>>509291479turning the other cheek doesn't mean what most people think it does
It's about clearly identifying what a person's intents are so you can respond accordingly.
The implication is if you are struck, you are being struck with the back of the hand across the cheek.
An insult.
Turning the other cheek is to present the offender with one of three options
1) strike you with the back of their left hand
2) strike you in the face with the back of their right
3) Analogous to 2, strike you with their right using a fist.
In the case of the latter 2, they're aiming to harm you. Respond accordingly. You don't even need to wait for the reply to connect. The hand they use dictates the reply.
In the case of the former, they only intend to slight you. So what. That's between them and God. Brush it off and let the divine authority sort them out.
But all of that is ancient times. None of the context applies today. The PARABOLIC meaning of it can, to the extent that we are still obliged to identify a person's intent, but particularly in western society, the matter starts earlier with words. You don't need to wait for them to start hitting you, even with a limp backhanded slap. If someone is threatening you with words alone, identify their intent. Are they talking shit? Or do they genuinely mean you harm?
How do we distinguish that? you're 170IQ. You figure it out.