Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take it, and likewise his scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one. For I say unto you, that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, And he was reckoned among the transgressors: for the things concerning me have an end. And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough.Notice that the disciples think He is speaking literally, and tell Jesus they already have two swords. This is problematic. Are two swords enough to defend the disciples against all the enemies they will eventually face? Nope. And later that night, Peter will use one of those swords to cut off the ear of one of their enemies, and what will Jesus do? He heals His enemy's ear. So when Jesus says "It is enough," He probably is not saying they are enough, the two literal swords. Linguistically, it is just as likely He is saying something more like, we're done talking for now.
(Luke 22:36-38)
Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.We also know He said that the one who lives by the sword will die by the sword. If we rely on the weapons of human might to defend us against our spiritual enemy, we are not equipped to win that fight. Paul says we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities and powers in high places. Yes, we have a duty to protect our families, and sometimes that will involve lethal force. But it is a last resort. The real battle is with the prince of darkness and his minions.
(John 18:36)
FR public bookmarked (not the first time among your own well-considered comments)
And which "two swords" statement some (Rome most notably) wrested as meaning the church ruling over souls without, even if by requiring civil rulers to exterminate theological dissidents, as well as her own. We are still suffering the effects of those called Christians acting contrary to the charter of the church.
My dear Bro SR, I beg to differ with you on your approach regarding the sense of this passage Luke 22:34-38, and that is a matter of interpretation, the hermeneutic. Referring to Wittman :
"Scripture has but one meaning. There is only one primary interpretation to which all context lends itself. It applies directly to those addressed at some specific time indicated, and must have a specific meaning for them. In light of this it can be applied to us under similar conditions which exist relative to those conditions prevailing in the context. There may be several secondary applications, but there is only one primary interpretation -- one specific, intended meaning" (See Ex. 15:26) (Wittman, F., "Here's How! The Bible Can Make Sense To You Today!," Morris Publishing, Kearney, NE (2000) P. 27; see also Wittman, F., "How To Mature In Christ -- First Stage: Babes," Morris Publishing, Kearney, NE (1997) p. 11).
It is beyond the shadow of a doubt that in these verses Jesus' language is literal, but because of the immediacy of the situation in which purchasing more swords is not possible, therefore His command (the verbs here are aorist tense, active voice, imperative mode) is to apply to the future of the Disciples beyond His cross-death.
This is not to wholly negate the general thrust of that which you've written, but to insist that Jesus was not speaking figuratively to them in this matter; nor should secondary applications to Christian disciples of today be taken as metaphorical, but straight-forwardly plain literal commands, interpreted literally.
And so concur major commentaries, as follows:
Luke 22:36
---------------
Adam Clarke
He that hath no sword - Bishop Pearce supposes that the word μαχαιραν, sword, has been inserted here from what is said in Lk. 22:38, as it is evident our Lord never intended to make any resistance, or to suffer a sword to be used on the occasion; see Mt. 26:52.
"Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword" (Mat 26:52 AV)
The word stands rather oddly in the passage: the verse, translated in the order in which it stands, is as follows: And he who hath none, let him sell his garment and buy - a sword. Now it is plain that the verb πωληστω, let him buy, may be referred to πηραν a scrip, in the former part of the verse: therefore if, according to the bishop's opinion, the word sword be omitted, the passage may be understood thus: "When I sent you out before, Lk. 10:1, etc., I intended you to continue itinerants only for a few days, and to preach the Gospel only to your country-men; therefore you had but little need of a staff, purse, or scrip, as your journey was neither long, nor expensive; but now I am about to send you into all the world, to preach the Gospel to every creature; and, as ye shall be generally hated and persecuted for my sake, ye shall have need to make every prudent provision for your journey; and so necessary will it be for you to provide yourselves victuals, etc., for your passage through your inhospitable country, that, if any of you have no scrip or wallet, he should sell even his upper garment to provide one." Others, who are for retaining the word sword, think that it was a proverbial expression, intimating a time of great difficulty and danger, and that now the disciples had need to look to themselves, for his murderers were at hand. The reader will observe that these words were spoken to the disciples just before he went to the garden of Gethsemane, and that the danger was now so very near that there could be no time for any of them to go and sell his garment in order to purchase a sword to defend himself and his Master from the attack of the Jewish mob.
Judea was at this time, as we have already noticed, much infested by robbers: while our Lord was with his disciples, they were perfectly safe, being shielded by his miraculous power. Shortly they must go into every part of the land, and will need weapons to defend themselves against wild beasts, and to intimidate wicked men, who, if they found them totally defenceless, would not hesitate to make them their prey, or take away their life. However the matter may be understood, we may rest satisfied that these swords were neither to be considered as offensive weapons, nor instruments to propagate the truth. The genius and spirit of the Christian religion is equally against both. Perhaps, in this counsel of our Lord, he refers to the contention about supremacy: as if he had said, Instead of contending among yourselves about who shall be the greatest, ye have more need to unite yourselves against the common enemy, who are now at hand: this counsel was calculated to show them the necessity of union among themselves, as their enemies were both numerous and powerful.
