It seems that there are many misconceptions about non-violence. Opponents and those who dismiss it outright tend to gravitate toward scenarios where it would seem to be impossible to not retaliate in a physical manner.
Often the questions focus on how it can’t be done rather than on how to truly be non-violents.

Misconceptions are thus:

1. That non-violence is passive. Non-violence does not mean that you will be chanting and burning incense in a corner while your family is being attacked.
2. That non-violence is unrealistic. However, it has been successful hundreds of times in effecting revolution and peace.
3. That non-violence is anti-american. The success and legacy of those involved in the civil rights movement should effectively lay to rest that claim.

What is established is this:

1. It is Biblical. We see the prophets lay forth the vision of peace, of the lion and the lamb and the sword being beaten into plowshares.
2. It is the way of Christ. He could have deployed an army at Calvary exacting military retribution for the oppression of His people. Yet He did not. Instead, He humbled Himself, even to the point of the cross.
3. It is largely untried. Part of the reason this conversation is so difficult for us is that true meekness is not something that is instilled in us. We are taught the virtue of pride. We gossip. We use our tongues as weapons against other.

For the sake of this individual post, I’d like to take aim at the first misconception. Hear this, clearly. Non-violence is not doing nothing.
It requires more creativity and action than violence does.
This is one of the reasons that I shy away from use of the word pacifism. It sounds to close to passive.
However, Jesus shows us the creative ramifications of non-violence (HT: Walter Wink; I’m relying heavily on his scholarship)

There are a lot of things that Jesus does not address in His teachings: abortion, homosexuality, instrumental music, the role of women, etc.
But He does talk quit a bit about non-violence. To wit:

In Matthew 5: 39, He tells us “Do not resist the one who is evil.” This is a progression of the laws of retaliation that were prominent in the Torah that proclaimed an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth. It’s important to note that laws of retaliation were prescribed through the courts, not individual vengeance.
It’s important that we understand what Jesus means by “resist.” The Greek word is anthistemi and doesn’t really mean resist. Anti–against. Histemi has a noun form that means violent rebellion. As a matter of fact, that is how it is rendered most times in the Greek OT. It refers to armed revolt.
So, what Jesus is saying is not to resist evil. Of course, we are supposed to. What He is saying is not to resist evil by lashing back with your own violent acts. It has also been translated “be hostile towards” or “rebel.”
Anthistemi was a military term. It’s used in Ephesians 6 in regards to taking up the full armor of God. It’s also used to mean insurrection and rioting in the NT.
Josephus used this term for military conflict.
So, what Jesus is truly saying is, “Don’t strike back against evil.” Violence is not the answer to violence. The scholars version says “Don’t react violently against the one who is evil.”
The Good News Bible says “Do not take revenge on someone who wrongs you.”

But what are we to do:

Jesus says to turn the other cheek. Jesus says if someone strikes you on the right cheek, offer the left. Why the right cheek?
Again, Wink gives us tremendous insight. The left hand was used in the first century for unclean tasks. The only way that you could hit someone on their right cheek with your right hand would be to backhand them.
It was the greatest insult that could be given in that culture. You could be prosecuted in both Jewish and Roman courts for such an offense. According to the Mishnah the fine for backhanding someone was 100 times greater than hitting them with your fist.
This is a personal affront mean to bring about embarrasment and humiliation. A backhand would by employed to establish domination over another.
Jesus says, “give them the other cheek as well.” In other words, rob them of their power over you. Take away the indignity by embarrasing them.
It’s an emphatic statement that “you cannot diminish my worth. I am just as valuable a person as you are.”
It’s not fighting back. It’s turning the tables completely.
Without violence.

Then Jesus says “Hey, you are being sued for your tunic, go ahead and give them your cloak as well.”

Wink says,

Only the poorest of the poor would have nothing but an outer garment to give as collateral for a loan. Jewish law strictly required its return every evening at sunset, for that was all the poor had in which to sleep.

To do what Jesus said would be to strip off all of their clothes and leave the court without a stitch of clothing. This is civil protest at its finest.
Take what you want, but you won’t rob me of dignity.

Then Jesus says that if you are compelled to go one mile, go ahead and go the second. If a Roman soldier try to require a Jew to go more than a mile, he would face severe penalties.
If you go the second mile what are the implications?
–That you are stronger than the Roman soldier?
–That you are possibly being forced, inviting investigation of the Roman official?

Again, the tables are turned.

What we see in each of these scenarios is that the non-violent approach is not a do-nothing way of living. It is an active, creative way of turning the tables back upon your attacker.

If someone backhands you, the human impulse is to strike back. But instead, expose them for the aggressor that they are, maintaining your own dignity.
If someone sues you needlessly, don’t sue them back. Instead look for creative ways to establish your independence for usurious laws.
If someone forces you to work against your will, turn it to your will.

Non-violence IS harder than violence. It involves more creativity, more action, more diligence.
It involves standing your ground by rising above your attacker.