus to learn humanity of love, forgiving etc.. when push comes to shove on Judgment Day goes on a spree killing of all his enemies himself.. in total contradiction of all the moral lessons of Jesus.

This moral schizophrenia fucks up a lot of Christians. Even if you don't take Revelation literally and merely as a poetic expression of some or such.. it still is bad unhealthy poetry IMO, noise in the channel. Holy books are full of that. The demonic and the divine in one pocket edition. Best would be IMHO to turn your other cheek also on all holy books a.s.a.p. :P
Deep down I'm very superficial
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
Posts: 6170
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Should we turn the other cheek?

Post by Nonc Hilaire »

The Revelation of John is explicitly a series of visions, and to take it literally is profoundly ignorant. Moreover, the generally accepted Christian opinion is that the book was referring to the Christian persecution under the reign of Nero and not to future events.

One of the major aspects of the speech by Jesus which Alex refers to is that it points out the role of intention in sin. It is the same list of examples in which Jesus says to lust after a man's wife is as evil as adultery, and to call a man a fool is as evil as murder.

This is obviously extreme hyperbole, but it makes a point. Sin is not just a list of forbidden actions, but also the deeper matter of intention. It is much like the last two of the Ten Commandments which specifically forbid coveting.
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
User avatar
kmich
Posts: 1087
Joined: Mon Jan 27, 2014 11:46 am

Re: Should we turn the other cheek?

Post by kmich »

Nonc Hilaire wrote:The Revelation of John is explicitly a series of visions, and to take it literally is profoundly ignorant. Moreover, the generally accepted Christian opinion is that the book was referring to the Christian persecution under the reign of Nero and not to future events.
Yes, of course, the likely author of Revelations, John of Patmos, was a Jewish-Christian prophet who was likely refugee from a war in his own country, Judea, where a war had broken out in 66 to the year 70 when the Romans came in and totally destroyed Jerusalem.

Revelations is about those who destroyed his world and persecuted his people being revenged by the wrath of God. Since it was dangerous to express open hostility to Rome at the time, it required the use of codes and symbols. It is an odd book, and while human violence is not advocated, there is a projection of violent, vengeful intention onto a vicious, divine wrath that is frankly not easy to reconcile with many of the messages present in the Synoptic Gospels, including the one under discussion.

You may consider literal interpretation as profoundly ignorant, but many Christians do take it literally. The "Left Behind Series" has surpassed 65 million copies sold. So what is the true Christianity, yours or theirs? And how is one to decide? Authority? Whose? And why?
User avatar
Nonc Hilaire
Posts: 6170
Joined: Sat Dec 17, 2011 1:28 am

Re: Should we turn the other cheek?

Post by Nonc Hilaire »

kmich wrote:
Nonc Hilaire wrote:The Revelation of John is explicitly a series of visions, and to take it literally is profoundly ignorant. Moreover, the generally accepted Christian opinion is that the book was referring to the Christian persecution under the reign of Nero and not to future events.
Yes, of course, the likely author of Revelations, John of Patmos, was a Jewish-Christian prophet who was likely refugee from a war in his own country, Judea, where a war had broken out in 66 to the year 70 when the Romans came in and totally destroyed Jerusalem.

Revelations is about those who destroyed his world and persecuted his people being revenged by the wrath of God. Since it was dangerous to express open hostility to Rome at the time, it required the use of codes and symbols. It is an odd book, and while human violence is not advocated, there is a projection of violent, vengeful intention onto a vicious, divine wrath that is frankly not easy to reconcile with many of the messages present in the Synoptic Gospels, including the one under discussion.

You may consider literal interpretation as profoundly ignorant, but many Christians do take it literally. The "Left Behind Series" has surpassed 65 million copies sold. So what is the true Christianity, yours or theirs? And how is one to decide? Authority? Whose? And why?
By ignorant I mean uninformed. Uninformed of church history and historical belief, uninformed in ancient symbolism, uninformed of scholarly work, and most of all being unaware that John of Patmos was not a prophet and that he explicitly states this is a vision and not a literal truth.

The earliest church histories, which predate the canon, show the early church believed the events described in Revelation to have passed in the first century.

"Holy Blood, Holy Grail" was also a popular best seller but sales do not equal veracity. Sensationalism sells, but it does not lead to factual understanding.

