Should I buy a sword?

markalan said:

Luke 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.

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.

Why did Jesus instruct His disciples to buy a sword?
How should we apply this today?

Click to expand...

a glock, 9mm, or AR-15 would be nice!

lforrest said:

Matthew 26:52 seems to be a warning that when taking up arms not to expect God or his angels to defend you from the same. You take your life into your own hands.

Click to expand...

Not sure how you come to that conclusion unless you think that is Jesus’ intent in having one but a sword, which does t make sense.

Ronald Nolette said:

a glock, 9mm, or AR-15 would be nice!

Click to expand...

It sure would.

A couple of hypothetical scenarios to consider-

1. If a person broke into your home armed with a gun and was one by one murdering your family members, and you are head of the house what would you do as a Christian?
I would first pray quickly for what I was about to do, and shoot him, unless I was told to do otherwise. No, I would not offer him cookies and milk, or even waste time to call the police first, or attack him with a candlestick.

2. You are at work at the local elementary school as a teacher- someone stormed the school and he is firing at the children and already slaughtered several. You are armed- should you shoot him or hide and call 911 because you are a "Christian"?

These are serious deadly massacres of the innocent. To you who say- don't repay evil for evil or thou shalt not murder- I do hear you and I say this-
Is it better to save a life or destroy it? Does God want sacrifice or mercy from us? Are God's laws able to be broken when a person is in dire need or not?
Are God's laws for us or against us? Do we have enough faith to understand this?
Is a cop liable for sin for killing an evildoer perp who is doing evil to others? -Are you? -

Be a hero not a coward who is trying to save his own soul.

lforrest said:

An armed society is a polite society. Just having a weapon can serve as a deterrent.

Click to expand...

On the street then? I'd have to ask the would be evil doer to me or mine:
"Could ya wait a coupla minutes, so I can go back to the house and grab my pistol, because I haven't a "C&C Permit?"
Do you think he'd wait?
Do you think I'd come back?

Buy guns.
If guns are illegal where you are,make them.

Christians, born again from above Christians, should not own a gun for protection. You are to trust in God.

Proverbs 3:5-6 -
Trust in the Lord with all your heart
And do not lean on your own understanding.
6 In all your ways acknowledge Him,
And He will make your paths straight.

markalan said:

Luke 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.

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.

Why did Jesus instruct His disciples to buy a sword?
How should we apply this today?

Click to expand...

Wow I have dealing with this from various angels recently.


1) Stever Carcuco's Aramaic angle.

The Context of Matthew 26:52​

In the scene, Peter draws a sword to defend Jesus during his arrest. Jesus rebukes him:

Greek Majority Text (e.g., Textus Receptus / Byzantine):

τότε λέγει αὐτῷ ὁ Ἰησοῦς Ἀπόστρεψον τὴν μάχαιράν σου εἰς τὸν τόπον αὐτῆς· πάντες γὰρ οἱ λαβόντες μάχαιραν ἐν μαχαίρῃ ἀπολοῦνται. pantes gar hoi labontes machairan en machairē apolountai. "For all who take the sword will perish by the sword."

Click to expand...

This is a straightforward proverb emphasizing violence begetting violence, with poetic parallelism (sword... by sword).

Peshitta Syriac (Eastern Aramaic):

ܟܠܗܘܢ ܓܝܪ ܗܢܘܢ ܕܢܣܒܘ ܣܝܦܐ ܒܣܝܦܐ ܢܡܘܬܘܢ kulhun ger hānun da-nsab saife, b-saife n'muthun. "For all of them who take up swords, with swords they shall die."

Click to expand...

Note the plural "swords" (saife / ܣܝܦܐ) in both instances.

Caruso's Analysis: The Galilean Aramaic Wordplay​

Caruso argues that retro-translating into Galilean Aramaic (a Western dialect) reveals a deliberate pun that the Greek partially captures in spirit but misses in nuance, while the Peshitta obscures it entirely due to dialectal differences:

bgyn kl dnsb syyp bsyyp ymwtwn bagin kal d-nsab saiyp, b-saiyp yimuthun "For everyone who took up a sword, by a sword (OR 'in the end') they shall die."

Click to expand...

• In Western Aramaic dialects like Galilean, saiyp (or similar forms) can mean "sword" or "end" (related to roots for conclusion/termination; cf. b-sop "in the end").
• b-saiyp can thus be read as "by the sword" or "in the end."
• This creates a layered meaning: Those who live by violence will die violently and/or "in the end" (ultimately, eschatologically, or as a consequence).

This wordplay is attested in Rabbinic literature and Western Aramaic sources (e.g., Palestinian Talmud, Targum Neophyti). It fits Jesus' style of teaching with puns, parables, and double meanings.

Christian Palestinian Aramaic (another Western dialect, closer to Galilean) preserves something closer to this ambiguity in its rendering of the verse.

How the Greek Captures the Spirit​

The Greek uses machaira (sword) consistently and renders the idea poetically with parallelism. It conveys the core moral/spiritual truth effectively for a broad audience but loses the Aramaic pun because Greek has no equivalent double meaning. The translators (or evangelist) prioritized clarity and rhetorical force over replicating the exact wordplay. This is typical of how the NT handles Aramaic underlayers: it often translates the sense faithfully while occasional puns or nuances are flattened.

Other points

I’ve been wrestling with this passage from various angles lately, and I want to add two observations from the broader biblical witness.

2) Bearing a sword is not inherently evil. Throughout the Old Testament, God Himself commands His people to bear arms in certain situations (e.g., the conquest narratives, the defensive wars in Judges and Kings). Angels are depicted with swords, and even the Law makes provisions for self-defense and protecting the innocent.

Taking an extreme pacifist stance that completely rejects any use of force can start drifting toward the old Marcionite heresy — the idea that the New Testament God is totally different from the Old Testament God. This creates a false disjunction in God’s character. Scripture shows continuity in God’s faithfulness, justice, and holiness across both Testaments. The New Covenant is an upgrade and fulfillment, not a total rejection of everything that came before.

3) The allegorical and practical layers from Church history. When we read the Church Fathers and early Christian commentary, we often see a stronger emphasis on pacifism in personal conduct, combined with rich allegorical interpretation: the Old Testament battles become pictures of spiritual warfare against sin, the devil, and the flesh — fought with prayer, fasting, Scripture, and the spiritual disciplines.

At the same time, the Fathers generally affirmed that God still ordains the sword in society today for restraining evil (see Romans 13). There’s a balance: Christians are called to a higher standard of love and non-retaliation in our personal lives (Matthew 5:38-44), while recognizing that governing authorities bear the sword as God’s servants.

Jesus’ words in Matthew 26:52 (“all who take the sword will perish by the sword”) carry that strong warning against living by violence, while Luke 22:36 shows a shift in circumstances once He would no longer be with them physically. Both truths can stand together without contradiction.