---------------
Albert Barnes:
And he that hath no sword - There has been much difficulty in understanding why Jesus directed his disciples to arm themselves, as if it was his purpose to make a defense. It is certain that the spirit of his religion is against the use of the sword, and that it was not his purpose to defend himself against Judas. But it should be remembered that these directions about the purse, the scrip, and the sword were not made with reference to his "being taken" in the garden, but with reference "to their future life." The time of the trial in Gethsemane was just at hand; nor was there "time" then, if no other reason existed, to go and make the purchase. It altogether refers to their future life. They were going into the midst of dangers. The country was infested with robbers and wild beasts. It was customary to go armed. He tells them of those dangers - of the necessity of being prepared in the usual way to meet them. This, then, is not to be considered as a specific, positive "command" to procure a sword, but an intimation that great dangers were before them; that their manner of life would be changed, and that they would need the provisions "appropriate to that kind of life." The "common" preparation for that manner of life consisted in money, provisions, and arms; and he foretells them of that manner of life by giving them directions commonly understood to be appropriate to it. It amounts, then, to a "prediction" that they would soon leave the places which they had been accustomed to, and go into scenes of poverty, want, and danger, where they would feel the necessity of money, provisions, and the means of defense. All, therefore, that the passage justifies is:
. . . 1. That it is proper for people to provide beforehand for their wants, and for ministers and missionaries as well as any others.
. . . 2. That self-defense is lawful.
Men encompassed with danger may lawfully "defend" their lives. It does not prove that it is lawful to make "offensive" war on a nation or an individual.
---------------
Marvin Vincent's Word Studies
He that hath no sword, etc - But sword is not governed by hath. It is too far off in the sentence. The meaning is, he that hath not purse or scrip (and is therefore penniless), let him sell his garment and buy a sword.
---------------
Robertson's Word Pictures:
Buy a sword (agorasatō machairan). This is for defence clearly. The reference is to the special mission in Galilee (Lk. 9:1-6; Mk. 6:6-13; Matthew 9:35-11:1). They are to expect persecution and bitter hostility (Jn. 15:18-21). Jesus does not mean that his disciples are to repel force by force, but that they are to be ready to defend his cause against attack. Changed conditions bring changed needs. This language can be misunderstood as it was then.
---------------
Jamieson, Faussett, & Brown:
But now -- that you are going forth not as before on a temporary mission, provided for without purse or scrip, but into scenes of continued and severe trial, your methods must be different; for purse and scrip will now be needed for support, and the usual means of defense.
---------------
Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary:
How unbecoming is the worldly ambition of being the greatest, to the character of a follower of Jesus, who took upon him the form of a servant, and humbled himself to the death of the cross! In the way to eternal happiness, we must expect to be assaulted and sifted by Satan. If he cannot destroy, he will try to disgrace or distress us. Nothing more certainly forebodes a fall, in a professed follower of Christ, than self-confidence, with disregard to warnings, and contempt of danger. Unless we watch and pray always, we may be drawn in the course of the day into those sins which we were in the morning most resolved against. If believers were left to themselves, they would fall; but they are kept by the power of God, and the prayer of Christ. Our Lord gave notice of a very great change of circumstances now approaching. The disciples must not expect that their friends would be kind to them as they had been. Therefore, he that has a purse, let him take it, for he may need it. They must now expect that their enemies would be more fierce than they had been, and they would need weapons. At the time the apostles understood Christ to mean real weapons, but he spake only of the weapons of the spiritual warfare. The sword of the Spirit is the sword with which the disciples of Christ must furnish themselves.
(My Note: Here, MH errs greatly, converting what the disciples clearly and without controversy amongst them or with Jesus understood throughout this after-supper discourse, that He was speaking in plain literal language, and not figurative-literal language, attaining a primary literal interpretation and meaning, for both then and for now as applying to all His genuine followers.)
*********
Contrary to your conception stated above, there is no "or" in the plain sense of Luke 22:36; it can not be at all metaphorical or figurative in intent or in its delivery as a command.
Summing this up, do not forget that the common accepted mode of the disciples was--at one's personal--pleasure, to carry a side-arm of sufficient caliber to be considered a deadly weapon. The absence of any remonstrance for the disciples' possession of such side-arms, even during the most holy initiation of the Eucharist, should be marked by us as being not remarkable. We may also note that a few moments later, Jesus did not scold Peter for having and carrying a sidearm, but only corrected Peter in the use of it. He did not order Peter to get rid of his side-arm, but only to put it back in its place; that is, to merely re-holster it. Whomever of the other disciples bearing the second one was a little more sensitive to the situation, and did not offend by displaying it to the law officers come to arrest and bind the Messiah.
From this, we should also take away the thought that, as an application of Christ's command regarding open or concealed deadly weapons, under control of a Christian owner customarily bearing one, that each ought to have one and be trained in it, and that the presence of them in a church meeting is by law no different than bearing one's sidearm in a Rotary lunch meeting, or to a restaurant, or to a movie theater, or any other such venue not otherwise prohibited by state/local ordinances or signage at the entrance to the proprietor's premises.
However, it is not at all clear that the sending of warriors in the Crusades to win back the Holy Lands seized by the Muslims was a truly Christian project. Nor can it be seen that the employment of destruction and killing by military means in a preemptive strike against Moslem-governed lands absent demonstrable enmity, or to prevent terroristic Islamic attacks against our nation, is ethically or morally acceptable today.
Respectfully --- "I'm a redeemed one" = imardmd1