TexasCHLforum.com

This is not a discussion of religion, in the sense of mine is better than yours or I am right and you are wrong or you should believe what I believe, but more of a clarfication on the meaning or interpretation of biblical text.

And Luke 22:36 reads:

36 [Jesus] said to [the disciples], "But now the one who has a purse must take it, and likewise a bag; and the one who has no sword must sell his cloak and buy one." (New Revised Standard Version, NRSV)

I have seen many forum members with this tag line and if you do a forum search you'll see it has been discussed a few times, but with out the proper explanation of its meaning in my opinion.

Example:
viewtopic.php?f=7&t=408&p=2835&hilit=luke+22%3A36#p2835" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

and

viewtopic.php?f=23&t=2267&p=22634&hilit ... A36#p22634" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Now as a Catholic, I must say that I believe legitimate self defense is justifiable. I am not saying the bible or Christianity does not support self-defense, just that Luke 22:36 is not that support.

http://www.vatican.va/archive/ccc_css/a ... s2c2a5.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; see 2236 and references below article.


All I am saying is while Luke 22:36 seems cool to use as an argument for arming ourselves and self-defense, but thats not what I believe it means at all.


At this point we pick up the textual context of Luke 22:36 (bold print). He is eating the Last Supper on the night he was betrayed.

Luke 22:35-38 says:

35 [Jesus] asked them [the eleven apostles], "When I sent you out without a purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?"
They said, "No, not a thing."
36 He said to them, "But now the one who has a purse must take it, and likewise a bag. And the one who has no sword must sell his cloak and buy one. 37 For I tell you, this scripture must be fulfilled in me: ‘And he was numbered among the lawless’; and indeed what is written about me is being fulfilled."
38 They [the disciples] said, "See, Lord, here are two swords."
"It is enough," he replied. (NRSV)

So what does it mean? The swords were somehow needed to fulfill prophecy

"For I tell you, this scripture must be fulfilled in me: ‘And he was numbered among the lawless’" (Luke 22:37). By far the clearest purpose of the two swords is Jesus’ reference to Isaiah’s prophecy (53:12). He was destined to be arrested like a criminal, put on trial like a criminal, and even crucified like a criminal (but his arrest, trial, and execution were based on false evidence. He did nothing but good.) Yet, he was hung on the cross between two thieves, which is also a fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecy (Luke 23:32; 39-43). What are criminals known for carrying with them? Weapons, and to be numbered among criminals, Jesus must also have weapons. That is why he said that only two swords would be enough—to fulfill this prophecy. Also, Matthew mentions fulfilling prophecy (26:54). If Peter had kept on physically using the sword to prevent Christ’s arrest, prophecy would not have been accomplished smoothly and without hindrance. Jesus says that he could call on twelve legions of angels to protect him, meaning he is destined by God to die; he was not permitted to stop even the mighty Roman Empire from fulfilling its role (Matt. 26:53). That is why Jesus told Peter to put his sword back in its place (Matt. 26:52). And in Luke he says to Peter after the disciple cut off an ear, "No more of this!" (22:51).

Conclusion

The events in the Garden of Gethsemane and the commands of Jesus there teach the Apostles nonaggression, so Luke 22:36 does not permit violence. He said to Peter: "For all who draw the sword will die by the sword" (Matt. 26:52). Peter and the others heard those words that clarify the use of swords. Therefore, a lifestyle of the sword must not be part of the disciples’ new walk with the resurrected Christ, as they preached his message of hope.

http://www.answering-islam.org/Authors/ ... _22_36.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Although I am not advocating the website quoted (at best I think the two sides will have to agree to disagree), I have googled this topic and this particular reference seemed to make the most sense to me. So don't be put off by it and if you are then that is your right.

And I don't believe "people who live by the sword, die by the sword" is meant to those who arm themselves for self defense but rather those who go out and commit unjust acts against others. What goes around, comes around! Turning the other cheek has its limitations.

Now when I go out and my wife says "becareful", I always say " Don't worry, I got Jesus and a .45! What one won't take care of the other one will."

Just my 2 cents. I am no biblical scholar. Please be gentle.