5

Perhaps one of the most difficult verses to properly examine the context of is Matt. 5:39,

But I say unto you, That ye resist not evil: but whosoever shall smite thee on thy right cheek, turn to him the other also.

Is "Resist not evil" a statement of uniformity, basically saying we should "Never resist evil" or evildoers, for that matter? Is there a specific context for this passage to be applied?

How are we to understand "Resist not evil" in light of Matt. 5:39, and determine it's proper context in light of the rest of Jesus's sayings?

  • That last part, 'in light of the rest of the new testament', seems to assume a systematic relationship between Matthew 5.39 and any other N.T. text. Answers may provide reasoning for such a relationship, but the question shouldn't impose that. – user2910 May 30 '15 at 18:36
  • 1
    @MarkEdward I'm aware of the 'Systematic Relationship'(ie: pacifism/antiwar, etc.) that could be engendered from this question, and that is not my purpose in posting it. However, my question is "Contextual" and not merely translative, which means an answer should be consistent with the rest of Jesus's sayings, which provide a means of understanding this particular text. That is entirely "On-Topic". – Tau May 30 '15 at 21:41
  • I don't think your question is off-topic, but I think that final sentence assumes a relationship with other new testament texts that may not exist (i.e. it's assuming a systematic theology). – user2910 May 30 '15 at 23:12
  • 1
    @MarkEdward OK, how about this edit where I limit it to the sayings of Jesus? – Tau May 31 '15 at 8:06
  • That looks great to me. – user2910 Jun 1 '15 at 1:25
1

Question Restatement: How should Jesus' command to "Not Resist, [Oppose], Evil" be interpreted--and to what extant?

Organization: (1.) Answer: How NOT to Oppose Evil (2.) How TO Oppose Evil (3.) What about Defending Others? (4.) What about Self Defense, and other Contexts? (5.) What if the Authorities Fail?

1. Answer: How NOT to Oppose Evil

Answer: Because of the text's context, the commandment certainly cannot be interpreted as, "Do not Oppose Evil", but rather it should be interpreted as "How NOT to Oppose Evil--by not Retaliating against the Person".

Context: This commandment sits within a series of Commandments affirming that Christians are--TO--Oppose and Overcome Evil, (Chapters 5-7), and more specifically, within the context of being "persecuted for the sake of righteousness/justice", and showing mercy, love, and forgiveness towards enemies..

Matt. 5:10-12, NASB - “Blessed are those who have been persecuted for the sake of righteousness

NOTE: In that culture, "Righteous" literally means "the one who acts justly", morally. And, "a Just/Righteous person" is recognized--even apart from the law. See Gen. 15:6, and Gal. 3:6.

Jesus, the Disciples, and the Early Church applied Jesus' command to the extreme--regardless of the severity of the evil done to them.

Jesus even rebuked Peter in the garden for using his sword--(even though Jesus told him to bring it). Stephen, and Paul demonstrated their interpretation of this commandment, and laid down their lives.


2. How TO Oppose Evil

Following these verses is an example of How TO Oppose Evil through mercy, and gentleness: that is:

Matt. 5:44, NASB - But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you.

Loving Your Enemy, IS a form of Retaliation:

Prov. 25:21-21, NASB - If your enemy is hungry, give him food to eat; And if he is thirsty, give him water to drink; 22 For you will heap burning coals on his head, And the Lord will reward you.

To Oppose Evil--with Gentleness and Mercy--is Consistent in the New Testament:

Eph. 6:10-12, NASB - Finally, be strong in the Lord and in the strength of His might. 11 Put on the full armor of God, so that you will be able to stand firm against the schemes of the devil. 12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places.

James 4:7, NASB - Submit therefore to God. Resist the devil and he will flee from you.

1 Peter 3:13-15, NASB - 13 Who is there to harm you if you prove zealous for what is good? 14 But even if you should suffer for the sake of righteousness, you are blessed. And do not fear their intimidation, and do not be troubled, 15 but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, yet with gentleness and reverence;


3. What about Defending Others?

Jesus' commandment was certainly not commanding anyone to sit around and watch someone be abused--rather Jesus rebuked people for not providing justice, (Matt. 23:23), and then told them they were going to go to hell, (v. 33).

Matt 23:23, NASB - “Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint and dill and cummin, and have neglected the weightier provisions of the law: justice and mercy and faithfulness; but these are the things you should have done without neglecting the others.

