Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Bob Stuart's avatar

"Turn the other cheek" is a serious misunderstanding of what Jesus intended. The cultural context is covered thoroughly at

https://thetyee.ca/Citizentoolkit/2004/11/22/JesusTrickster/, but here's the most relevant bit:

When Jesus said "Turn the other cheek" he was not recommending total surrender, but rather some radical mischief. I'll attach the whole article on this, but here's the relevant bit:

"If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also." Why the right cheek? How does

one strike another on the right cheek anyway? Try it. A blow by the right

fist in that right-handed world would land on the left cheek of the opponent.

To strike the right cheek with the fist would require using the left hand,

but in that society the left hand was used only for unclean tasks. As the

Dead Sea Scrolls specify, even to gesture with the left hand at Qumran

carried the penalty of ten days penance. The only way one could strike the

right cheek with the right hand would be with the back of the hand.

What we are dealing with here is unmistakably an insult, not a fistfight.

The intention is not to injure but to humiliate, to put someone in his or her

place. One normally did not strike a peer in this way, and if one did the

fine was exorbitant (four zuz was the fine for a blow to a peer with a fist,

400 zuz for backhanding him; but to an underling, no penalty whatever). A

backhand slap was the normal way of admonishing inferiors. Masters backhanded

slaves; husbands, wives; parents, children; men, women; Romans, Jews.

We have here a set of unequal relations, in each of which retaliation would

be suicidal. The only normal response would be cowering submission. It is

important to ask who Jesus' audience is. In every case, Jesus' listeners are

not those who strike, initiate lawsuits, or impose forced labor. Rather,

Jesus is speaking to their victims, people who have been subjected to these

very indignities. They have been forced to stifle their inner outrage at the

dehumanizing treatment meted out to them by the hierarchical system of caste

and class, race and gender, age and status, and by the guardians of imperial

occupation.

Why then does Jesus counsel these already humiliated people to turn the other

cheek? Because this action robs the oppressor of power to humiliate them. The

person who turns the other cheek is saying, in effect, "Try again. Your first

blow failed to achieve its intended effect. I deny you the power to humiliate

me. I am a human being just like you. Your status (gender, race, age, wealth)

does not alter that. You cannot demean me."

Such a response would create enormous difficulties for the striker. Purely

logistically, how can he now hit the other cheek? He cannot backhand it with

his right hand. If he hits with a fist, he makes himself an equal,

acknowledging the other as a peer. But the whole point of the back of the

hand is to reinforce the caste system and its institutionalized inequality.

Expand full comment
2 more comments...

No posts