Jesus and the Swords

tagged: Bible, Les Puryear, Theology

Jesus and the Swords

Here’s another passage of scripture which I have some difficulty. I would love to hear your thoughts.

35 And He said to them, “When I sent you without money bag, knapsack, and sandals, did you lack anything?” So they said, “Nothing.” 36 Then He said to them, “But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one. 37 For I say to you that this which is written must still be accomplished in Me: ‘And He was numbered with the transgressors.’ For the things concerning Me have an end.” 38 So they said, “Lord, look, here are two swords.” And He said to them, “It is enough.” Luke 22:35-38 (NKJV)

Questions I have about this passage:
1. Why does Jesus instruct His disciples to buy a sword?
2. When the disciples said they have two swords and Jesus replied “It is enough,” what did He mean?

Roger Ferrell says:

November 8, 2007 at 7:29 am

Les,
A couple possible answers:

The Reformation Study Bible notes say that Jesus did not mean this literally, but was implying that times would be difficult for the disciples in the future and that persecution was coming. Then when they take him literally, he cuts them off, as in “that is enough of that kind of talk.”

Another view: having a sword did not mean you planned to use it. Traveling with a highly visible sword or other weapon kept theives and troublemakers at bay. So it was wise to bring one along if you were traveling.

In Luke 22:49 and in John 18 we find the story of Jesus’ arrest in which Peter draws a sword and attacks a servant of the high priest named Malchus, giving Jesus the opportunity to miraculously heal Malchus, proving that he has supernatural power. This was necessary so that those who were arresting Jesus would be accountable for knowing he had power from God, to teach His disciples how to respond to persecution, and that those present might bear witness to his power and nature. None of this would have been possible without Peter bringing along a sword. So in that sense, two swords was “enough” for this to happen.

Les Puryear says:

November 8, 2007 at 11:55 am

Roger,

Thanks for your comment. The first view is not very compelling to me. The second view seems closer to the right view, as least for me.

Les

David Rogers says:

November 10, 2007 at 11:38 am

Les,

Good questions.

I personally am baffled as to what application for us this Scripture may have for us today. Have you done any investigation as to what other Bible commentators may have to say on this?

November 10, 2007 at 1:11 pm

David,

I have read several commentaries and no one seems to truly address the issue of the swords.

cb scott says:

November 11, 2007 at 1:17 pm

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Swords are for those of us who will use them to protect others with from those who use them wrongly. You should thank God that some of us use them well and far better than those who would use them to do harm to you and your families.

Think what you want, but that is what that passage and others is about in the Word of God. It is necessary for the Christian man to be willing to defend the defensless, the weak, the young, the old, any woman and any child.

I have never looked for a war, but I was and am always willing with sword or whatever it takes to travel whenever and whereever if necesssary and I thank God for gifting me in those areas along with others like me. Cuss us if you will, but when you need us it seems you are always glad to see us.