Matthew 5:39

Right & Wrong
Post Reply
User avatar
_Homer
Posts: 639
Joined: Fri Jan 07, 2005 11:43 pm
Location: Brownsville

Matthew 5:39

Post by _Homer » Thu Apr 27, 2006 6:46 pm

Steve, et al,

I would like to hear any comments regarding your view of the application of this teaching by Jesus regarding retaliation.

Steve has said he takes this command literally and has acted in accord with it at one time when he was struck. In "the Divine Conspiracy", Dallas Willard takes the exact same position as Steve.

On the other hand, Joachim Jeremias takes the position that the blow struck on the right cheek indicates it was an action taken as an insult to a heretic. The right cheek being struck, most people being right handed, indicates the practice of grabbing the heretic by the beard with the left hand while striking the right cheek with the back of the right hand. Thus the necessity of "turning the other cheek" for another back hand blow from the right hand. Jeremias understands this teaching of Jesus as limited to persecution as Christians and not addressed to self defense.

I have believed that 1 Cor. 6:7 teaches that the "ideal" response to being taken advantage of financially is to let it go rather than sue. Steve has pointed out that in at least some cases this might not be the loving thing to do in that the perpetrator would not be held accountable and would likely persist in his sin. Would not this same principle apply in cases of self defense? Could a Christian defend himself in a minimal way, i.e. only to the extent necessary to prevent harm?

Any comments will be appreciated.

Steve, forgive me if I have mis-stated any of your position(s).
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
A Berean

User avatar
_JC
Posts: 196
Joined: Thu Feb 16, 2006 12:18 pm

Post by _JC » Fri Apr 28, 2006 4:17 pm

Homer, that's a very good question. I think that, as Christians, we are always to do the most loving thing in any given situation. Sometimes this involves protecting an innocent person from an aggerssor because that's the loving thing to do. I've heard Steve say that he would defend someone else but not himself. I disagree with him, but only slightly. I'm a trained martial artist and can (in some circumstances) restrain a violent man without hurting him. This would be my course of action. But if the assault is merely an insult, I will apply Peter's advice and "repay insult with blessing." This often has a very shocking effect on the aggressor. When people insult you they are often taken aback when you don't respond in like manner. Brother Yun's biography, "The Heavenly Man" gives examples of people being brought to the Lord by his response to violent men.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:

Post Reply

Return to “Ethics”