Jesus And Swords
By Norman A. Bert, PhD
Texas Tech University, Lubbock, TX
Note: In addition to teaching specialties in playwriting and dramatic analysis, Dr. Bert has a primary interest in the interface of theatre and Christianity, holds a BD degree from the Associated Mennonite Biblical Seminaries, and teaches adults at Second Baptist in Lubbock.
In spite of Jesus clear teachings throughout his ministry, as represented in every strand of the NT witness, many Christians-and especially those in American evangelical churches-refuse to accept that he was a pacifist who taught against the use of force and violence. One of the proof-texts used to support the idea that Jesus advocated the bearing and use of weapons is Luke 22:35-38. In this passage, immediately before leaving the upper room to go to Gethsemane, Jesus said, "The one who has no sword must sell his cloak and buy one." When the disciples point out that they possess, amongst them, a total of two swords, Jesus replies, "It is enough."
Although Luke`s account appears to portray Jesus advocating situational ethics and, in particular, the use of force, a closer analysis shows Jesus consistently teaching against violence while showing his followers how to respond to threats.
To understand this passage clearly, we must first look at Luke 22:47-53, the report of Jesus arrest in the garden, the incident during which the disciples used the weapons in question. The report of this incident is included in all of the synoptic Gospels (Mt 26:47-56; Mk 14:43-50), as well as in John 18:3-11. All accounts agree that during the arrest, one of the disciples drew a sword and sliced off the ear of a slave of the high priest. John`s account further identifies the assailant as Peter. Matthew, Luke, and John all report that Jesus intervened to stop the attack, in the process teaching against use of violence by his followers. Only Luke, the one evangelist who reports the arming incident at the Last Supper, portrays Jesus as healing the slave`s ear. Luke clearly sets up the two stories as a connected pair.
Why would Jesus, contrary to everything else the Gospels say about him-indeed contrary to all the NT witnesses about him-command his disciples to take up arms, only to forbid the use of force as soon as the weapons were put into play? Did he have a momentary lapse of conviction? Or was the command to purchase weapons just hyperbole intended to clarify for the disciples the danger that lay ahead? The simplest and most probable explanation is that Luke`s pair of stories about swords on the eve of the crucifixion is intended to teach that Christians under threat should respond with gospel testimony, not with force.
In the first story (Lk 22:35-38), anticipating the attack that he and the disciples would soon experience, Jesus uses the word "sword" to mean the word of testimony, not an actual weapon. To paraphrase him, he says, "Go to all extents to prepare yourselves to bear witness to the coming of the Kingdom. Your witness will even be more important than being clothed." In typical fashion, however, the disciples miss the point and take him literally; they show him that they possess two weapons. Jesus, weary of trying to get through to his thickheaded disciples, gives up with words that mean, "Let`s just drop it." In other words, "it is enough" refers to the line of argument, not to the supply of weapons.
The evangelist shapes the sequel (Lk 22:47-53) in such a way as to make the point clear to his readers. In doing so, he adds an important nuance to the story as told by the other three evangelists. During the arrest in the garden, one of the disciples puts one of the swords to its intended use and cuts off a man`s ear-the one organ that equips the victim to hear the word of testimony. Rather than simply teach about non-violence (as in Matthew) or underline the divine necessity of his own death (as in John), Jesus heals the ear, thus equipping the slave anew to hear the gospel. Luke thereby turns the negative message of Matthew and John-don`t use force and don`t get in the way of God`s will-into a positive lesson: when under threat, preach the gospel of the kingdom.
How likely would it be that Luke-or Jesus-would use "sword" symbolically in this way, and what confidence might Luke have that his readers would understand the symbolism? As it turns out, there`s every reason to believe that "sword" was frequently used in this manner in the NT community and every reason to argue that later Christians who took Luke 22:35-38 as a call to bear arms have been just as thick-headed as Jesus` disciples before the resurrection.
The first biblical use of "sword" to indicate the word of God occurs in Isaiah 49:2-"He made my mouth like a sharp sword." The early church seized on this metaphor and used it in no fewer than three strands of the NT. To begin with, in Ephesians 6:17, Paul frankly equates the term "sword of the Spirit" with the word of God. The writer to the Hebrews uses the symbol in a comparative simile: God`s word is sharper than a sword (Heb 4:12). And John the Revelator makes the same point imagistically when he portrays the sword of the triumphant Christ issuing from Jesus` mouth (1:16; 19:15). Thus, Luke could expect that his readers, unlike the slow-witted disciples, would get the point (no pun intended) and would realize that, on the eve of his death, Jesus continued to advocate non-violence and to urge his followers to speak the gospel truth as their main strategy when under attack.
Furthermore, Jesus himself, according to Matthew`s witness, made this connection between testimony and swords earlier in his ministry: In Matthew 10:34, Jesus says, "I have come to bring a sword." This is a "Q saying" that appears in Luke (12:51-53) and Matthew, but not in Mark or John. In Luke`s version the saying makes no references to weaponry, nor does it deal with witness or preaching. In Matthew`s Gospel, however, the saying occurs in the middle of a passage about acknowledging Jesus and spreading the word of the Kingdom through prophecy. Here again, when Jesus associates himself with swords, he draws an immediate connection between swords and the word of testimony.
What then do we conclude? Faithful followers of Jesus Christ anticipate conflict including conflict that will maim or kill them. But following the teachings of their Lord as well as his example, faithful Christians eschew the use of violence and instead go on the attack wielding the sword of the spirit, the word of testimony.
