Is it a sin for Christians to defend themselves? We are supposed to turn the other cheek, right? Fighting fire with fire, retaliation, or vengeance is more in line with what Jesus said in Matt 5:38-42 when he said to “turn the other cheek”. Defending oneself against both slander and physical assault is acceptable. Jesus even told his disciples to take two swords with them for the time after his ascension (Luke 22:35-38). Throughout the Bible, God instructed Israel to go to war to defend themselves; Jesus didn’t change that.
In Matthew 5:38-42, Jesus isn’t saying to be a pushover, but rather to make decisions that will lead to peace more quickly. Jesus didn’t stay silent when he was slapped by a soldier (John 18:22-23), and neither did Paul (Acts 23:1-4) when he was slapped. In both scenarios, they called out the person for striking them. Calling out injustice done to you is not a violation of turning the other cheek, because it is precisely what Jesus and Paul did when they were smacked. We don’t have to allow people to harm us and get away with it without speaking out against them. When it comes to physical assault, striking someone back should only be done if it will result in a resolution. Act with wisdom in each circumstance; self-defense in life-threatening situations differs from a simple insult or a weak slap. If it is not worth escalating, then don’t respond. The point is not to retaliate by fighting fire with fire but to fight fire with water. It’s also not about allowing the fire to keep burning or adding fuel to it. Jesus instructs us to love even our enemies in Matthew 5:44-48 and Luke 6:27-36, and this principle is also reflected in Psalm 109.
We also find this in Proverbs 24:17, which says, “Do not rejoice when your enemy falls.” Proverbs 25:21-22 says, “If your enemies are hungry, give them food to eat, if they are thirsty, give them water to drink, and in doing so you will heap burning coals of shame on their heads, and God will reward you.” This is similar to what Jesus says about how we treat people in Matthew 25:31-46. Romans 12:19-20 quotes Deuteronomy 32:35, which states that vengeance belongs to the Lord, as well as Proverbs 25:21-22. Then in verse 21, Paul wrote, “Do not let evil conquer you, but conquer evil by doing good.”
I believe it is essential to follow the Spirit in various situations. Primarily, if they attack you because of something you initially did to them, the best course of action is to ask for forgiveness and make amends. Matthew 5:38 references the “an Eye for an Eye” principle in the law, which is found in Exodus 21:24, Leviticus 24:20, and Deuteronomy 19:21. This principle was in effect under the Old Covenant before the Holy Spirit, so people didn’t have the power to resist sin within themselves like New Covenant believers. No one was a born-again (John 3:3-8) new creation (2 Corinthians 5:17) because Jesus hadn’t died to save anyone yet. The city of refuge system was designed to protect people from those who held grudges against a person after causing the accidental death (Numbers 35:9-29, Deut 19:1-13). This was for someone who accidentally killed someone else, so they could escape from the victim’s family, because even though it was an accident, their hard hearts prevented them from forgiving. The eye for an eye system is built on the foundations of the death penalty for murder (Gen 9:5-6). This allowed someone who was truly wronged to receive immediate compensation, thereby freeing them from grudges. Otherwise, it can turn into family feuds and sin in future generations that divide the nation of Israel. It also promoted equal retribution, meaning a person can’t murder someone for simply wounding them; the punishment has to match the crime.
In the Old Testament, wicked people who committed violent acts had to die or be injured in the same way to bring justice to the victim and prevent sin from spreading like a disease across the camp. People needed a deterrent to prevent retaliation. It’s kind of like when God in Genesis 4:15 pronounced a curse on anyone who continued the cycle of murder by marking Cain after he killed Abel. Lamech, Cain’s descendant, killed a man for wounding him and thought the punishment associated with Cain’s mark should be multiplied seven times for anyone who kills him (Gen 4:24). Murder spread despite God’s marking of Cain. Notice Lamach killed a man for wounding him, that is not equal to retribution; he had the right to wound but not kill.
Luke 22:35-38 has been misinterpreted and twisted into two opposing views that are both outside the scope.
Luke 22:35 (NLT) Then Jesus asked them, “When I sent you out to preach the Good News and you did not have money, a traveler’s bag, or an extra pair of sandals, did you need anything?” “No,” they replied. 36 “But now,” he said, “take your money and a traveler’s bag. And if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one! 37 For the time has come for this prophecy about me to be fulfilled: ‘He was counted among the rebels.’[a] Yes, everything written about me by the prophets will come true.” 38 “Look, Lord,” they replied, “we have two swords among us.” “That’s enough,” he said.
One view is that Jesus is speaking metaphorically, and he is not talking about literal swords. The other view is that this is a license for Christians to arm themselves with a bunch of guns to fight the government. The first view can’t be right because, in verse 35, Jesus asked his disciples about literal things that they would typically take with them when traveling. He told them not to take them because they needed to trust that God would provide for them, and those things included money, a traveler’s bag, and sandals. Then in verse 36, he says Now I want you to take these things with you. This is because he’s preparing them for after he is crucified and sins, and they will be on their own and have to deal with persecution. There’s a shift here where they will now have to bring resources with them, and that includes swords. He says that if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.
As for the other view, notice that he says to buy a sword, the disciples responded “We have two swords among us” and he says “That’s enough”. At this point, Jesus is talking to 11 of his 12 disciples, so if two swords are enough, then he doesn’t want each one of them to have their sword. This implies that the swords weren’t used to start a rebellion and fight the Romans or Jewish leaders, but instead were used as a tool necessary for their travels. Deterrence is one example of a peaceful usage of swords. If a criminal can see that you have a sword, then they may be less likely to attack you, and if deterrence isn’t enough, they can use it to defend themselves from direct bodily threats. It’s important to note that the disciples never engaged in armed conflicts with the people who threatened their lives while preaching, as recorded in any of the New Testament documents. They didn’t use the swords when they were arrested because the government has the right to arrest and imprison people to enforce the law, so it seems the swords would be aimed at threats from non-legal entities.
