Responding to Evil People

Generally, this passage has been interpreted as meaning a believer should simply accept suffering caused by others (i.e. be a “doormat”). 

However, the real meaning is lost in translation and taken out of its proper historical context.

“You have heard the law that says the punishment must match the injury: ‘An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.’” – This refers to the law (set out in Deuteronomy 19:21) that enabled judges to mete out punishment to wrongdoers that matched the wrongdoing done to their victim.  History teaches us that Israelites then started applying this principle in private conflicts with others (i.e. they took revenge for personal insults and other minor conflicts not adjudicated by the authorities).  It is this “taking the law into your own hands” out of a motive of personal revenge that Jesus teaches against.

This teaching does not take away the right to refer egregious conduct to the authorities. Romans 13:4 [NLT] tells us: “The authorities are God’s servants, sent for your good. But if you are doing wrong, of course you should be afraid, for they have the power to punish you. They are God’s servants, sent for the very purpose of punishing those who do what is wrong.” It also does not take away one’s right to self-defence, as we shall see below.

The word “resist” in Matthew 5:39 comes from the Greek word “anthistemi”, meaning to “stand against”.  In classical Greek, this word had a military context of soldiers standing strongly against an enemy (in other words, fighting back).  Jesus calls on believers not to fight back in the ordinary sense of repaying evil for evil (see 1 Peter 3:9) but teaches us to overcome evil with good (see Romans 12:21).

He does so by giving us a few examples:

1.  The slap on the right cheek – a slap on the right cheek from a person facing you ordinarily happens through a back-handed slap (from a right-handed person). This was considered an insult in Jewish culture (rather than a physical attack). It was a slap used to indicate social hierarchy, i.e. that the person slapped was of an inferior social standing.  A slap on the left cheek was reserved for a fight between equals. In ancient Jewish Rabbinic law, a slap on the right cheek carried a fine double that for slapping a person on the left cheek because of its deeply offensive nature (https://www.sefaria.org/English_Explanation_of_Mishnah_Bava_Kamma.8.6.1?lang=bi – 29 August 2026).   

In Jesus telling us to “offer the other cheek also”, He is clearly not calling on the victim of the slap to simply accept the slap and walk away.  Instead, by calling upon the victim to turn their face and offer the other cheek, (i) the victim asserts their dignity not by slapping back (paying back evil for evil) but by offering the left cheek, the victim signals to the evil-doer that he/she is the evil-doer’s equal; (ii) the evil-doer is prevented from again insulting the victim with another slap to the right cheek but is forced to either stop the insult or treat the victim as an equal by slapping the right cheek with an open palm or punching the victim’s right cheek.  Either way, the evil of demeaning the victim’s social standing is stopped without the victim resorting to doing evil in response.

This does not mean self-defence is prohibited by the Bible.  In Luke 22:36, just before Jesus went to the Garden of Gethsemane (knowing that He would be arrested and eventually crucified), He said to His disciples “But now, he who has a money bag, let him take [it], and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one.”  Following this statement, in Luke 22:38 [NKJV], the disciples found two swords: “So they said, ‘Lord, look, here [are] two swords.’ And He said to them, ‘It is enough.’” We can see from this Scripture that Jesus allowed self-defence as a principle.

However, as we learn in John 18:10-11 and in Matthew 26:52, when Peter used a sword to slash off the right ear of the high priest’s slave in the Garden of Gethsemane, Jesus told him to put away the sword because He wanted God’s will to be done, and He warned Peter that those who use the sword will die by the sword.  That means even though Jesus allows self-defence, it must be exercised judiciously so that it is not exercised in an evil way that is contrary to God’s word.

We get an indication of a judicious exercise of self-defence in Exodus 22:2-3 [NLT]:

“If a thief is caught in the act of breaking into a house and is struck and killed in the process, the person who killed the thief is not guilty of murder.  But if it happens in daylight, the one who killed the thief is guilty of murder.” (My emphasis.)

From this Scripture, we see that under the Law (given to Israelites), God allowed self-defence in a situation of an emergency / lack of clarity (i.e. at night) but not in a situation where a person has the opportunity to think and act rationally (i.e. in daylight).  

