Skip to content

Add your phone number?

Optional. Nothing is sent unless you choose it.

The Historic Faith
Sign in

Jumpstarter 4 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion
Question 4
When Dean read Jesus’ words about nonresistance and enemy-love (turn the other cheek, love enemies, pray for persecutors), he asked, “What if he meant those things?” What would early Christians have assumed about those commands, and what assumptions do modern Christians often bring that make those commands feel optional, symbolic, or “not for real life”?
Another way to ask: If Jesus really meant “turn the other cheek” and “love your enemies,” how would early Christians have taken those commands? What beliefs do Christians today bring that make those words seem optional or only symbolic?

Direct Answer Based on Dean’s teaching, early Christians (and later “persecuted/radical churches”) would have assumed Jesus’ commands were meant to be obeyed plainly as a “design for life.” Modern assumptions often treat Christianity as beliefs in the head—so Jesus’ hard commands become “meditation,” symbolism, or ideals that can be set aside for normal life.

Support from Transcript:

  • Dean reads Jesus’ words: “resist not evil… turn… the other… love your enemy… pray for them… that you may be the children of your Father.”
  • His crisis question: “What if he meant those things?” and he says his “entire world was contrary to the teachings of Jesus Christ.”
  • He contrasts his earlier “sinner’s prayer” view with Scripture becoming “a blueprint… a model for me.”
  • He says the Anabaptist/Christ-following difference is Jesus (by the Spirit) saying, “I mean it.”
  • He describes the Word not as “something that just makes you feel guilty… and feel better,” but “a design for life… a whole way.”
  • He generalizes: any group that opens the Bible and says, “I think he means it,” becomes a “radical and persecuted” church.
Discussion Follow-ups What modern “categories” (politics, career, self-defense, comfort) pressure Christians to treat Jesus’ words as ideals rather than commands? How do you tell when you’re using interpretation to avoid obedience?