<P> Since the passages call for total nonresistance to the point of facilitating aggression against oneself, and since human governments defend themselves by military force, some have advocated Christian anarchism, including Leo Tolstoy who elucidated his reasoning in The Kingdom of God Is Within You . </P> <P> The scholar Walter Wink, in his book Engaging the Powers: Discernment and Resistance in a World of Domination, interprets the passage as ways to subvert the power structures of the time . </P> <P> 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 . </P> <P> Wink continues with an interpretation of handing over one's cloak in addition to one's tunic . The debtor has given the shirt off his back, a situation forbidden by Hebrew law as stated in Deuteronomy (24: 10--13). By giving the lender the cloak as well, the debtor was reduced to nakedness . Wink notes, that public nudity was viewed as bringing shame on the viewer, and not just the naked, as seen in Noah's case (Genesis 9: 20--23). </P>

Turn the other cheek vs eye for an eye