Luke 22:36 vs Matthew 26:52 … FIGHT!

Wow. Obviously I've been living under a rock to have missed the New Most Popular Verse in the Bible: Luke 22:36 (http://bible.cc/luke/22-36.htm):

'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.'

This has led to a run on the Twitter market from gun enthusiasts, arguing that this proves that Jesus wants you — in fact, commands you — as a Good Christian to carry a gun.

The video below offers some broader context and an alternative interpretation.  Here are a few more of the passages:

' 35 And He said to them, “When I sent you out without money belt and bag and sandals, you did not lack anything, did you?” They said, “No, nothing.”36 And He said to them, “But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one.37 “For I tell you that this which is written must be fulfilled in Me, ‘AND HE WAS NUMBERED WITH TRANSGRESSORS’; for that which refers to Me has its fulfillment.”38 They said, “Lord, look, here are two swords.” And He said to them, “It is enough.”'

I.e., by arming up, his party would provide further rationale for the arrest in Gesthemene … which is what immediately happens.

And, of course, in the process of the arrest over in Luke, we get some sword violence occurring (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=luke%2022:49-51&version=NIV):

'49 When Jesus’ followers saw what was going to happen, they said, “Lord, should we strike with our swords?” 50 And one of them struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his right ear. 51 But Jesus answered, “No more of this!” And he touched the man’s ear and healed him.'

Or, as Matthew has it (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=matthew%2026:51-54&version=NIV): 

'51 With that, one of Jesus’ companions reached for his sword, drew it out and struck the servant of the high priest, cutting off his ear. 52 “Put your sword back in its place,” Jesus said to him, “for all who draw the sword will die by the sword. 53 Do you think I cannot call on my Father, and he will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels? 54 But how then would the Scriptures be fulfilled that say it must happen in this way?”)'

And here are some various translations of that Matthew 26:52: http://bible.cc/matthew/26-52.htm … no suggestions there that God wants people taking up arms and striking at others, even in the face of so great affront of Jesus being arrested by treacherous types in the dark of the night.

So is the interpretation in the video the "right" way to translate the Luke passage?  I don't know. Various alternative interpretations by scholars at http://bible.cc/luke/22-36.htm suggest anything from the virtue of self-defense to the idea of Jesus speaking in metaphor about spiritual warfare.

Regardless, given how Jesus reacts to the actual use of swords in the very same chapter, it doesn't seem likely to me that his out-of-context admonition in Luke serves as Biblical support for the Second Amendment. Even if (as some suggest) it's a recommendation by Jesus that, once He was gone, they would need some defense when going out on their mission, bear in mind that the disciples would be going to strange, even hostile lands, with highwaymen and wild animals still a significant risk. That's quite a bit different from claiming a holy duty to create a militia, let alone an exhortation to keep swords around in the house to protect against burglars, or to collect them to rise up against the tyrannical Roman government. 

Google+: View post on Google+