Why did Jesus say: "Buy a sword!"

[marco]

In Luke 22 we have: “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. "


Jesus has stopped telling people to turn the other cheek, but rather turn the sword on the attacker. Of course he had an inkling that it would all end in carnage, that his friends would be slaughtered and his church would be the instrument of mass murder, for he said: in Matthew 10

34 “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. 36 And a person's enemies will be those of his own household.


Some think Christ meant that, sadly, the consequence of his coming would be division. Christ does not say this: He says the purpose of his coming is to bring a sword, to set people against each other and divide families. That is his intention.



How can we redeem the Redeemer here? How can we find any good in Christ when he advises the purchase of swords, and says he wants to set people against each other?

[marco]

[Replying to post 1 by marco]

I have seen justifications of Christ's "buy a sword" message that are miracles of changing black to white. The sword was common in Christ's day so Jesus would obviously use it as a symbol. But surely that doesn't turn the sword into a peace offering?

Like everyone else, Christ must have had his off days, times when he felt anger and irritation. His speeches here are perhaps atypical, just uttered in human frustration. That might be the best explanation.

[WeSee]

[Replying to post 1 by marco]

Let's set Luke 22 aside for now and look at Matthew 10.

In the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry, Jesus spoke in parables. While "parable" has commonly come to mean "a usually short fictitious story that illustrates a moral attitude or a religious principle" or the like, the meaning really boils down to "figurative language". As such, it's a mistake to take "sword" literally in Matthew 10. To gain insight as to why Jesus spoke in parables, see Matthew 13.

In Matthew 10, Jesus uses "sword" figuratively to indicate a dividing. In the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry, a common theme is that of strict dichotomy between the righteous and the unrighteous: "A servant cannot serve two masters. He will love one and hate the other", "A good tree cannot bear bad fruit. A bad tree cannot bear good fruit", "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, that which is born of the spirit is spirit", etc. One is either righteous or they are unrighteous. Period. There is no inbetween. In Matthew 10 Jesus uses "sword" to indicate that He has come to divide the righteous from the unrighteous.

Any issues with the above?

[marco]

Let's set Luke 22 aside for now and look at Matthew 10.

In the gospel preached by Jesus during His ministry, Jesus spoke in parables. While "parable" has commonly come to mean "a usually short fictitious story that illustrates a moral attitude or a religious principle" or the like, the meaning really boils down to "figurative language". As such, it's a mistake to take "sword" literally in Matthew 10.

Well no one has suggested that "sword" be taken literally in Matthew. It may well have a literal meaning in Luke.

In Matthew 10, Jesus uses "sword" figuratively to indicate a dividing. .......There is no inbetween. In Matthew 10 Jesus uses "sword" to indicate that He has come to divide the righteous from the unrighteous.

Any issues with the above?

I think there must be many ways of saying this that would have more clarity than that chosen by Jesus, who concentrates on his coming to set family members against each other. This is his purpose in coming, he says. If someone enters my house and says: "I have come to set your daughter against you," then I would rightly consider the statement malicious. It is Christ's cold intention to cause animosity in families that is repugnant. Some religious groups obey this despicable suggestion to the letter, and expel a son or daughter or mother from their congregation. It is usual to uncover a benign meaning in some apparently vicious biblical statement but your explanation faithfully maintains the original viciousness in what Christ said. So we are in agreement.

Welcome to the forum.

[WeSee]

[Replying to post 4 by marco]

Well no one has suggested that "sword" be taken literally in Matthew.
You framed it as follows:

Of course he had an inkling that it would all end in carnage, that his friends would be slaughtered and his church would be the instrument of mass murder, for he said: in Matthew 10

I think there must be many ways of saying this that would have more clarity than that chosen by Jesus...
Jesus wasn't trying for a superficial "clarity" or understanding. Keep in mind: "I speak to them in parables".

And as I wrote earlier, "To gain insight as to why Jesus spoke in parables, see Matthew 13".

...Jesus, who concentrates on his coming to set family members against each other. This is his purpose in coming, he says. If someone enters my house and says: "I have come to set your daughter against you," then I would rightly consider the statement malicious. It is Christ's cold intention to cause animosity in families that is repugnant.
This also indicates a literal reading on your part. There is no "cold intention to cause animosity in families". His "purpose in coming" is to divide the righteous from the unrighteous. Jesus calls His followers to become righteous. Keep in mind: "I speak to them in parables".

Some religious groups obey this despicable suggestion to the letter, and expel a son or daughter or mother from their congregation.
Like you, they take what Jesus was saying literally instead of figuratively.They don't understand what Jesus is saying - no less believe Jesus. Without understanding there can be no belief.

...your explanation faithfully maintains the original viciousness in what Christ said. So we are in agreement.
Actually it doesn't. The "viciousness" is a product of taking it literally. And no, we are not in agreement. Keep in mind: "I speak to them in parables".

Welcome to the forum.
Thanks

[marco]

Keep in mind: "I speak to them in parables".

Presumably he didn't intend us to believe every statement he made was a parable, or even couched in figurative language.

Well no one has suggested that "sword" be taken literally in Matthew.

