Have you been told you should “turn the other cheek?”
Where does this come from, and does the Bible actually say that you should “turn the other cheek?” The answer to these questions are not as straight-forward as you might have been told.
Throughout my life, I have heard this phrase used as an alternative statement to “look the other way” when someone has wronged you. Or basically to pretend that nothing happened. And the Bible has been the reference, or the source, of this comment. The problem with this is that it is not what the Bible actually says. Or, to be more specific, Jesus didn’t teach this.
Where does this come from?
If you grew up going to church, or even if you didn’t, you may have heard of the Sermon on the Mount. This speech, the longest recorded speech of Jesus, is found in the gospel of Matthew, though much is also recorded in Luke. It is in this speech that we can find where this phrase originated. And if we want to be specific, the phrase actually recorded (if we choose to only take a snippet) is, “Turn to him also the other.”
Does that sentence fragment make sense to you? It shouldn’t. And neither should rearranging the full sentence to say, “Turn the other cheek.” Some may say that it is just a paraphrase of the full sentence – and here’s where the problem begins.
The Sermon on the Mount is a speech by Jesus, recorded in the Gospels, in which he explains to the listener how to live right by God and others. To truly comprehend the entirety of this speech, you could dedicate your life to studying. But to take a portion of the speech, rearrange it, and misappropriate it into something it was never meant to say is, quite honestly, disrespectful.
What does it actually say?
As I previously mentioned, this speech aims to show how we ought to live in a way that is right by God and right by others. This speech is meant to be understood in whole, not portioned out in snippets to be quoted for our personal gain. But let’s look at these verses a little more in depth.
Beginning in Matthew 5:38 (NIV), Jesus says, “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.” Other translations phrase it differently, and my previous phrasing was actually translated directly from Greek.
Regardless of the translation, I hope you can see (if you look at this text in-depth) that “look the other way” loses its luster.
But, you may say, Jesus says not to resist an evil person. Doesn’t this show a passive stance? The Greek word for resist here, antistēnai, speaks of a more aggressive opposition. So it might be better for us to phrase this as, “Do not take a harsh opposition against…” or, “Do not retaliate against…” if we want to only use part of this speech. But I suppose this still doesn’t do this phrase justice. To understand this word “resist” better, it is this act of resistance that we should resist evil itself, not an evil person.
What does this mean?
Why is it, do you think, that Jesus specifies the right cheek? Because in order to slap someone on the right cheek, it would be from a back-handed slap. The intent is to be more offensive to the recipient of the slap than with the palm. Think of the idea of a back-handed comment.
To offer the other cheek is to face your aggressor and command that, if they wish to slap you, they do it with more dignity. Instead of a back-handed slap designed to dishonor the victim, it is a challenge to the individual that, if they wish to slap you, it should be done with honor. It is not retaliating against, or compounding the issue. It is a peaceful response to opposition.
Please keep in mind that our current culture, or your current culture, is not the same as the culture from two thousand years ago. But I imagine that a back-handed slap in either culture could cause any issue to escalate. And here is where this teaching comes in.
We are not called to stand around and pretend nothing has happened. And in the same way, we should not escalate the problem either.
What does this look like?
I will give an example from my personal life, though I am really not trying to say that I am the role model you should base your life on.
A few years ago, I suffered a back injury at work. I had to go to the emergency department where they found I had some neuro deficits in my leg and foot. An MRI revealed I had disc impingement on the nerves.
After several months of other treatments, I finally had surgery. But the worker’s compensation company refused to cover the surgery, claiming it was unrelated to my injury.
The idea of turning the other cheek to mean looking the other way would say that I should ignore the issue. Instead of causing a fuss, I should just have my private insurance cover the cost. At which point, I would have to pay my very large deductible and my insurance company would have to pay the rest.
I also could have resisted this person, or the organization. I could have escalated the problem further than necessary. And in fact, I probably reacted in ways I shouldn’t, and said some things I shouldn’t have about the individual and about the company. But ultimately I had to turn the other cheek.
I had to confront the company. I had to get documentation from my surgeon and my doctor. And I had to get evaluated by a separate doctor. After months of back-and-forth and the threat from them of going to court to have a judge agree they were responsible (thankfully, it never came to this), they agreed to pay for my surgery.
How does this relate to turning the other cheek?
Instead of looking the other way, or slandering the other company, I confronted them. It is the duty of this company to cover work-related injuries, including any resulting treatment. The slap on the cheek was them refusing to pay for the surgery (this wasn’t the first slap on the cheek, by the way). This necessary surgery was already delayed, and this refusal caused another potential delay. But had I been required to submit this to my private insurance, I would have had to pay several thousands of dollars out of my pocket for my deductible.
To turn the other cheek, I had to hold this company responsible. Think, “If you wish to deny my surgery, you must make sure that it is valid. Don’t just deny it because you don’t want to pay. Here is my cheek. If you wish to slap it, do it properly.”
Now I understand that this might seem a little silly or superficial, but it’s just an example.
Why do I bring this up?
This idea of telling people to “Look the other way,” claiming that it is the teaching of Jesus, is harmful in so many ways. And the problem is that people use this “teaching” as a way to control others – basically telling them, “Pretend that the harm I have caused didn’t happen. That way, I can continue doing the same thing without having to be responsible for my actions.”
This teaching not only repeatedly harms the victim, but it also leads the victim to believe God condones it. And not just condones, but teaches it.
These victims are left to the conclusion that if God teaches to look the other way when they are subjected to harm, then either God doesn’t exist, or they want nothing to do with Him. I guess I’m left to wonder why someone would allow another person to reject God so that they don’t have to be accountable for their actions.
The answer is in the teaching
It is our responsibility as individuals and as a collective to stand up for what is right. If we are witness to injustice, to harm, it is up to us to do what’s right, what’s true, what’s just. When we receive a slap on the right cheek, or see another who receives an unjust slap, we must do what the right thing to do is – we must face those who cause harm. Not to escalate the issue, but to stand up through “creative acts of nonviolent resistance.” Then we can tell them, “If you wish to slap me on the cheek, look me in the eye and do so with honor.”