... 33 You serpents, you brood of vipers, how will you escape the sentence of hell?

NOTE: This is often cited as a defense by Christians in the military, when challenged by other Christians who cite this command.


4. What about Self Defense, and other Contexts?

This commandment certainly does not preclude one from going to the authorities, especially to present a case about persecution for doing good because of an inward hope, (1 Peter 3:15, above).

Perhaps these commands only apply to actions within the context of "for the sake of righteousness / justice". Perhaps this commandment only applies to: "the mission trip to a third world country", or; the "Mission trip across the street", or; "the mission trip upstairs to their spouse".

Or perhaps, this context should apply to every act, which should be for the sake of righteousness / justice.

There are too many scenarios to consider, to show which exceptions should apply, so, the commandment must be addressed "Generally", at first :

Generally, Jesus affirmed that some instructions/commands were too difficult for some, because of the process of spiritual growth, a matter of faith, (like about not having sex, in Matt. 19:12).

The New Testament certainly affirms that in the end, obedience, (such as: keeping kosher, turning the "Other Cheek"), is absolutely a matter of personal faith, conviction, and trust :

That is, even if Jesus's commandment is to be interpreted--without exception, the person trying to obey this, outside of trusting/faith, would actually be sinning.

Rom. 14:23, NASB - 23 But he who doubts is condemned if he eats, because his eating is not from faith; and whatever is not from faith is sin.


5. What if the Authorities Fail?

What if the just person is persecuted, though acting justly/righteously, and appeals to family, friends, their community, police, and courts, yet there is no justice?

Christians often cite Jesus' condemnation of those that neglect justice, as a source of comfort--"heaping coals of fire upon their heads".

For those that Seek Vengeance: this is unsatisfactory, because this is an unfathomable reality--and does nothing to resolve the conflict--now.

For the Merciful: this is not satisfactory, because True Justice is not revenge, or retaliation.

True justice begins with Mercy, James 2:8, wherein those that hurt you have a true change of heart, seek peace, and pursue reconciliation--Justice, through mercy, where healing and restoration is found.

The precept of "Justice through Mercy", (Matt. 6:12-15), is the reason why Jesus' command to "not retaliate" is contextually found associated with his commandment to show mercy--to pray for, and love, and forgive enemies.

Matt. 6:14-15, NASB - “For if you forgive men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. 15 But if you do not forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive your trespasses.

From Matt. 18:23-35 - Those who forgive, are forgiven.

James 2:13, NASB - For judgment will be merciless to one who has shown no mercy; mercy triumphs over judgment.

It is a thought-provoking concept that Mercy, non-retaliation, can be the Justice, (and the judge), that brings true justice, conviction, rehabilitation, healing, and restoration.

The hard part, of course, is the mind boggling cost--and whether the Cross is considered sufficient.

  • Thank you for your response! This is perhaps the most thorough response, yet several issues remain: 1) What is meant by 'righteousness' or 'righteousness sake'? Are we referring to 'right standing' or 'right position'? I believe clarity on this issue would vastly improve it-and perhaps a "checkmark". :>) – Tau Jun 9 '15 at 23:54
  • @Tau, (A.) Please feel free to post an edit regarding "right standing/right position", I am not certain how it applies. (B.) HOWEVER, I disagree with injecting the issues of "Right Standing" and "Right Position" into this context--the Greek and Hebrew words, "(δίκαιος, צַדִּיק)--literally mean "Just", or "observant of morality/law". (C.) For the definition of "Righteous" check out: hermeneutics.stackexchange.com/questions/1445/… ... It is a very limited conversation, but the answer posted partially reflects my view. – elika kohen Jun 10 '15 at 0:31
  • "* Because of the text's context, the commandment certainly cannot be interpreted as, "Do not Oppose Evil", but rather it should be interpreted as How NOT to Oppose Evil*." Yes! "The issue of "Justice and Mercy" is why Jesus' command to "not retaliate" is contextually found, juxtaposed with his commandment to show mercy, and pray for them." – Tau Jun 10 '15 at 1:24
  • @Tau, I highlighted the portion you pointed out in your last comment. I have no problem at all if you want to edit it. I will let it sit, now. I tend to OCD on the edits ... Thanks for the constructive feedback. – elika kohen Jun 10 '15 at 5:52
4

Here is an answer extracted and slightly edited from my article, "Can Christians be Hardass?" For a fuller version, please see that article.