Another aspect of this is the quote in verse 37 when Jesus references Isaiah 53:12, saying, ‘He was counted among the rebels.’ Isaiah 53 is a messianic prophecy about Jesus, and some say he told them to bring a sword so that when Jesus was arrested, this prophecy would be fulfilled. While this sounds true, it’s a little more complex than that. When they came to arrest Jesus, Peter used one of the swords and cut off one of the ears of one of the priest’s servants named Malchus, but Jesus healed him. The Sanhedrin never accused Jesus and his disciples of being armed rebels; their accusations against Jesus were primarily that of blasphemy for calling himself God, so having the sword was never an issue, and no one brought up Peter cutting off Malchus’ ear.
The line about Jesus being counted among the rebels may apply more to Jesus being crucified alongside two thieves in place of an actual rebel and murderer named Barabbas (Matt 27:16-26, Mark 15:7-15, Luke 23:18-25, John 18:40). However, when he is being arrested, Jesus does ask his captors why he is being detained out of sight of the public with many armed soldiers and questions if he is seen as a dangerous revolutionary. In Luke 22:52-53, Jesus says, “Am I some dangerous revolutionary, that you come with swords and clubs to arrest me? Why didn’t you arrest me in the Temple? I was there every day. But this is your moment, the time when the power of darkness reigns.”
This was something Jesus would have said even if Peter hadn’t used his sword, so he was already “counted among the rebels” before Peter used the sword.
Lastly, Jesus responded to Peter, cutting off Malchus’ ear by saying in Matt 26:52-54, “52 “Put away your sword,” Jesus told him. “Those who use the sword will die by the sword. 53 Don’t you realize that I could ask my Father for thousands of angels to protect us, and he would send them instantly? 54 But if I did, how would the Scriptures be fulfilled that describe what must happen now?”
In addition, John 18:11 says that Jesus told Peter, “Put your sword back into its sheath. Shall I not drink from the cup of suffering the Father has given me?” This shows that Jesus didn’t want them to use the sword to defend him, since he was supposed to die for the sins of humanity. Therefore, the purpose of the swords was for some point afterward, when they would travel to spread the gospel after he ascended.
Furthermore, since they didn’t defend themselves against being arrested by legal entities the only rational reason left is for the swords to be used as a deterrent and for self-defense against non-legal entities (like thieves and wild animals) that obstructed their mission, as well as the defense of others like Moses who defended Jethro’s daughters from the shepherds that were bullying them at the Midian well in Ex 2:16-17. Defending helpless people from others would have been an opportunity to share the gospel with those being mistreated and abused, so having a sword comes in handy for that, and the assailant doesn’t need to be killed in the process, just chased off, as in the case of Moses. It seems to me that the New Testament doesn’t teach ultra-pacifism, nor does it advocate for human vengeance and the violent instigation of conflict; instead, it promotes conflict resolution and deterrence.
Luke 22:35-38 is not a license to kill, unless necessary, but one should aim to try to restrain or disarm, and maybe wound nonlethally when possible. Then pray for and care for that person to be healed as a demonstration of God’s power and love.
Exodus 22:2“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. 3 But if it happens in daylight, the one who killed the thief is guilty of murder. “A thief who is caught must pay in full for everything he stole. If he cannot pay, he must be sold as a slave to pay for his theft.
The distinction in Exodus 22:2-3 is that in the daytime, a theft victim can call for help, and it is easier to see if the thief is armed, so there is no need to murder them since it is easier to subdue them and ensure they pay restitution or be enslaved. At night, they may have had a weapon, and because it was dark, people were sleeping, so there was no way to know for sure. Furthermore, there was no police service hotline available in the ancient world, so individuals were allowed to take necessary measures to defend their families in dire situations.
With physical violence, self-defense is often the most prudent course of action, but in terms of the other examples Jesus gave, such as someone suing you (Matt 5:40), this is a more profound application of turning the other cheek. If they have cause, then give them what you can and try to settle it outside of court (1 Cor 6:7-8). And if it is slander, you have the right to speak the truth and defend yourself, and in that situation, you have to trust God to vindicate you, even if you don’t win. In Isaiah 54:17, God says that “every tongue that rises against his people will be condemned,” after saying no weapon will prosper against them. Joseph in Genesis 39 was falsely accused of sexual assault and imprisoned. However, he ended up as the vizier of Egypt a few years later. God’s justice will prevail in every situation. If you are persecuted and have done nothing wrong, then God will vindicate you; however, if you have done something wrong, you must apologize. We must remember not to let anger lead us to sin.
Remember the Bible is not against killing, it is against murder (Ex 20:13, Deut 5:17). Murder is killing someone who is not proven guilty of anything worthy of death or was not an immediate threat to a person’s life. War and self-defense are allowed, but mass murder because of blood lust is forbidden and is punishable by death.
Paul said this:
Ephesians 4:26 And “don’t sin by letting anger control you.”[Ps 4:4] Don’t let the sun go down while you are still angry, 27 for anger gives a foothold to the devil.
A word from Peter on the subject:
1 Peter 3:13 13 Now, who will want to harm you if you are eager to do good? 14 But even if you suffer for doing what is right, God will reward you for it. So don’t worry or be afraid of their threats. 15 Instead, you must worship Christ as Lord of your life. And if someone asks about your hope as a believer, always be ready to explain it. 16 But do this in a gentle and respectful way. Keep your conscience clear. Then if people speak against you, they will be ashamed when they see what a good life you live because you belong to Christ. 17 Remember, it is better to suffer for doing good, if that is what God wants, than to suffer for doing wrong!