Active Now

Randy D
Flint Ironstag
Sharon Marie Therese Veronica
Discussion » Questions » Religion and Spirituality » Jesus says if someone slaps you in the face, offer your other cheek to them. Did he mean face or butt cheek?

Jesus says if someone slaps you in the face, offer your other cheek to them. Did he mean face or butt cheek?

Posted - November 7, 2018


  • 9609
    Why do you arse that...who are you trying two have a crack at ? :( 
      November 7, 2018 3:45 PM MST

  • 13017
    Butt it was only meant to get satan behind me.
      November 7, 2018 3:47 PM MST

  • 9609's un ladylike to diss kindly Mr Satan ....He only a short way away from becoming Father Christmas again...:)D 
      November 7, 2018 3:53 PM MST

  • 21571
    i think he nneant face
      November 7, 2018 4:20 PM MST

  • 6069
    Hi carbon~ :) :) I keep telling myself, I need to read the Bible. 

      November 7, 2018 5:11 PM MST

  • I turn both sets so as to not take a chance of being damned. :P This post was edited by Benedict Arnold at November 7, 2018 11:02 PM MST
      November 7, 2018 5:35 PM MST

  • 4267
    Probably the butt cheek.
    After all, who wouldn't like to take a wack at this ass?

    Just look at him!
    Who brags about their weiner size in front of a crowd anyways?
      November 7, 2018 5:56 PM MST

  • 21820
    Which cheek do YOU want me to turn?

      November 7, 2018 6:19 PM MST

  • 13488
    It is the cheek on your face.
    I would explain farther but I don't think you are looking for a serious answer. This post was edited by my2cents at November 16, 2018 1:39 PM MST
      November 7, 2018 6:32 PM MST

  • 3022
    On this, Jesus and I differ. Once is the only time, there is no twice. 

    Considering that the original NT scriptures were written in Greek, which has different words for those body parts, we could discount anything but the face was intended. 
      November 7, 2018 7:52 PM MST

  • 5126

    "To one who strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also."---frequently interpreted as instruction to Christian pacifism.

    I sort of like this interpretation:  At the time of Jesus, says Wink, striking with the back of the hand a person, who was deemed to be of a lower socioeconomic class, was used as a means to assert authority and dominance. If the persecuted person "turned the other cheek," the discipliner was faced with a dilemma: The left hand was used for unclean purposes, so a back-hand strike on the opposite cheek would not be performed. An alternative would be a slap with the open hand as a challenge or to punch the person, but this was seen as a statement of equality. Thus, by turning the other cheek, the persecuted was demanding equality.
      November 7, 2018 10:19 PM MST

  • 3022
    Good stuff, Tom. 
      November 8, 2018 4:22 AM MST

  • 841
    Not sure if this is what he meant considering he also said "Whosoever compels thee to go a mile, go with him twain." And if any man will sue thee at the law, and take away thy coat, let him have thy cloak also." But... I like your thinking :)
      November 8, 2018 2:27 PM MST

  • 13488
    Actually, it is exactly right. 

    If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. [Matthew 5:41]

    At first glance, this is a wonderful image of being humble and serving other people, which it is.  But there is also an intentional edge to what Jesus challenged his believers to do.

    You see, there was a Roman law called lex angeria which allowed a soldier to compel a civilian to carry his pack for one milion– 1,520 paces.  This is known as a Roman mile.  But the soldier was required to take the pack again at the end of the mile.  He would be subject to punishment if he tried to make the civilian carry the pack further.

    By telling his followers to walk beyond the mile, he was actually challenging the Roman authority.  Jesus, in his brilliant non-violence, found a way to show up the Roman system.

    Under the threat of Roman force, we might be required to walk a mile.  So, by love we should walk two.

    When following Jesus’ command here, the Christian would force the Roman soldier to acknowledge that Jesus’ teachings were more compassionate, loving and humble than the Roman system.  Jesus’ followers were more submitted to him than to Roman law, more willing to do for him what few would do for Caesar.

    Giving up the inner garment as well as the outer for a debt was also a way of shaming the creditor. Leaving him naked with the creditor standing there with both his garments. In ancient Judah the same would have been on the seeing and who caused nakedness.
      November 8, 2018 3:38 PM MST

  • 7332
    "A local boy kicked me in the butt last week
    I just smiled at him and I turned the other cheek"
    - Weird Al Yankovic, Amish Paradise
      November 7, 2018 8:10 PM MST

  • 22389

      Perv. Get all of your cheeks over here before I change my mind and uninvite you.
      November 7, 2018 11:01 PM MST