Jesus is being provocative to challenge old laws and attitudes

To get the full impact of Jesus' words in Matthew 5:38-42, it helps to realize that when he said, "You have heard that it was said, 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth,'" he was not merely referring to social customs; he was quoting from Scripture. Not once, but three times in the Hebrew Scriptures (Exodus 21:22–24; Leviticus 24:17–22; Deuteronomy 19:15–21) the ancient "Law of Retaliation" is given as a commandment from God.

In other words, in saying this, Jesus is directly contradicting the Scriptures and the long established customs that were sacred to his audience and their religious leaders.

That's provocative!

The Law of Retaliation does involve a certain kind of rough justice. It can even be seen as a moderating principle: without such a law, many people would do much greater damage to those who have hurt them, causing a vicious circle of revenge and counter-revenge. As a principle of rough justice, it has been practiced in many cultures since ancient times, and even continues to be practiced in some societies and communities right up to the present.

However, Jesus wished to lift society up to a higher level. He advocated a new, more spiritual, and more enlightened approach to the ancient problem of evil and crime. It's not so much that he was contradicting Scripture as that he was saying that it was time for humankind to move toward a higher law. When humanity moves to a higher level, some of the laws that were designed for earlier and less enlightened societies can drop away.

But old laws and customs don't die easily. Jesus had to make a big impression to even cause a dent in the old, well-established idea of retaliatory justice. That's one reason that in the Sermon on the Mount he went to the opposite extreme, advocating a form of pacifism and non-retaliation that was in stark contrast to the ancient Law of Retaliation that he sought to uproot and replace with more enlightened principles.

Jesus was providing new tools for our toolbox to use in dealing with evil

As any carpenter, plumber, or electrician knows, you need more than one tool to get most jobs done. If all you have is a hammer, how can you drill a hole or paint a wall?

Life throws many different situations at us. The more "tools" we have in our spiritual toolbox, the better we’ll be able to handle all those situations.

When Jesus says, "Don't resist evil" and "Turn the other cheek," it doesn't necessarily mean that's the best thing to do in every situation. If that's what he had meant, why did he say that he came not to bring peace, but a sword? And why did he himself resist evil many times, on one occasion even using a literal, physical weapon (a whip) to combat an injustice?

Put in the context of Jesus' entire life and teaching, the message is not that we must give in to evil and let it roll over us. Rather, Jesus is telling us that in some cases turning the other cheek and not resisting evil is actually a much more effective means of dealing with evil.

Non-resistance especially applies to milder and one-time offenses

Consider the examples Jesus gave when saying not to resist evil:

  • Getting slapped on the cheek
  • Getting sued for your shirt
  • Getting forced to walk a mile with someone
  • Being asked for money or a loan

Notice that all of these examples are of offenses that are probably one-time events. (Being "forced to go one mile" refers to an ancient Roman practice whereby a Roman soldier could force one of the locals to carry his heavy backpack for up to a mile.) And while they could be a serious insult or inconvenience, they are not likely to be life-threatening. In other words, Jesus' examples of when to "turn the other cheek" were for relatively minor offenses, not for major, ongoing assault and abuse.

In such cases, Jesus is saying, resisting or retaliating is not the best way to deal with the situation.

  • If someone slaps you on the cheek and you slap them back, the most likely result is a big fight, in which everybody loses.
  • If you’re having a dispute about something minor, like a shirt, is it really worth going to the courts and duking it out there? The only winners will be the lawyers!
  • If a soldier points his sword (or gun) at you and orders you to carry his backpack for a mile, how smart is it to say "No"?!?
  • If a friend asks you for a few bucks, sometimes just giving the money is the best thing to do.

But Jesus' teaching also goes beyond mere convenience and expediency. If someone slights or slaps us, the expected response is that we will try to get back at them. What if we don't? When we react to rude and thoughtless people in ways they don’t expect, sometimes it causes them to stop and think!

Consider an ancient Roman soldier who is used to having all the locals hate and fear him, and grumble unwillingly when he exercises his right to force them to carry his pack for a mile. What if one day, instead of cursing and groaning, one of them not only carries the pack cheerfully, but when the mile is up, says, "Here, let me carry it for you another mile"? Of course, the soldier might just say, "What an idiot!" But there's a pretty good chance he'll have something new to think about. What sort of person does that? Can I be happy even in the face of mistreatment and injustice?

