Support the Café

Search our Site

Whether swords or guns: what they have “is enough”

Whether swords or guns: what they have “is enough”

John Fugelsang writes on Luke 22:36:

Jesus says to disciples in this verse:

“And the one who has no sword must sell his cloak and buy one.”

Might seem like a rather forgotten verse, to which Fugelsang says:

But go ahead and search Luke 22:36 on Twitter — tons of Christians are throwing this around like the last part of the Second Amendment, conveniently forgetting about the well-regulated militia part. It suits their taste just fine, as long as you don’t read the rest to put it all into context.

And they’re saying that this means Jesus is pro-gun — the modern-day sword. But what Jesus is really doing is talking about prophesy and being a criminal. Because as soon as Jesus throws down his line about buying a sword, he adds that they only need swords because the prophesy says they’re meant to be criminals: “For I say unto you that this that is written must yet be accomplished in me, and he was reckoned among the transgressors.”

So he’s not talking about defending yourself, he’s talking about having a sword as a prop so he can get arrested [to] fulfill the prophecy.

In the very next line, the apostles say, “Hey, Jesus, we’ve already got two swords here with us.” And Jesus says, “That’s enough.”

Jesus never sends them out to buy swords. No one ever buys a sword.

In fact, when the jack-sandaled government thugs swoop in to arrest him…it’s Peter who pulls a sword and cuts off some guy’s ear. Does Jesus join in the fight? No. He heals the wounded guy and tells his friends that “those who live by the sword shall die by the sword.”

In other words, my Judeo-Christian friends, Jesus never comes out against owning swords, but he’s pretty seriously against using them.


Café Comments?

Our comment policy requires that you use your real first and last names and provide an email address (your email will not be published). Comments that use non-PG rated language, include personal attacks, that are not provable as fact or that we deem in any way to be counter to our mission of fostering respectful dialogue will not be posted.

Support the Café
Past Posts

The Episcopal Café seeks to be an independent voice, reporting and reflecting on the Episcopal Church and the Anglican tradition.  The Café is not a platform of advocacy, but it does aim to tell the story of the church from the perspective of Progressive Christianity.  Our collective sympathy, as the Café, lies with the project of widening the circle of inclusion within the church and empowering all the baptized for the role to which they have been called as followers of Christ.

The opinions expressed at the Café are those of individual contributors, and, unless otherwise noted, should not be interpreted as official statements of a parish, diocese or other organization. The art and articles that appear here remain the property of their creators.

All Content  © 2017 Episcopal Café