What does "Not Peace but the sword" mean?

[Ray the atheist]

Very often, Christians will argue about context.. so maybe the context of the verse I will be quoting isn't a call to violence, after all.

Matthew 10:34 (KJV)

“Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.”

2 Questions:

1. How does this verse accurately represent a message of harmony, mutual love and non-violence that I am told that Jesus was promoting?

2. How does the imagery of a sword suggest "peace"?

[tam]

Peace to you Ray,

Very often, Christians will argue about context.. so maybe the context of the verse I will be quoting isn't a call to violence, after all.

Matthew 10:34 (KJV)

“Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.”

It is most definitely not a call to violence. I am sure you are aware that Christ rebuked Peter for using a sword to strike another person.

“Put your sword back in its place,” [Jesus] said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. Matt 26:52

And one of them struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his right ear. 51But [Jesus] answered, “No more of this!” And He touched the man’s ear and healed him. Luke 22:51

“Put your sword back in its sheath!” [Jesus] said to Peter. “Shall I not drink the cup the Father has given Me?”

And other teachings such as:

But I tell you not to resist an evil person. If someone slaps you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also; Matt 5:39

“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor[a] and hate your enemy.’ 44 But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45 that you may be children of your Father in heaven. Matt 5:43-45


And of course Christ did not Himself use a literal sword to wage war against anyone, and He commanded His disciples to follow His example.

2 Questions:

1. How does this verse accurately represent a message of harmony, mutual love and non-violence that I am told that Jesus was promoting?

There is not going to be harmony on the earth just yet. So I'm not sure who told you that.

2. How does the imagery of a sword suggest "peace"?

The sword is truth.

But this world has a lot of lies in it. Lies that people even prefer over the truth. Lies about the world, and lies we tell ourselves, even about ourselves. Many do not want to hear or to know the truth. Many prefer the lie, and will hate both the truth and the person who spoke it to them.

Christ is the Truth.
The language that He speaks is truth.
Truth is the sword that comes out of His mouth (Rev 19:5).

That is not going to bring peace to this world, however (at least not yet), because this world is a lie (filled with lies, loves lies, promotes lies.) This world is under the power of the Adversary (the one called Satan) who is the father of lies:

You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies. John 8:44

We know that we are of God, and that the whole world is under the power of the evil one. 1 John 5:19

And the great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil and Satan, the deceiver of the whole world. He was hurled to the earth, and his angels with him. Rev 12:9


There is a division between truth and lies. Not peace.


**


We can, however, receive HIS peace (John 14:27), even while in this world.

Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be afraid.




Peace also to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[Mr E]

You are right to consider context, and in a spiritual understanding, it is the logos (word/thought/understanding) of the truth that divides (like a sword) our innermost thoughts and exposing that which was previously hidden inside...

For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any double-edged sword, piercing even to the point of dividing soul from spirit, and joints from marrow; it is able to judge the desires and thoughts of the heart. And no creature is hidden from God, but everything is naked and exposed to the eyes of him to whom we must render an account. (Heb 4)

The context and concept of the sword that Jesus wielded was that of the words (of God) he conveyed through his teachings. He spoke truths that cut to the heart.

[1213]

Very often, Christians will argue about context.. so maybe the context of the verse I will be quoting isn't a call to violence, after all.

Matthew 10:34 (KJV)

“Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.”

2 Questions:

1. How does this verse accurately represent a message of harmony, mutual love and non-violence that I am told that Jesus was promoting?

2. How does the imagery of a sword suggest "peace"?

It depends on what does the sword mean. By what I know, Jesus didn't have physical sword and didn't use a physical sword. But, it can be said that God's word is a sword. That he brought.

For the word of God is living, and powerfully working, and sharper than every two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of both soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge of the thoughts and intentions of the heart;
Heb. 4:12

And the God's word is about peace and love. Unfortunately many people are against it and anyone speaking it, which then leads to conflict and persecution.

[tam]

Peace again to you all,

Just to clarify,

The Word of God is Christ (Rev 19:13.) Translators don't capitalize 'word' in the Hebrews verse, but Christ is the Word of God. The living Word of God (since He is alive.)

[Ray the atheist]

[Replying to tam in post #2]

Very often, Christians will argue about context.. so maybe the context of the verse I will be quoting isn't a call to violence, after all.

Matthew 10:34 (KJV)

“Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.”

It is most definitely not a call to violence. I am sure you are aware that Christ rebuked Peter for using a sword to strike another person.

_______________________________________

The Peter verse isn't evidence that Jesus was being non-violent in his choice of metaphor. It's evidence of the inconsistency of the authors.

We have conflicting ideas... It's too bad that the authors had Jesus speak in parables, using ambiguous metaphors and other examples that I would call "sloppy writing".

But the bigger problem is this:

if Jesus is God, the context gets a lot wider, including when God commands the killing of people using actual, non-metaphorical swords.

The clearest example is Exodus 32:27. It explicitly attributes the command to Israel’s God and results in about 3,000 deaths.

> “Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour.”
> Exodus 32:27 (KJV)

So, the question is.. do you believe in the trinity union of Jesus and the old testament god?

