MAT 5:38 Ye have heard that it hath been said, An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth: 39 But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Whenever a person seeks to make a case for pacifism they nearly always use this verse as proof positive for the kind of behaviour that is expected of Christians. Huge assumptions and mis-applications are made in this process and I wanted to address some of those, particularly in view of the current climate of the villanization of self-preservation and self-protection. Should a Christian own fire-arms? Should a Christian use them if neccesary to protect the innocent, his family, or even himself? Please understand that while this particular verse doesn’t answer these questions specifically, my intention is to show that the teaching in this verse is most certainly not against these things.

The first thing to consider is that when Jesus gave his sermon on the mount he wasn’t giving a us a new law. Rather, He was giving (among other things) the law they already had back it’s teeth. The law had in some ways lost it’s bite in a manner of speaking. Too many people were under the impression that they were actually keeping the law and was therefore righteous before God. The purpose of the law was to demonstrate our inabilty to keep it, thus establishing our guilt before God. Christ was pointing out to them by this sermon that their perception of God’s law was quite different from the one He had in mind for them. They had been mishandling and abusing the law. In this case they were using a law that was meant for civil authorities as grounds for personal retribution.

Consider what Jesus actually says. Why does he specify the right cheek? Think about this for a moment. How would you smite someone on their RIGHT cheek? You would have to smite them with the back of your right hand. Most people are not left-handed so it would be quite unnatural to smite someone with that hand. Furthermore, when you look up the word for “smite” it means “to slap.” Jesus, in this instance is not speaking about someone who is about to pummel your face in. He is speaking about someone who has humiliated you. This pertains entirely to how we should respond to someone whose goal is to humiliate me, not someone who is threatening my life or the life of another.

Is Jesus in any way suggesting that if a man struck my wife or my child on the face that I am to offer their other cheek? I don’t know about you but I don’t lock my doors at night to keep my family safe. It’s to keep to poor soul safe that might wander into our home uninvited. Did you know that in the very law that Jesus is reinforcing with His sermon it says that if a thief breaks into and enters a persons home at night and is killed by the homeonwner that there would be no guilt? Is that not endorsing the defense of one’s self, home, and family? Jesus never spoke or acted against the law of God.

One last thing I would like you to consider. Christ said this to a people that are apparently much wiser than many people of today. Nobody had to tell these people they had an inherent right to protect themselves. They understood this perfectly well, everybody did. In much the same way He didn’t need to explain to them they had a right to breath the air. These things are understood and simply do not need to be explained to sane people.