This is not to make a judgment of "true" Christianity. Salvation does not hang on intellectual constructs, but a belief held without knowledge of the facts involved can only be described as ignorant.
“Christ has no body now but yours. Yours are the eyes through which he looks with compassion on this world. Yours are the feet with which he walks among His people to do good. Yours are the hands through which he blesses His creation.”

Teresa of Ávila
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Should we turn the other cheek?

Post by Mr. Perfect »

manolo wrote: Mr P,

Do you love your enemies? (If you have any of course).

Alex.
Yes I do. Why do you ask.

I find many of these discussions to be disingenuous. A series of questions that are designed to lead to a predetermined location. I don't really understand why that is appealing. I rather just say what I think of something and wish others would do the same.

A common thing we Christians deal with from others is the isolated scripture. Not out of context per se but just isolated. The scripture in question here in isolation implies certain things. However there are probably 100s verses across all scripture on dealing with people. So as a Christian I would not spend much time on this in isolation. It is one of many instructions.

As a result my reading of scripture is such that there are times where if I were to witness a person in mortal danger, I may turn on walk away. There are times where I may sacrifice my life to do something. It all depends on the complete picture. And not my selfish desires but on balance what I have learned and believed to be right from the Bible.
Censorship isn't necessary
manolo
Posts: 1582
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 4:46 pm

Re: Should we turn the other cheek?

Post by manolo »

Mr. Perfect wrote:
manolo wrote: Mr P,

Do you love your enemies? (If you have any of course).

Alex.
Yes I do. Why do you ask.
Mr P,

I thought this would be your answer, but just checking.

Re your 'walking away' point. I have heard Buddhists say the same.

Alex.
manolo
Posts: 1582
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 4:46 pm

Re: Should we turn the other cheek?

Post by manolo »

Parodite wrote: What I said.. ehm.. rephrased: turning the other cheek as advised by Jesus, the way I read it, makes sense in some sort of general sense. Just on the human level. I think Mr. P. also said it well.

But then... it can become problematic on a much deeper level when the issue is mystified again, or I'd say "de-humanized"... when God and the magic of "revelation" enters the equations. You only have to read Revelations of John to know what I mean; the Grand Operator behind the scenes who sent Jesus to learn humanity of love, forgiving etc.. when push comes to shove on Judgment Day goes on a spree killing of all his enemies himself.. in total contradiction of all the moral lessons of Jesus.

This moral schizophrenia fucks up a lot of Christians. Even if you don't take Revelation literally and merely as a poetic expression of some or such.. it still is bad unhealthy poetry IMO, noise in the channel. Holy books are full of that. The demonic and the divine in one pocket edition. Best would be IMHO to turn your other cheek also on all holy books a.s.a.p. :P
Parodite,

I have had this conversation with an elderly Catholic Nun (in 3d), who I much admired; also with other Christians from time to time. She was reduced to saying "It's the mystery" which Christians often fall back to when facing such difficult questions. Of course, I'm happy to accept that any theist God would be unknowable by humans, but there is something in the story which goes against that. We do seem to know too much and it's not pleasant. This may be a hangover from the Old Testament 'jealous God' notion, but it seems to dog Jesus' life as well.

If the Jesus story is true, he was given nothing if not a hard time by his father, and that is where he had to do the cheek turning. Even if we accept the split off 'satan' idea of evil, the author of all this is the Christian God. That's where the buck stops.

Alex.
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Should we turn the other cheek?

Post by Mr. Perfect »

manolo wrote: Mr P,

I thought this would be your answer, but just checking.

Re your 'walking away' point. I have heard Buddhists say the same.

Alex.
People of all stripes in practice do it all the time. The reasons can be interesting.
Censorship isn't necessary
manolo
Posts: 1582
Joined: Wed Aug 22, 2012 4:46 pm

Re: Should we turn the other cheek?

Post by manolo »

Mr. Perfect wrote:
People of all stripes in practice do it all the time. The reasons can be interesting.
Mr P,

I see it as a lack of moral fibre.

Alex.
Mr. Perfect
Posts: 16973
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Should we turn the other cheek?

Post by Mr. Perfect »

manolo wrote:
Mr. Perfect wrote:
People of all stripes in practice do it all the time. The reasons can be interesting.
Mr P,

I see it as a lack of moral fibre.

Alex.
It can be.

For example Bill Clinton, secular left Europe and Rwanda, there is only one explanation. The fiber.

OTOH, in a Civil War like Syria I'm not sure what you do other than turn away. As the obama faction has done. You guys may have been right to do that.
Censorship isn't necessary
Post Reply