[Ray the atheist]

[Replying to tam in post #2]

And of course Christ did not Himself use a literal sword to wage war against anyone, and He commanded His disciples to follow His example.

That's a good point

I can think of three occasions when Jesus used violence:

1. Jesus made a whip and drove merchants from the temple (John 2:15).
2. Jesus threatens judgment involving slaughter (Luke 19:27).
3. Jesus describes swords among his followers (Luke 22:36).
___________________________________

If Jesus is God, then the God commands slaughter by the sword at least 8 times.
Those are examples of calls to violence.

This causes a lot of confusion.
I say it's due to the nature of at minimum, 66 distinct authors with all kinds of different theologies. Of course, they could not all agree on theology, so we have contradictions.

I also believe that the bible might not have been intended to be read as one, cohesive story.

If counting distinct biblical episodes where God explicitly commands or sanctions sword slaughter, there are roughly a dozen major narratives, depending on counting criteria.

There are at least 400 distinct stories in the bible. There is no scholarly consensus count. Published compilations range from 144 to thousands, depending on what qualifies as a contradiction.

THE BIG QUESTION:

If you are a trinitarian, then Jesus is the same god as is depicted in the old testament, and did command and personally perpetuated bloody, vengeful violence. Why does God command bloody violence if God actually desires non-violence?

[Ray the atheist]

[Replying to tam in post #2]

2 Questions:

1. How does this verse accurately represent a message of harmony, mutual love and non-violence that I am told that Jesus was promoting?

There is not going to be harmony on the earth just yet. So I'm not sure who told you that.

____________________________________

BIG QUESTION:

If you believe that God has a plan, then, it really does seem to me that you are saying that God's plan does not include harmony, mutual love, and non-violence.

Did you mean to say that God's plan includes bloody violence?

[Ray the atheist]

[Replying to tam in post #2]

2. How does the imagery of a sword suggest "peace"?

The sword is truth.

But this world has a lot of lies in it. Lies that people even prefer over the truth. Lies about the world, and lies we tell ourselves, even about ourselves. Many do not want to hear or to know the truth. Many prefer the lie, and will hate both the truth and the person who spoke it to them.

Christ is the Truth.
The language that He speaks is truth.
Truth is the sword that comes out of His mouth (Rev 19:5).

_________________________________

Equivocation occurs when a key term changes meaning during an argument.

You assume “sword” means “truth” in Matthew 10:34 because Revelation associates a sword with Christ’s spoken judgment.

You redefine “sword” as “truth” without establishing that Matthew 10:34 means the same thing as Revelation 19:15.

Revelation’s imagery cannot automatically determine Matthew’s meaning.
You would have to demonstrate, not simply assert your conclusions.

[tam]

Peace to you Ray,

[Replying to tam in post #2]

Very often, Christians will argue about context.. so maybe the context of the verse I will be quoting isn't a call to violence, after all.

Matthew 10:34 (KJV)

“Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.”

It is most definitely not a call to violence. I am sure you are aware that Christ rebuked Peter for using a sword to strike another person.

_______________________________________

The Peter verse isn't evidence that Jesus was being non-violent in his choice of metaphor. It's evidence of the inconsistency of the authors.

In each instance, Peter is rebuked and/or told to put his sword away. That seems pretty consistent to me.

And add that to other commands from Christ (love your enemy, bless those who persecute you, give to Caesar what is Caeser's, etc). If, however, it was a call to violence, then this would be easily proven. Simply show where any apostles/disciples picked up swords against the religious or political leaders of the day (where Christ did NOT rebuke the act.)

Do we have examples like that in Acts - which details some of the acts of the disciples and apostles?

Or are we shown that it is the disciples of Christ who were persecuted, even killed (case of Stephen.)

We have conflicting ideas... It's too bad that the authors had Jesus speak in parables, using ambiguous metaphors and other examples that I would call "sloppy writing".

Seems like it was made clear to the disciples and apostles. Unless you want to show some examples of where they picked up swords and committed violence against the religious and political leaders, rather than the other way around.

But the bigger problem is this:

if Jesus is God, the context gets a lot wider, including when God commands the killing of people using actual, non-metaphorical swords.

If you are introducing another question (an "If") question, then it seems to me that you may understand that the verse from the OP was not a call to violence.

Is that correct?

The clearest example is Exodus 32:27. It explicitly attributes the command to Israel’s God and results in about 3,000 deaths.

> “Thus saith the LORD God of Israel, Put every man his sword by his side, and go in and out from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay every man his brother, and every man his companion, and every man his neighbour.”
> Exodus 32:27 (KJV)

So, the question is.. do you believe in the trinity union of Jesus and the old testament god?

I do not.

That being said:

Christ (not the OT or religion) is the One who reveals the Father to us as the Father truly is. If you want to know God, then you need to know His Son, His image, His truth.

“I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me. 7If you had known Me, you would know My Father as well. From now on you do know Him and have seen Him.” John 14:7

All things have been entrusted to Me by My Father. No one knows the Son except the Father, and no one knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal Him. Matt 11:27

“If you knew Me, you would know My Father as well.”[/color] John 8:19

And whoever sees Me sees the One who sent Me. John 12:45


Peace again to you.