Somewhat of a side issue jumped out at me.
I have never seen any discussion of whether the apostles’ possession of swords was legal under Roman law.
It would seem very odd of the Romans to allow restive subject populations to carry arms freely.
I have never seen any discussion of whether the apostles’ possession of swords was legal under Roman law.
It would seem very odd of the Romans to allow restive subject populations to carry arms freely.
I have wondered about that too. As long as you paid your taxes, paid lip service to Caesar and kept the peace, the Romans were not too oppressive? Carrying swords must have been permitted. The Roman soldiers in the garden apparently did not confiscate the swords or arrest the apostles. I guess their concept of arms control was limited to hitting what you swung at.
I do know that any Roman Citizen {who wasn’t a slave} could possess and use a sword; the Apostle Paul is an example of one who was both a Jew and a Roman Citizen so some of the 12 could have been Citizens and therefore owning a sword would be permissible.