In short, Jesus is telling us that if someone hurts or insults us, instead of responding in the standard retaliatory fashion, try responding in a surprising way! Try doing something nice for the person instead, and see if the whole situation can be turned from negative to positive.

Doing so also means that instead of just reacting to others and therefore being controlled by others, we are taking matters into our own hands. We are taking specific, well-thought-out actions of our own in order to achieve a specific result: taking an evil, hurtful situation and turning it into a good and constructive situation for everyone involved.

Jesus taught and demonstrated resistance against sustained, systemic evil

However . . .

  • What if you turn the other cheek, and your attacker slaps you silly, then comes back the next day and beats you to a pulp?
  • What if you hand over your shirt and coat, and the person you give them to proceeds to strip you naked, and steals all the clothes in your closet, too?
  • What if you are being subjected to ongoing oppression, and being forced into a lifetime of slave labor?
  • What if you lend your friend a few bucks, and your friend keeps coming back week after week, asking and begging for more and more money, and even stealing money from you?

Are you still supposed to turn the other cheek?

No. Christianity does not mean you have to make yourself into a doormat, or meekly bend over and take a hiding from anyone who wants a piece of you. When it comes to sustained, ongoing evil, a more active response is called for.

When Jesus was faced with the long-established tradition of merchants making big profits from the prescribed religious practices of the people, he drove them out of the temple with a whip.

When Jesus was faced with an entrenched group of religious leaders who were abusing and misleading the people while building up wealth and power for themselves, he engaged in a fierce verbal battle with them that ultimately cost him his life.

When we are faced with ongoing, systemic evil, that is when Jesus "did not come to bring peace, but a sword." That is when it is time to "put on the whole armor of God" (Ephesians 6:13-17) and engage in an active battle to right wrongs, defeat injustice, and replace it with justice both for ourselves and for others.

When faced with ongoing evil and abuse, it is not time for Christians to bend over and take it. It is time for true Christians to be hardass for as long as it takes to resist and overcome that evil.

Yet as Jesus says, this should never be done in order to retaliate. It should be done for definite, positive reasons, aiming at a good result. It should be done out of love and respect not only for ourselves and those we are defending from evil, but also for the enemies who are perpetrating the evil. It should be done, not to get back at the offenders and hurt them, but so that what is just and right can prevail. It should be done so that both we and those we love can live in peace, protected from those who would harm us.

"Loving our enemies" is much more complex than just being nice to them. Sometimes it means preventing them from doing the harm they intend to do.

  • Thank you for your response! Jesus's teaching in Matt. 5:39 must be taken in context with the rest of His teachings to understand the true import of this passage. Chasing the moneychangers out of the Temple with a whip of cords does not appear congruous with "Resist not evil". But the point is well taken that He is calling us to live by a higher Law-which only grace can cause us to fulfill. – Tau May 31 '15 at 11:36
  • 1
    Very Good Answer! – Malachi Jun 8 '15 at 13:57
  • @Lee (A.) Your interpretation contradicts Jesus' command, "Love as I have loved, lay down your life for your friend." (B.) It contradicts Jesus' declaration to Peter in the Garden, "the one who lives by the sword with die by the sword." (C.) It contradicts how the Early Church understood Jesus' commandment, Stephen, persecuted Christians, etc... The Martyrdom and Persecution of the Christians were not "Minor Offenses". – elika kohen Jun 9 '15 at 16:59
  • @e.s.kohen Well then, Jesus must be contradicting himself. It doesn't work to over-simplify Jesus' teaching and example. – Lee Woofenden Jun 9 '15 at 20:53
  • Lee. (A.) This is not christianity.stackexchange.com ... We don't really care about the doctrine, just what the texts say. (B.) If there is a contradiction in the interpretation--that is a question for priests. :) (C.) Interpreting a text, by that author, in its given context--at that time, is what we try to do; (D.) How people interpret it today--is a whole different issue, (I tried to apply the contexts of military combat, and domestic abuse issues below--which is problematic); – elika kohen Jun 9 '15 at 20:56
2

The NASB translates Matthew 5:39 as follows:

"But I say to you, do not resist an evil person; but whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also."

Rather than translating "resist not evil," the NASB translates "do not resist an evil person." This makes eminently good sense, since verses 40-42 are obviously talking about real people, not just generic evil.

