But *I* say unto you, not to resist evil; but whoever shall strike thee on thy right cheek, turn to him also the other;
Matthew 5:39 · DarbyView all translations →

Jesus has just quoted the old rule of "an eye for an eye." Now He tells His disciples to meet a personal insult with the other cheek. Two questions follow at once: is He overturning justice itself, and did He mean this literally?

The Rule He Quotes

The words Jesus repeats come from Israel's law. They belonged in a courtroom, not in a private quarrel.

This law contained moral directions for the life of each Israelite. It contained ceremonial directions too — the laws of the offerings, so that the children of Israel could serve God. And it contained legal directions to regulate the daily life of the people. The principle of "an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth" belongs to the last group. It is not a principle for one person's conscience. It is a legal direction for the authorities and judges of Israel. This is clear from Exodus 21:22 and Deuteronomy 19:18, where the judges are expressly mentioned. The direction rested on absolute fairness in repaying the deed. It was also meant to warn the people and hold them back (Deut. 19:20).

Modernised from Arend RemmersOriginal wording

Beyond Righteous, To Gracious

So Jesus is not calling the old measure unfair. He is asking for something the law never asked.

It is not that it is wrong for a man to punish according to the injury that has been inflicted on another. "An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth" is perfectly righteous. But our Lord shows that we ought to be much more than righteous. We ought to be gracious… It is clear the Lord has no reference here to what governments have to do… He is speaking of personal injury. The evil done may be ever so undeserved, but it has to be overcome with good. Show that you are willing to take even more for Christ's sake.

Modernised from William KellyOriginal wording

Why The Right Cheek

The detail of which cheek is struck is not decoration. It marks the blow as an insult rather than an injury.

At that time a slap in the face was a deep insult. It was even more humiliating when it came with the back of the hand and so landed on the right cheek. According to the Jewish Talmud this offence "weighed double" compared to an ordinary slap. The disciples of the Lord Jesus ought not to look for reparation before men, but to suffer offences (compare 1 Peter 2:20). It reminds us of what Isaiah foretold about our Lord: "I gave my back to those who strike, and my cheeks to those who pull out the beard; I hid not my face from disgrace and spitting" (Isa. 50:6).

Modernised from Arend RemmersOriginal wording

What The Verse Does Not Cover

The command has a boundary, and the wording draws it — every case Jesus lists happens to you.

There is no supposition that the law or its penalties are abolished. The government of the world is not in question. What is in question is the path of disciples in it… We may still turn the left cheek to the man who strikes the right. We may let the man who sues us have the cloak as well as the coat he took by fraud. That is clearly within our rights. If the cause were someone else's, we would have no such right. We may not help men escape justice or make light of it. The Lord could never lay down a general rule that His people should allow lawlessness, or shrug at the rights of others. He speaks only of what is personal to oneself — "slaps you," "sues you," "forces you."

Modernised from Numerical Bible NotesOriginal wording

The Objection From Christ's Trial

Many soften the saying by pointing to Jesus' own reply when a servant struck Him at His trial. Kelly answers that objection:

Some pare down and whittle away His words. They are not ashamed to argue that He did not mean them literally. Their reason: when He was struck on the face for His answer to the high priest, He protested calmly while bowing to the insult. Was this paying evil back in its own coin? On the contrary. This was One who did no sin, and no deceit was found in His mouth. When He was reviled, He did not revile in return. When He suffered, He did not threaten. In fact He presented far more than the other cheek. They spat in His face, beat Him, and struck Him with their hands in utmost contempt.

Modernised from William KellyOriginal wording

Where The Power Comes From

This life is not a stricter rule to try harder at. It is a different path altogether.

The saint is given a path through this world which has nothing to do with the world, but which displays the character of Christ in it. … This would not be righteousness, but Christ displayed.

Modernised from J. N. DarbyOriginal wording

Summary

- Law — "an eye for an eye" was a fair rule handed to Israel's judges, never a licence for the injured man to settle his own score.

- Grace — Jesus does not call that rule unjust. He calls His disciples past justice into grace, ready to bear more wrong instead of repaying it.

- Christ — the standard is His own face, given to those who struck and spat. The disciple follows a Master who took far more than one blow.

- Limits — the wording keeps it personal: he slaps you, sues you, forces you. It gives no cover to lawlessness and no right to give away what belongs to someone else.

- Life — this path is not law kept better but Christ displayed: a way through the world that has nothing to do with the world.