Literal Swords vs Spiritual Weapons

[BlessedByTheBest]

i create this discussion in the hopes of discovering what the general consensus is of those among us who choose to participate.

i have taken the liberty to provide relevant scripture in addition to the below verses, as to encourage the principle of putting to use the entire counsel of God.

please feel free to reference any verses you feel support your views.

1) could the words of our Lord Jesus Christ in the passages below be utilized by Christians to justify violent behavior in His name?

-or-

2) could the words of our Lord Jesus Christ in the passages below be interpreted in a figurative sense, as He spoke spiritually, of the trials His apostles were about to face?

-or-

3) (plug your question or comment here)

Luk 22:35 And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any thing? And they said, Nothing.

Luk 22:36 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.

Luk 22:37 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.

Luk 22:38 And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords. And he said unto them, It is enough.

Luk 22:39 And he came out, and went, as he was wont, to the mount of Olives; and his disciples also followed him.

Luk 22:40 And when he was at the place, he said unto them, Pray that ye enter not into temptation.

Luk 22:41 And he was withdrawn from them about a stone's cast, and kneeled down, and prayed,

------------

Luk 22:49 When they which were about him saw what would follow, they said unto him, Lord, shall we smite with the sword?

Luk 22:50 And one of them smote the servant of the high priest, and cut off his right ear.

Luk 22:51 And Jesus answered and said, Suffer ye thus far. And he touched his ear, and healed him.

related:

Mat 26:50 And Jesus said unto him, Friend, wherefore art thou come? Then came they, and laid hands on Jesus, and took him.

Mat 26:51 And, behold, one of them which were with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest's, and smote off his ear.

Mat 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.

Eph 6:17 And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:

i would like to say, that it is interesting how Christ didn't say, 'give me a sword, too'...

...in fact, after encouraging His followers to pray...He then, knelt down to pray...

thoughts?

love to you all.

[The_Patriot21]

Well, the way I read it, Jesus is not encouraging his followers to take up arms and take over the world. So let me get that out of the way, Jesus was not a war mongerer, nor did he encourage the use of violence. but on the same note, the swords in that passage, I believe were lieral swords. Now, you can certainly apply them to standing for the armor of God-but they were literal swords. Jesus knew Peter was carrying a sword, Jesus told him to. Peter, also used that sword, to defend Jesus when the priests came from him. (luke 22:49-51)

Now, the fact that Peter had this sword, after Jesus told the disciples to get a sword, means that Jesus was indeed, speaking of literal swords, and not spiritual swords. It also shows that Jesus, was not against swords or other weapons. Thats point 2. Point 3, when Peter cut off the servants ear, Jesus did not rebuke Peter for having the sword, that would be foolish since He had just told Peter to have it, but rebuked him for his use of the sword, it was His will to be captured. Now, each gospel tells it a wee bit different, I like the one in matthew 26:52 where Jesus says Put your sword back in its place. For all who take up the sword shall perish by the sword. Many take this as a sign that Jesus doesn't want us to own weapons or use them. But, the thing theyre overlooking is two things, first, Jesus told Peter to buy that sword, and 2, Jesus never told Peter to get rid of it, but to put it in its place.

And the putting it in its place, is where Im getting at. Jesus knew that sword wasn't evil. Jesus also knew that he who lives by it, dies by it, but He wasn't referring to the weapon, but the heart. There is a difference between a man who lives by the sword-and someone who owns it. A man who lives by it, is a violent man, who seeks violence, who uses that sword to hurt other people, to kill, to maim. A serial killer, for instance, is someone who lives by the sword, he is violent at heart, and wants to hurt others. The kid who shot up newtown, and the one who shot up that theatre in aurora, were violent at heart, and seeked to hurt others, they lived by the sword.

Now, is it possible to own a sword, and not be a violent man. Yes. Is it possible, to use violence, and not be a violent man, and live by the sword. Again, the answer is yes. Ecclesiastes 3:1 says there is a time and a place for everything, and I do mean everything. Now, Im going to throw something out here, and thats the law. Now don't twist my words, we are no longer bound by the law, don't get me wrong, however, the law is not to be ignored, because the law of the OT defines what sin is (Romans 7:7) It tells us what is sin, and what is not sin, were not bound by the law, we don't have to sacrifice for our sins, because Jesus was the perfect sacrifice and we are covered in His blood, but we know what is sin from it. And according to the law, owning a weapon is not a sin. Killing someone who enters your home in self defense, is again, not a sin. There is nothing in the law, nor in the New testament, that says a sword, (which was the "gun" of the time") is sinful, or that christians shouldn't own one.

I would also say, that the sword Jesus is speaking of in luke, that the disciples took with them into the garden, is not the same sword as is mentioned in ephesians about the armor of God. the sword in ephesians is speaking of a spiritual sword, while the one in luke a literal sword.