As for "turning the other cheek" as a way of not resisting an evil person, Jesus used the words right cheek deliberately. Here's why: When a person slaps you on your right cheek, chances are he is using his right hand to do the slapping, since most people are right handed.

When a right-handed person slaps someone on the right cheek, he executes the slap with the back of his hand, not the palm. The expression "back-handed compliment" is really an insult disguised as a compliment. In like manner, a back-handed slap indicates the person doing the slapping is demonstrating his contempt for, and his supposed superiority to, his victim.

When the victim then gives the perpetrator his left cheek, the victim is saying in effect,

"You think you're superior to me. Well I know you're not, and to prove it I'll give my left cheek to you as well, so you can give me a proper slap in anger. Now, I ask you, who is the superior human being, you or me?"

In other words, a Christian is so secure in who he is and whose he is that he can show he is not fazed by his enemy's attempt to treat him with contempt. When an enemy gives him a back-handed slap, the Christian demonstrates his moral and ethical superiority by allowing his enemy to slap him a second time.

Are Jesus' words, then, an indication of uniformity, such that his disciples cannot be soldiers and bear arms against their country's enemies? No. Jesus was not talking about an enemy combatant in war; rather, he was talking about a non-Christian who takes a disliking to a Christian and demonstrates his dislike--or hatred--by attempting to shame the Christian with a back-handed slap.

Does Jesus require every disciple who is drafted into the armed forces of his or her country to become a combatant? No, I don't think so. Had Jesus been a conscientious objector to the military in general and to war in particular, would Luke under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit have included the following exchange between John the Baptizer and some soldiers?

Then some soldiers asked him, "And what should we do?" He replied, "Don't extort money and don't accuse people falsely--be content with your pay."

John did not "go off" on a tirade about the evils of war and the military establishment; rather, he told that particular segment of the crowds who listened to his preaching not to abuse their power--and also not to whine about how low their wages were. Practical advice indeed, and not just for soldiers!

ADDENDUM

The "Sermon on the Mount" (from which Matthew 5:29 is taken) was Jesus' way of spelling out the ground rules for the king's subjects in the Kingdom of Heaven on earth. By Jesus' time, the 612 commandments of Moses' Law had been supplemented and sometimes supplanted by orally transmitted laws and commentaries on those laws. The Tanakh (OT) would always remain important, but law-keeping became more complicated as the oral traditions were codified in the Midrash and the Talmud (a combination of the Gemara and Mishnah).

When Jesus came on the scene, then, he had to refocus his audience’s attention not only onto the letter of Moses’ Law but also its spirit. A familiar iteration in Jesus’ Sermon was,

”You have heard it was said . . . , but I say to you . . ..”

In great economy of expression, Jesus re-interpreted some of the commands in the Torah in a way which was more in line with the two most important commandments; namely, to love God with all one’s heart, soul, mind, and strength, and then to love one’s neighbor as oneself.

The Old Testament law about “an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth” was a good law for its day. The tendency of human nature, both then and now, is to take off someone’s head for having knocked out one of your teeth. By authoring a commandment by which “the punishment fit the crime,” Moses in his day made a valuable contribution to the concept of fairness.

Jesus’ interpretation of the “eye for eye” commandment went to the very heart of what showing restraint is all about; namely, forgoing resistance for the sake of love—even for an unbeliever or neighbor who persecutes you. “An impossible standard” you say. Yes, but God has forgiven a great debt for all of us, even when we were helpless, ungodly, sinners, and God’s enemies (Romans 5:6-10). How, then, can we refuse to extend grace and mercy to our enemies and persecutors?

  • Hi Don, and thank you for your response! Your last paragraph would probably be best stated in a comment, otherwise I agree that Jesus is not purposefully saying not to resist any evil, but the person who does evil towards you, in your presentation of the gospel. Could you offer some other passages that would clarify what context Jesus is refering to when He says,"Resist not evil"? Thank you! – Tau May 31 '15 at 4:54
  • @Tau: I've included an addendum to my answer by which I attempt to contextualize some of Jesus' teachings in the Sermon on the Mount, including his teaching on not resisting an evil person. – rhetorician Jun 1 '15 at 3:37
  • @e.s.Kohen: Thanks for the corrections. My information came from a old set of notes of mine which were not by any means what you would call scholarly! Don – rhetorician Jun 11 '15 at 2:36
2

Jesus said, “Do not resist one who is evil. But if any one strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also....” Matt. 5:38-39 Here, the Greek word translated as “resist” (anthistemi) means to actively oppose, retaliate, rebel, resist. The Greek New Testament has inserted immediately above these verses the subtitle, “Teaching about Retaliation.”