You framed it as follows:

"Of course he had an inkling that it would all end in carnage, that his friends would be slaughtered and his church would be the instrument of mass murder, for he said: in Matthew 10 "

You seem to misunderstand the difference between literal and figurative. A literal interpretation would involve the use of a sword as a sword while a figurative interpretation relates to the violence associated with a sword.

Jesus wasn't trying for a superficial "clarity" or understanding. Keep in mind: "I speak to them in parables".

Ah, you accuse Jesus of being misleadingly obscure then. I think an emissary from heaven would always seek for clarity, and get it, even when he's indulging in metaphor.

This also indicates a literal reading on your part. There is no "cold intention to cause animosity in families". His "purpose in coming" is to divide the righteous from the unrighteous. Jesus calls His followers to become righteous. Keep in mind: "I speak to them in parables".

The statement has nothing to do with parables. You deduce information about "the righteous" that isn't there. His words: "I come to set father against son" involve a simple statement of purpose. One can attach another meaning to father and son but it does not change the intention - to cause division. Your interpretation completely ignores the words used and has nothing to do with parables.

Like you, they take what Jesus was saying literally instead of figuratively.They don't understand what Jesus is saying - no less believe Jesus. Without understanding there can be no belief.

So the magical means of penetrating Christ's esoteric messages is to repeat, three times, the mantra: "Keep in mind: "I speak to them in parables". It is also good to read what is said. I accept that Christ frequently employed metaphors but that's no reason to suppose his every pronouncement is metaphoric.


I suppose you want to play parables with Luke's sword too.

[SallyF]

It's quite clear that the propagandists have written that their possibly fictional Leader came to cause division …

Whether it's literal families …

Or subjective judgement on what constitutes righteousness.

But it's instructive to remember that when Jesus was still in Heaven as "God", he ordered and condoned Islamic State-like ethnic cleansing with the edge of the sword.

And when Jesus returns to this planet he created and flooded, there will be more genocidal extermination of non-Christians with swords and such.

The Jesus character - like Hitler and Mao and Pol Pot and numerous others - sought to make this planet their personal "Kingdom".

But to the best of my knowledge, Hitler and Mao and Pol Pot did not have their propagandists write that they were sired by a god … mythological or otherwise.

[Tcg]

Keep in mind: "I speak to them in parables".

It is always helpful to also keep context in mind. Jesus said this in response to this question:

• Matthew 13:10 The disciples came to him and asked, “Why do you speak to the people in parables?â€�

The "them" in your reminder refers not to the disciples, but to "the people."

The setting for Luke 22 is the Lord's Supper. After the meal, Jesus is talking with His disciples. This is when he tells them to buy a sword. If we are to take this as advice as figurative, we can't use the phrase, "I speak to them in parables" to justify it. As we have seen, this wasn't spoken about the disciples.

Looking further at Luke 22, we find this:

• 38 The disciples said, “See, Lord, here are two swords.â€�
  “That’s enough!� he replied.

If swords are to be taken figuratively, what was it the disciples showed Jesus? It would be quite a stretch to read this as anything other than a display of two physical swords which Jesus observed and approved of. He obviously wanted them to be prepared for a pending calamity of some sort.


Tcg

[marco]

If swords are to be taken figuratively, what was it the disciples showed Jesus? It would be quite a stretch to read this as anything other than a display of two physical swords which Jesus observed and approved of. He obviously wanted them to be prepared for a pending calamity of some sort.

Yes, when is a sword not a sword? When the good man said he had come with a sword it is hard to construe this as anything other than he came to bring violence. When we paint Jesus as a man of peace we have to take his violent statements to mean the opposite of what they appear to say. What must the poor fisherfolk have made of it?

[WeSee]

[Replying to post 6 by marco]

I accept that Christ frequently employed metaphors but that's no reason to suppose his every pronouncement is metaphoric.
This is a straw man and an extremely blatant one at that. No where have I stated or even implied that "his every pronouncement is metaphoric". However I have said that Matthew 10:34-36 contains figurative language that should not be taken literally.

You seem to misunderstand the difference between literal and figurative. A literal interpretation would involve the use of a sword as a sword while a figurative interpretation relates to the violence associated with a sword.
I understand the difference just fine. You seem to not understand that your particular figurative interpretation is not the only possible interpretation. Not only is yours not the only possible interpretation, yours is incorrect.

I think an emissary from heaven would always seek for clarity, and get it, even when he's indulging in metaphor.
What you seem to have in mind is a simplistic superficial clarity. That's not what Jesus was seeking. As I said earlier, "Jesus wasn't trying for a superficial 'clarity' or understanding". In other words, what Jesus sought was deep understanding.

Once again, "To gain insight as to why Jesus spoke in parables, see Matthew 13". Seriously, give it a read. Let me know what you think Jesus is saying there.

Your interpretation completely ignores the words used and has nothing to do with parables.
That's how figurative language works. What is literally stated is not the intended meaning.

So the magical means of penetrating Christ's esoteric messages is to repeat, three times, the mantra: "Keep in mind: "I speak to them in parables".
Actually I kept repeating it only because you repeatedly seemed to fail to do so.

I suppose you want to play parables with Luke's sword too.
Actually I don't. I first wanted to see how well you did with Matthew.