question pick up the sword or not?

for many different reasons and i read many explanations, but i think its simple.

Luk 22:36 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.
Luk 22:37 For I say to you that this which is written must still be accomplished in Me: ‘[b]And He was numbered with the transgressors.[/b]’ For the things concerning Me have an end.”

Jesus had previously said and preached that blessed are the persecuted, rejoice ect ect, was he thinking of selfdefence? no i dont think so, then they would have had 12 swords, But two is enough, and i think its possible so he could be numbered with the transgressors.
Jesus had low faith at this time? he could not trust God? I dont believe that, but seeing the numerous other passages in all four gospels where christ tells us to rejoice in persecution and saying we shall be hated by all men ect ect.

no i think so he could be numbered with the transgressors, those who rob and kill and steal have swords.

i dont think he suddenly changed all these doctrines and stopped trusting God for a mere sword or two. those who slay the sheep has swords, and we are counted as sheep for the slaughter.

but i am not sure :-) just my thoughts on this really fast i am sure many others can give you more insight from both sides of the thing.

God bless you

Well, let's look at Scripture.

John 13v3, 'Jesus knowing...'

I just want to pause there. Jesus knew what was going to take place.

The verse continues '...that the Father had given all things into His hands, and that He had come from the God and was going to God,

In the same chapter, Jesus told Peter that he would deny Him 3 times.

Matt 26v31, '...I will strike the Shepherd and the sheep of the flock will be scattered'

All that took place was in line with prophecy.

Peter did use a sword to cut of someone's ear in the garden, John 18v10.

In essence, there is self-defence, and there is persecution, and they do differ.

People are always saying the Bible contradicts itself, ignoring the fact that prophecy has been fulfilled time and time again, and no amount of self-deception will change that.

Also, there are Bible commentaries that you could look at that would help.

Intresting subject.

God bless.

bible4life

This is a question that many of us disagree on, in general. I am not bothered by those who disagree with me, as long as they are living based on what they believe the Word of God to teach on this matter.

My view is that it is clear from Luke 22:38 (and other passages) that Jesus did not forbid the carrying of a sword (weapon) to the Christian:

And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough.

After Jesus told the eleven disciples that the two swords were enough, they carried these two swords to the Garden of Gethsemane where Peter used one to cut of the servant's ear. After this was done, Jesus told Peter in John 18:11b:

Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?

Of course, Jesus' focus was on being obedient to the Father, but He also told Peter to put the sword into the sheath; He did not tell Peter to cast it away. The assumption would be that the disciple carrying the other sword never drew his.

For the sake of brevity, here are some other short Bible verses on the subject:

Ex 15:3 The LORD is a man of war: the LORD is his name.

Num 32:6b Shall your brethren go to war, and shall ye sit here?

Rom 13:4b he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

My point is that, as Jesus taught, we are not to live by the physical sword, but rather the spiritual one: the Gospel. The gospel was not intended to cut off the hearer's ear, but rather to stab the heart (spiritually). There is not some great biblical teaching that we are to take up a sword, neither is there one to cast it away; but rather a practical lesson that there is, as Solomon put it:

Qoh 3:3a A time to kill, and a time to heal

I will protect myself, my family, and my country, as long as I can best discern that it is the will of God. If I see that God guides me to be taken captive and give my testimony before rulers, then so be it; but there are many of Jesus' (and other biblical) teachings that make self defense practical, as well as passivity:

Prov 17:12 Let a bear robbed of her whelps meet a man, rather than a fool in his folly.

Matt 24:43 But know this, that if the goodman of the house had known in what watch the thief would come, he would have watched, and would not have suffered his house to be broken up.

Luke 22:36b he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

History has shown that the gospel has flourished under the sword of enemies (first century Romans, modern-day Africans), as well as under the defense of the sword (Wesley, Spurgeon). The sword is what it is: a tool. The evil lies in the man who uses it to do evil. But as said earlier, the one who bears the sword to bring justice to those who do evil (quoting the inspired words of the Apostle Paul from Romans 13:4) is:

"the minister of God to thee for good."

The meaning for the Greek word in this context is for cutting up animals etc.

Greg, I never heard this definition before. Could you venture an explanation why this was so?

ginnyrose

Letsgetbusy,

Good comments.

bible4life,

I have been reading through the thread

We Need to Talk About Peace by pastorfrin

https://www.sermonindex.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=15338&forum=35&start=260&viewmode=flat&order=0

here is a post from the above thread that may help with your question.

WAR INCONSISTENT WITH THE
RELIGION OF JESUS CHRIST

by David Low Dodge

Part 4

OBJECTIONS ANSWERED

11. Christ told his Apostles to get swords

Objection. Our Lord, just before his crucifixion, commanded his disciples to take swords, and, if any were destitute, to sell their garments and procure them, as they would no longer have his personal presence to protect them. And, as they were to encounter great trials and difficulties, they must, besides relying on providence, take all prudent means for their defense and preservation.

Answer. That our Lord did not direct them to take swords for self-defense is evident because he told them that two were enough, and because the disciples never made any use of them after their Master directed Peter to his away and pronounced a penalty on all who should have recourse to swords afterwards. But the design seems to have been to show by example in the most trying situation where self-defense was justifiable, if in any case, that the use of the sword was utterly prohibited under the gospel economy, and to show the criminality and danger of ever using deadly weapons against mankind afterwards. If Christ’s kingdom had been of this world, then, he tells us, his servants would have fought; but his kingdom being not of this world, the weapons of their warfare were not carnal but spiritual. He therefore rebuked them for their mistaken zeal, healed the wound they made, and forbade the use of the sword.