Edited April 7, 2013 by the_patriot2013

[Guest man]

1) could the words of our Lord Jesus Christ in the passages below be utilized by Christians to justify violent behavior in His name?

Many people use that passage as permission to use deadly force.

[goldust59]

Well, the way I read it, Jesus is not encouraging his followers to take up arms and take over the world. So let me get that out of the way, Jesus was not a war mongerer, nor did he encourage the use of violence. but on the same note, the swords in that passage, I believe were lieral swords. Now, you can certainly apply them to standing for the armor of God-but they were literal swords. Jesus knew Peter was carrying a sword, Jesus told him to. Peter, also used that sword, to defend Jesus when the priests came from him. (luke 22:49-51)

Now, the fact that Peter had this sword, after Jesus told the disciples to get a sword, means that Jesus was indeed, speaking of literal swords, and not spiritual swords. It also shows that Jesus, was not against swords or other weapons. Thats point 2. Point 3, when Peter cut off the servants ear, Jesus did not rebuke Peter for having the sword, that would be foolish since He had just told Peter to have it, but rebuked him for his use of the sword, it was His will to be captured. Now, each gospel tells it a wee bit different, I like the one in matthew 26:52 where Jesus says Put your sword back in its place. For all who take up the sword shall perish by the sword. Many take this as a sign that Jesus doesn't want us to own weapons or use them. But, the thing theyre overlooking is two things, first, Jesus told Peter to buy that sword, and 2, Jesus never told Peter to get rid of it, but to put it in its place.

And the putting it in its place, is where Im getting at. Jesus knew that sword wasn't evil. Jesus also knew that he who lives by it, dies by it, but He wasn't referring to the weapon, but the heart. There is a difference between a man who lives by the sword-and someone who owns it. A man who lives by it, is a violent man, who seeks violence, who uses that sword to hurt other people, to kill, to maim. A serial killer, for instance, is someone who lives by the sword, he is violent at heart, and wants to hurt others. The kid who shot up newtown, and the one who shot up that theatre in aurora, were violent at heart, and seeked to hurt others, they lived by the sword.

Now, is it possible to own a sword, and not be a violent man. Yes. Is it possible, to use violence, and not be a violent man, and live by the sword. Again, the answer is yes. Ecclesiastes 3:1 says there is a time and a place for everything, and I do mean everything. Now, Im going to throw something out here, and thats the law. Now don't twist my words, we are no longer bound by the law, don't get me wrong, however, the law is not to be ignored, because the law of the OT defines what sin is (Romans 7:7) It tells us what is sin, and what is not sin, were not bound by the law, we don't have to sacrifice for our sins, because Jesus was the perfect sacrifice and we are covered in His blood, but we know what is sin from it. And according to the law, owning a weapon is not a sin. Killing someone who enters your home in self defense, is again, not a sin. There is nothing in the law, nor in the New testament, that says a sword, (which was the "gun" of the time") is sinful, or that christians shouldn't own one.

I would also say, that the sword Jesus is speaking of in luke, that the disciples took with them into the garden, is not the same sword as is mentioned in ephesians about the armor of God. the sword in ephesians is speaking of a spiritual sword, while the one in luke a literal sword.

Excellent answer! Thank you for posting it!

[xero]

The sword is a literary device not a literal device.

Jeremiah 25:27 "Therefore thou shalt say unto them, Thus saith the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel; Drink ye, and be drunken, and spue, and fall, and rise no more, because of the sword which I will send among you. 28And it shall be, if they refuse to take the cup at thine hand to drink, then shalt thou say unto them, Thus saith the LORD of hosts; Ye shall certainly drink. 29For, lo, I begin to bring evil on the city which is called by my name, and should ye be utterly unpunished? Ye shall not be unpunished: for I will call for a sword upon all the inhabitants of the earth, saith the LORD of hosts."

John 18:10 "Then Simon Peter having a sword drew it, and smote the high priest's servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant's name was Malchus.

11 Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it?"

The verses from Jeremiah are part of the prophecy against all the nations. The cup is the cup of Gods indignation and the sword is the Word.

The cup:

Revelation 14:10 "The same shall drink of the wine of the wrath of God, which is poured out without mixture into the cup of his indignation; and he shall be tormented with fire and brimstone in the presence of the holy angels, and in the presence of the Lamb:"

The sword:

Revelation 2:16 "Repent; or else I will come unto thee quickly, and will fight against them with the sword of my mouth."

Jesus was about to drink from the cup (the crucifixion) and He already brought the sword:

Matthew 10:34 "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. 35For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. 36And a man's foes shall be they of his own household."

Mark 3:25 "And if a house be divided against itself, that house cannot stand."

Jesus used the term sword purposely because:

Isaiah 28:13 "But the word of the LORD was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken."

Its all about paying attention to the Word.

John 4:24 "God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth."

John 6:63 "It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life."

