I once met a Tibetan Buddhist Nun and author, named Thubten Chodron.

[ZombieHorde]

She came to my little mountain town and gave a speech at a local Buddhist center. I went with some of my buddies and the event was mostly fun. One of the things she said was Buddhist monks and nuns are not perfect, if they were perfect, they would not need to become monks and nuns. Additionally, since monks and nuns were not perfect, they did not always live up to their vows and the ideals of Tibetan Buddhism.

I am mentioning this because I wish to discuss a passage from the New Testament, but I don't want Christian readers to think I am criticizing them for not living up to the words and ideals of Jesus Christ.

How do you interpret this passage from the Book of Matthew, chapter 5?


38 "You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.'

39 But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.

40 And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well.

41 If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles.

42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.


This passage seems to forbid self defense, even in a court of law. Jesus Christ never defended himself when he was on trial. "Do not resist an evil person" seems extreme to me. What do you think?

[LuvNewcastle]

1. This passage describes the impossible

life of a Christian. It's a life where the scorn of others and material things mean nothing. One is supposed to forget his/her human side and live for the nurturing of the spirit. Few Christians even attempt to make this kind of sacrifice, and all who do fail.

[Sinti]

2. I used to be a Christian, maybe I can help.

I'm a pagan now, of course, but I still understand the literature and philosophy pretty well.

38 "You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.'
39 But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.

This eye for an eye business has no place in civilized society. You can only ever hope to make enemies. Christianity is supposed to be about peace. At least that's how Constantine and the Holy Roman Empire sold it. Do not resist an "evil" person. If you return aggression with aggression you will only ever get aggression. So, let it go.

40 And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well.

Obviously, if someone want to sue you and take your tunic, they are very needy so you should give him your cloak, as well. There is plenty, and there is no need to hoard anything. If you want others to realize this, you have to behave as if you also believe it. Therefore, hoard nothing - give freely.

41 If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles.

This piece, I think, is allegorical to having patience. You go "with him" two miles, be patient and listen to understand why a man would "force" you to walk a mile. It serves you also, you will learn what to do and what not to, if you listen accepting that the other person has reasons for doing the things that impinge upon your enjoyment of life.

42 Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

This is again in regard to the hoarding that humans do. No matter how often we say it is better to give, we still hoard more than we need, and the whole world is impoverished for it.

A man acts in the interest of survival for himself and his family, based upon knowledge he has about how to survive. If you want men to act differently, you have to teach them that changing their actions improves their chance of long-term survival.

The Bible, IMO, tries to tell this in several ways - the whole forgive everyone for everything, do unto others as you would have done unto you, and do not judge others - leave the judgment to god is trying to tell men how to have "more life," but too many Christians simply don't learn this from the myths and histories therein. Jesus was a pacifist. You cannot truly "defend" yourself from ideas, you can only propose new and different ideas. A lawyer doesn't simply refute charges, he paints a different picture of the situation for the jury.

Jesus himself may have never existed. There are no extra-Christian texts making reference to him. The miracles, and the ascension would have probably gotten some attention from the scholars at the time, but texts referencing these things have not yet been found. You can come to your own conclusions therefrom. Constantine used Christianity (a small mostly Egyptian cult at the time) to further his quest for world dominance, so there are a lot of contradictions in the literature that leave one scratching their head.

[ZombieHorde]

5. Interesting perspectives, thanks for posting. nt

[struggle4progress]

3. Walter Wink: The Third Way (1993)

... The second instance Jesus gives is, "If anyone takes you to court and sues you for your outer garment, give your undergarment as well." The situation here is dealing with collateral for a loan. If a person was trying to get a loan, normally they would use animals or land as collateral for the loan but the very poorest of the poor, according to Deuteronomy 24:10-13, could hock their outer garment. It was the long robe that they used to sleep in at night and used as an overcoat by day. The creditor had to return this garment every night but could come get it every morning and thus harass the debtor and hopefully get him to repay.

Jesus' audience is made up of debtors -- "If anyone takes you to court..." He is talking to the very people who know they are going to be dragged into court for indebtedness and they know also that the law is on the side of the wealthy. They are never going to win a case. So Jesus says to them, "Okay, you are not going to win the case. So take the law and with jujitsu-like finesse, throw it into a point of absurdity. When your creditor sues you for your outer garment, give your undergarment as well."

They didn't have underwear in those days. That meant taking off the only stitch of clothing you had left on you and standing nude, naked, in court. As the story of Jonah reminds us, nakedness was not only taboo in Israel. The shame of nakedness fell not on the person who was naked, but on the person who observed their nakedness. The creditor is being put in the position of being shamed by the nakedness of the debtor. Imagine the debtor leaving the courtroom, walking out in the street and all of his friends coming and seeing him in his all-togethers and saying, "What happened to you?"

He says, "That creditor has got all my clothes," and starts walking down to his house. People are coming out of bazaars and alleys, "What happened? What happened?" Everyone is talking about it and chattering and falling in behind him, fifty-hundred people marching down in this little demonstration toward his house. You can imagine it is going to be some time in that village before any creditor takes anybody else to court ...

http://www.csec.org/csec/sermon/Wink_3707.htm

[ZombieHorde]

6. Funny and interesting, thanks for posting. Do you think this is what Jesus Christ meant? nt

[JerseygirlCT]

4. I think you make an excellent point

but the idea of knowing you are imperfect doesn't mean that you are supposed to quit trying to do better.

I also read this passage as less about physical self-defense, and more about escalating anger. Meeting those who would hurt you in some way with forgiveness and kindness is tough to do, but often, either in the short-term or long, the most effective.

Have you ever felt utterly disarmed when someone you were angry at, or going after in some way (verbally, or physically) responds with sincere kindness? I think that's what's being talked about in this passage.

[ZombieHorde]

7. "Have you ever felt utterly disarmed when ... responds with sincere kindness?"

No, but I think imagine such a situation. I don't think a schoolyard bully would stop bullying if the victim was especially kind, but perhaps I am wrong.

[Occam Bandage]

8. ...

[ZombieHorde]

10. That is really funny, thanks for posting. nt

[Silent3]

9. This is the kind of thing that has a kernel of truth...

...but it's stupid if taken to the extreme.

Oddly enough, I don't see too many supposedly literalist Christians taking this part of the Bible literally.

Noah's Ark? Literally true apparently among the so-called literalists.

Lending money to anyone who ever asks for money? That must either be figurative, or the "Well, Christians aren't perfect, just forgiven" excuse has to be invoked.

[ZombieHorde]

11. Definitely a fair critique of Biblical "literalists".