But what about the swords?

One of our "Uncommoners" had a question last week about an obscure and difficult passage in the Gospel according to Luke. The passage reads:

And he (Jesus) said to them, "When I sent you out with no moneybag or knapsack or sandals, did you lack anything?" They said, "Nothing." He said to them, "But now let the one who has a monybag take it, and likewise a knapsack. And let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one. For I tell you that this Scripture must be fulfilled in me: 'And he was numbered with the transgressors.' For what is written about me has its fulfillment." And they said, "Look, Lord, here are two swords." And he said to them,"It is enough" (Luke 22:35-38).

This is troubling because it seems like Jesus is telling His disciples to now take up swords when previously His contrary teaching was "blessed are the peacemakers," and "love your enemy," and most pointedly, "all who take the sword will perish by the sword" (Matt. 5:9,44; 26:52). How could Jesus tell His disciples to now "sell his cloak and buy" a sword if "those who take the sword will perish by the sword?"

Several interpretations have been offered:

1. The first (and most ridiculous) is that Jesus is not telling His disciples to get a sword, but he really means knife, which would be a provision for cutting meat on their journeys. This is probably held because there is no New Testament reference to a knife. However, later in the passage, one of them draws a sword and cuts off the right ear of the high priest's servant with a sword. It was not a knife used for cutting meat to eat. I am weary of any interpretation of the Bible that claims when the Bible says, "x," it really means, "y." Where the Bible says, "wine" it means "wine," not "grape juice." Where the Bible says "donkey," it means "donkey," not "horse." Where the Bible says "sword," it means "sword," not "knife." Believing that "x" really means "y" opens the Bible up to dangerous speculation and complete uncertainty, because anything could mean anything else.

2. An interpretation that has a greater following takes Jesus' words literally, but strips them of context. Proponents of this view take Jesus to mean that when He sent them out, their provisions were cared for. But now, things are changing and its okay to defend themselves because things are going to get rough. One commentator took this so far as to say that Jesus was encouraging the disciples to defend themselves at any cost, because he encouraged them to sell their cloaks if need be. This interpretation takes the word sword to be a literal sword, which is good, but besides contradicting the context, it dangeroulsy contradicts Jesus' teaching about turning the other cheek, being blessed for being persecuted, and not repaying evil with evil.

3. A third way to look at it is to take Jesus' teaching on taking the sword in a spiritualized sense. The sword is to be taken figurativley as in, "Your future will be difficult, you need to muster up all the strength that you can, take upon yourselves the sword of the spirit..." This is a widely held view to make sense of a difficult passage and seems to reconcile this teaching with passages in Paul's letters without contradicting Jesus' teaching on being peacemakers. The problem with this view is that it leaves too many holes in the context and does not explain Jesus anger with talk of the sword.

4. The way to look at this passage is to keep it in context. The Passover supper has ended and the disciples begin a debate about who would be the greatest in the Kingdom. Something was learned from Jesus' example because Peter steps up to declare that he was "ready to go with (Jesus) both to prison and to death" (v. 33). Jesus begins to scold Peter and the other disciples because of their lack of trust in God to continue to provide for them. Their view was that they would advance God's kingdom on their own, in their own way. This is why when the disciples gather two swords, Jesus words are "It is enough," as if to say, "Stop this!" This is reinforced after the disciple cuts off the servants ear and Jesus says, "No more of this" (v. 51). His word is not an encouragement to take up swords because everything is changing. He is challenging their view in how the kingdom would be advanced. This keeps the context of the passage in place and doesn't contradict Jesus' teaching about being peacemakers who trust in God's provision.

Conclusion:
We must be careful that our interpretations of Scripture are not efforts to rescue Jesus from the things He said, or cramming HIs teaching into our own agendas. It is natural to want to defend ourselves, which is why Jesus' teaching on peacemaking is so poignant. We must remember that we are to be a people of another kingdom and of another King, under whose rule the first are last and the last are first. The Kingdom of God advances because the guiltless One took upon Himself the sin of the world. Jesus emphasizes this in saying that "what is written about me has its fulfillment." He would not allow the disicples to interfere in God's plan for the death of Jesus.