The apostle Peter found some of Paul’s writings hard to understand. 2 Peter 3, v.16. For us, the gospel records contain harder tasks still: tasks not only of understanding, but obeying.
Consider the words of Jesus in Matt. 5, v.39 (A.V.) “Resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.” Such plain, direct words have defied alteration in most other versions of Scripture. They do not tax the understanding, but the message does!
Does “resist not evil” mean we must deny Christ in yielding to evil? How can we reconcile our stand for the Master with this instruction? J. B. Phillips helps with his free translation, “You have heard that it used to be said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth,’ but I tell you, don’t resist the man who wants to harm you. If a man hits your right cheek turn the other one to him as well.”
Although there is to be no retaliation against an opponent, Jesus does not ask us to renounce the things we stand for. Where amidst the avalanche of evil does he replace godly thoughts with the thinking of his opponents? When does he descend from the heights to follow the methods of those who would trap him?
He is able to view his accusers separately from their words in cool objectiveness before the Judge of all the earth. His accusers are looked upon with compassion and understanding by One who knows their needs and seeks to benefit them. Their words, taken and weighed against the words of the LORD, are found wanting. The submission he offers is “my back to the smiters, and my cheeks to them that plucked off the hair. I hid not my face from shame and spitting” Isaiah 50, v.6.
Because the fundamental righteousness of this example is obvious, we try to apply it daily in the world. Why then is it that sometimes the issues are less clearly seen in disputes between brethren? Love should be evident one toward another, but love does not demand submission of one viewpoint to another. If the adversary shifts his ground, it is our responsibility to still offer the other cheek, and maybe our back as well — but never our mind! “Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind” Romans 14, v.5, and then if each has the mind of Christ, there will be no “pressing” of viewpoints by one upon another.
Why then do brethren and even ecclesias sometimes surrender their ideas to the relentless pressure of more vocal brethren? The reason seems to stem from the clause in the “Commandments of Christ.” (Ecclesial Guide). “Agree with your adversary quickly, submitting even to wrong for the sake of peace.” Matthew 5, v.25; 1 Cor. 6, v.7.
Yet Brother Robert Roberts does not apply this statement in this way; on the contrary, he classifies it under “IV. Concerning the Stranger” in his “Epitome of the Commandments of Christ.” More importantly, nowhere in Scripture can we find, “submitting even to wrong for the sake of peace,” nor do we know of other Scriptures which express this thought.
When the clause is taken and linked with Paul’s appeal for unity in 1 Cor. 1, v.10 “be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment,” we witness the birth of the peace-at-any-price policy. Such a policy is never the policy of our Lord. The submission of which he speaks in Matt. 5, v.25 concerns our attitude of mind to others and not our convictions. He exhorts us to avoid seeking revenge against an adversary. To do so, renders us as guilty of offence as him who has offended against us. Vengeance belongs exclusively to the Lord. Romans 12, v.19.
Brother Robert Roberts applies these principles in the Ecclesial Guide, section 42, in words which have not aged.
Brother John Thomas also argued against the peace-at-any-price policy (as quoted — Logos magazine, p.225, March, 1971). “The peace-at-any-price policy is as dangerous in matters of faith as in matters of politics. Peace ought not to exist where the one faith is not upheld in its purity: and therefore, we decline circulating an appeal to peace at a time when the word of God is being corrupted and made of none effect through tradition.”
Similar thoughts may well have been with Paul as he experienced the pressure of brethren who expected the “liberty of Christ” to submit to the “Bondage of Judaism.” An inconsistent Peter had already yielded and was no longer upright Gal. 2, v.14.
Was Paul also to yield and alter his convictions for the sake of peace? “No, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you” Gal. 2, v.5. In following his Master in this way, Paul lays on one side the temptations of non-resistance and passive resistance. True to his Lord he selects instead “the overcoming of evil with good.” And this is another hard saying, not of understanding, but of obeying. For Jesus, with his mind dedicated to the will of God, this phrase expresses the purpose in always “turning the other cheek.” So that submission to his enemies, without thought of revenge, was a natural expression of his great love. It was equally natural for him to resist the onslaught upon his convictions by other ideas. There was no selfishness in this.
Even at the end of his life under extreme trial, his godly thoughts turn to the needs of others. He prays for his murderers, he comforts and teaches a heartbroken thief. He provides for the needs of his mother and a disciple. For his own needs there is not a thought. No words of bitterness or reproach. No regrets for opportunities missed or wrongs done — there were none! Because there was nothing left undone, he could say, “It is finished.”
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One