Ephesians 6:17 "And take the helmet of salvation, and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God:"

God is our sword in adversity. God is our shelter in the storm. God is our Bread of Life when we are hungry. God is the Living Water that quenches our thirst. God is the Light by which we see. God is the Word we hear calling.

God is impressing upon us that we are absolutley dependant on Him in all circumstances and when it comes time to face death the only protection we have against that enemy is God because no other sword will cut it.

[The_Patriot21]

I would disagree with that blanket statement xero-about the sword being a literary device, and not a literal one. especially in the verses mentioned. In some cases, like the armor of God, it is a literary device, but others, like the sword in luke 22, the original passage at hand, it is clearly, a literal one. What defines "literal" verses a literary device, is the context. In Luke 22, Jesus tells His disciples to buy swords, He then asks if they have any, and they answer 2. It is a literal conversation. More evidence that this is literal, is that Peter used one of these swords to attack one of the priests servants. The difference between a literal sword, and a sword used figuratively, is defined by the context-while some verses, like ephesians 6:17 it is a figurative sword, used as a literary device, you can tell by the context, the sword of the initial passage-Luke 22, is an actual, literal, sword.

[Guest]

I would disagree with that blanket statement xero-about the sword being a literary device, and not a literal one. especially in the verses mentioned. In some cases, like the armor of God, it is a literary device, but others, like the sword in luke 22, the original passage at hand, it is clearly, a literal one. What defines "literal" verses a literary device, is the context. In Luke 22, Jesus tells His disciples to buy swords, He then asks if they have any, and they answer 2. It is a literal conversation. More evidence that this is literal, is that Peter used one of these swords to attack one of the priests servants. The difference between a literal sword, and a sword used figuratively, is defined by the context-while some verses, like ephesians 6:17 it is a figurative sword, used as a literary device, you can tell by the context, the sword of the initial passage-Luke 22, is an actual, literal, sword.

~

Literal Or No, With The LORD Jesus

And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.

His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.

And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.

And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean. Revelation 19:11-14

The Word Of God

And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.

And I saw an angel standing in the sun; and he cried with a loud voice, saying to all the fowls that fly in the midst of heaven, Come and gather yourselves together unto the supper of the great God; That ye may eat the flesh of kings, and the flesh of captains, and the flesh of mighty men, and the flesh of horses, and of them that sit on them, and the flesh of all men, both free and bond, both small and great.

And I saw the beast, and the kings of the earth, and their armies, gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse, and against his army.

And the beast was taken, and with him the false prophet that wrought miracles before him, with which he deceived them that had received the mark of the beast, and them that worshipped his image. These both were cast alive into a lake of fire burning with brimstone. Revelation 19:15-20

Become

For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart. Hebrews 4:12

A Cut Above The Rest

And the remnant were slain with the sword of him that sat upon the horse, which sword proceeded out of his mouth: and all the fowls were filled with their flesh. Revelation 19:21

Literally~!

[BlessedByTheBest]

let's refocus here, just in case things go any further astray.

this thread is not about the condemning or the absolving of weapons outside of the context of the passages.

in context, the possession of a weapon was neither condoned or discouraged by Christ. in context, the possession of one was a suggestion. in context, the untimely attack upon the soldier was not in self-defense, and the weapon's use was rebuked.

but this is all besides the point, because while the sword may be the object of this discussion, Christ, is the essence of The Word.

so if one chooses to respond to option #3 i have proposed, then please keep in mind that the purpose of this discussion is to share our views of what we can learn from what Christ has revealed in these passages of Luke 22.

for what it's worth, it is my understanding that Christ was speaking figuratively(as if he needed defense). and in the midst of quick-tempered violence, He exemplifies restoration, and regenerates what man destroys.

thank you all for your comments.

[The_Patriot21]

If He was speaking figuratively in Luke 22:35-41, why did Jesus ask them if they had swords, and say that it was enough when they said yes, and why did the Apostle Peter have a sword in the garden? In any other book we read, if a person in the story asks another person if they have a sword, and they say yes, we take it literally, yet we doubt that in the Bible? food for thought.

I would say, that Peters use, was in defense, maybe not self defense, but in defense of his master. Peter, was extremely loyal to Christ, he saw a threat to his master, his friend, and wanted to defend Christ. It is a noble quality. And notice, Jesus did not rebuke peter for wanting to defend Him, but you do bring out a very good point, Jesus did rebuke that instance-it was done rashly, and it wasn't in Gods plan. A weapon, is not something that should be used rashly, that much I do agree with.

I believe the Bible lays it out very clear when you can use a weapon (sword, gun whatever) and violence is acceptable, and when it is not. Self defense of your family. (exodus 22:2-3) is one of them. To protect the weak and the needy, to preserve life (psalm 82:4, Proverbs 24:11, Ezekiel 33:6) And when you can't use lethal force, such as in revenge, to fulfill your own greed, etc.

[enoob57]

I always find it interesting- how that people in the Grace period go into the law period to justify that activity there back into the Grace period

... interesting! Love, Steven