Some Christians interpret these words of Jesus to mean that Jesus condemns any form of self defense.

Christian scholars in another camp do not believe Jesus was teaching to turn the other cheek in virtually all circumstances. They point out that the expression “to strike on the right side of the face” is a Jewish idiom that describes a mild physical insult, similar to the way challenges to duels were made in later societies.

Other Christians wrestle with the quote and consider other words and actions of Jesus and his disciples.

Jesus himself did not submit but stood up and challenged the high priest during questioning; and Jesus did not “turn the other cheek” when he was smitten by an officer or member of the Sanhedren for his words and actions. John 18:22-24

Jesus himself became angry, made a whip of cords, and physically drove the money-changers and those who were selling animals for sacrifice out of the temple, poured out the coins of the money-changers and overturned their tables. John 2:13-17

Jesus himself approved of self defense. Jesus revealed to his disciples the future hostility they would face and said, “‘And let him who has no sword sell his mantle and buy one’... And they said, ‘Look, Lord, here are two swords.’ And he said to them, ‘It is enough.’.” Luke 22:36-38

Jesus recognized that physical protection of one’s friends was an act of great love when he himself said, “Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends.” John 15:14

When the centurion came to Jesus and asked Jesus to heal his servant, saying, “I am not worthy to have you come under my roof; but only say the word and my servant will be healed,” Jesus granted the request and “marveled,” saying, “Truly, not even in Israel have I found such faith.” Matt. 8:5-13

When soldiers came to be baptised and asked Jesus, “And we, what should we do?” Jesus replied to them, “Rob no one by violence or by false accusation, and be content with your wages.” Luke 3:14 Neither Jesus nor any of his disciples informed a military convert that he needed to resign from his line of work.

During Jesus' ministry, he refused to be arrested and evaded arrest because God’s timing for Jesus’ death had not yet come. John 8:59 In terms of Jesus’ later allowing himself to be arrested and his personal nonresistance at the cross, Jesus accepted God’s will for him to fulfill his prophetic role as the redemptive lamb of God. Matt. 26-52-56

Jesus never condemned self defense.

The New Testament commends Old Testament warriors for their military acts of faith. Hebrews 11:30-40

In the Old Testament, God is portrayed as the omnipotent warrior-leader of the Israelites who raised up warriors called the “shopetim” (savior-deliverers).

  • 1
    Welcome to BHSE! Consider taking the Tour and learn a little more how this site works. You only presented 1 side; perhaps you felt the 'other side' was adequately answered. In order to answer this question in context, it's important also to focus on what Jesus DID say, along with what He didn't say. Thank you! – Tau Jul 30 '16 at 2:58
-1

By the mercies of God, he nourishes his hope. Lam 3:22-36

let him give his cheek to the one who strikes, and let him be filled with insults. (Lm 3:30 [ESV2011])

Answer: To develop the Christian patience, the faith.

My own translation of Hebrews 12:2

fixing our eyes on Jesus, the originator and perfecter of faith, who for the joy that was set before him resolved himself to the cross, disregarding the affront, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. Hb 12:2

Koulaki Megalo Etymologiko

[![enter image description here][1]][1]

Liddell & Scott, Greek-English Lexicon

ὑπό

C.WITH ACCUS. II.of subjection, ποιεῖσθαι ὑπὸ σφᾶς id=Thuc., etc.

Georg Autenrieth's Homeric Lexicon

μένω c. c. acc. & inf., wait “οὐκ ἔμειν᾽ ἐλθεῖν τράπεζαν νυμφίαν” P. 3.16

The word ὑπέμεινεν in the context implies "waiting patiently", or "submitted unto", or "resolved unto" - the cross ...

​But not a hair of your head shall by any means perish. ​By your patient endurance you shall possess your souls. (Lc 21:18-19 [EMTV])

  • Welcome to Biblical Hermeneutics SE, thanks for contributing! Be sure to take our site tour to learn more about us. We're a little different from other SEs. Our community looks for answers to reflect a good degree of research and references. Typically, we like answers that cite scholarly references and/or explain how your interpretation arises from the text. Don't just tell us what you know, tell us how you know it. – James Shewey Aug 2 '16 at 4:10

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.