In Matthew 5:38-41, Jesus makes it clear that we may not retaliate with violence for personal insults, but we can (and should) stand up for ourselves and our dignity without being violent or doing anything evil.  That includes forgiving those who insult us.  “But if you refuse to forgive others, your Father will not forgive your sins.” [Matthew 6:15 NLT]

We are also not to take revenge against others – that is reserved for God:

“Dear friends, never take revenge. Leave that to the righteous anger of God. For the Scriptures say, ‘I will take revenge; I will pay them back,’ says the LORD.  Instead, ‘If your enemies are hungry, feed them. If they are thirsty, give them something to drink. In doing this, you will heap burning coals of shame on their heads.’  Don’t let evil conquer you, but conquer evil by doing good.” [Romans 12:19-21 NLT]

2.  “If you are sued in court and your shirt is taken from you, give your coat, too.” – Again we need to consider the historical context in which this statement was made by Jesus. The “shirt” or “tunic” (in other translations) was a long undergarment that was worn during the day at the time.  The “coat” or “cloak” (in other translations) was a robe that was worn on top of the tunic during the day and was also used at night (particularly by the poor) as cover to keep warm in bed.   It is for this reason that in Exodus 22:26-27, the Levitical law required that if a cloak was taken by a creditor as a pledge / security for debt, it had to be returned to the person by sunset for the person would otherwise not have had any blanket at night.  The cloak was considered more valuable than the tunic.

In ancient Rabbinical law, pulling a person’s cloak off him was punishable with a fine of 400 zuz (the same as for a back-handed slap on the left cheek).  Both offences were considered an insult to a person’s dignity.

Causing another person’s nakedness was therefore unacceptable and shameful.

Jesus in this Scripture calls on whoever is harassed with a potential lawsuit to take away his tunic, (i) not to engage in litigation (i.e. strife), but (ii) instead to a give his (more valuable) cloak to the person who wants to sue.  In other words, talking literally, in the days that Jesus was on earth, the person threatened with a lawsuit would voluntarily have his nakedness exposed by the person suing, causing the potential plaintiff shame for doing so.  Most likely, the action of the victim giving the aggressor not only his tunic but also his cloak (leaving himself naked) would have caused such shame on the aggressor for exposing another person’s nakedness that he would have stopped the harassment.

Jesus is therefore calling on us not to contend and get into strife in lawsuits but to assert our dignity in a manner that causes the aggressor to morally question his own actions and change cause (essentially by avoiding contention and giving the person even more than what he seeks to extract from us through the lawsuit).  In doing so, we “heap burning coals of shame on their head” by doing good in return for evil.  The Apostle Paul in 1 Corinthians 6:7 [NLT] said: “Even to have such lawsuits with one another is a defeat for you. Why not just accept the injustice and leave it at that? Why not let yourselves be cheated?”

3.  “If a soldier demands that you carry his gear for a mile, carry it two miles.” In Roman times, a Roman soldier was empowered by law to require a civilian to carry the soldier’s gear only for a thousand paces (mille passus, commonly referred to in English as the “mile”).  It was illegal for the soldier to require the civilian to carry the gear for more than a thousand paces.  This law is referred to as the angaria (from the Greek angareuein).  It was an unjust and oppressive law on civilians and was used by Roman soldiers on civilians in lands they had conquered.

Jesus in this Scripture called on civilians to assert their dignity against this unjust law and practice not by resisting and contending with the soldier but by using the angaria against the oppressive soldier.  In carrying the gear not only for one mile but two, the oppressed civilian not only complied with the law but voluntarily did even more than was allowed, putting the soldier in jeopardy of being disciplined for breaking the law.  The oppressive soldier would be put in a position where he had to practically beg the civilian to stop.  The civilian quietly stood against the injustice without any strife by voluntarily giving in to the suffering and doing more than what the oppressor required.

Conclusion

 From all the above, we see that Jesus does not require believers to be “doormats” and to simply accept injustice, but He calls on us to stand up to evil by doing good deeds that cause the person committing evil against us to re-examine their actions.  The instruction is captured succinctly in Romans 12:21 [NLT] – “Don’t let evil conquer you, but conquer evil by doing good.”