Just a question; When Jesus reprimanded Peter for drawing his sword, why did Peter have a sword in the first place on him?

After he rose from the dead he said to sell ya cloak and buy one. So it appears that just before his crucifiction was not the time and place to hack up and dismember people in jesus name...that came after with the catholics.

Because Jesus expected his followers to be able to kick a little ass when called for.

You think Christians are just supposed to let people beat, rob and kill them with no reprisals? Somebody taught you wrong.

Didn't everyone have a sword? The roads had bandits an such, I'd carry a sword around as well.

I am peter and have no knowledge of this

REALLY? That is not how Jesus tells it


"But, look! one of those with Jesus reached out his hand and drew his sword and struck the slave of the high priest and took off his ear. 52 Then Jesus said to him: “Return your sword to its place, for all those who take the sword will perish by the sword."- Matthew 26;51,52

Wrong TIME.

Simply read Jesus' response.

'3 For though we walk in the flesh, we do not wage warfare according to [what we are in the] flesh. 4 For the weapons of our warfare are not fleshly, but powerful by God for overturning strongly entrenched things'- 2 Corinthians 10:3,4

The roads were dangerous in those days, and Jesus led the apostles into Syria, as dangerous then as it is today.

They probably fought off bandits more than once, but it had nothing to do with the message of the Gospel, so it wasn't mentioned.

As one apostle said, the story of Jesus could fill books, but the information presented was carefully selected.

Hollywood and the church give you a skewed view of Jesus.

That quote is only about their spiritual aims. It doesn't exclude self defense when attacked.

Perhaps he sold his cloak for one?

Interesting thoughts.....

Though Jesus himself never carried a weapon....

must have been an open carry state ...

Here is your scripture for that....


"1 But, look! one of those with Jesus reached out his hand and drew his sword and struck the slave of the high priest and took off his ear. 52 Then Jesus said to him: “Return your sword to its place, for all those who take the sword will perish by the sword. 53 Or do you think that I cannot appeal to my Father to supply me at this moment more than twelve legions of angels? 54 In that case, how would the Scriptures be fulfilled that it must take place this way?” 55 In that hour Jesus said to the crowds: “Have YOU come out with swords and clubs as against a robber to arrest me? Day after day I used to sit in the temple teaching, and yet YOU did not take me into custody. 56 But all this has taken place for the scriptures of the prophets to be fulfilled.” Then all the disciples abandoned him and fled.'- Matthew 26:51-56


Though it is still unknown scripturally if Jesus said to carry swords in case of self defense....just never thought about this before

This thread rocks! So when the bibletards insist that we support Israel, I guess they "turn the other cheek" by looking away at the fact that the weapons being used in Israels "support" are pretty badass...better than a sword.

Matthew 26:53 tells us that Jesus would have been justified asking his Father for a legion of angels to come to his defense. You are only looking at half the story.

Ever hear of snakes, scorpions, and firewood?

^these^

Nothing wrong with going armed. Peter, James, and John were actually tasked with keeping watch over Jesus while he prayed. They sucked at night watch though. Jesus actually woke them up several times. It wasn't until Jesus was done praying and his time had come that the Roman soldiers approached. Jesus did not rebuke Peter for having a sword in the first place or for being prepared to use it if need be. Jesus rebuked Peter because it was his time to go.

There is a time for everything including both self defense and compliant surrender. Jesus used that time to teach both. They guarded him with swords when it was time for that and Jesus surrendered and went peacefully when it was his time to do so. It isn't any more complicated than that.

It's a surprising turn in the story. Always seemed out of character to me

Well, now true Christians would would not
"Encourage" support" for any nation....now would they?


"And he will certainly render judgment among the nations and set matters straight respecting many peoples. And they will have to beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning shears. Nation will not lift up sword against nation, neither will they learn war anymore.'- Isaiah 2;4

Luke 22:35-36 and he said to them, when i sent you without momey bag, knapsack, and sandals, were you lacking anything? so they said "nothing" then he said to them but now he who has a money bag let him take it and likewise knapsack and he who has no sword let him sell his garment and buy one.

Nice thread OP. I have also wondered about that same point many times in the past! One more thing to study on.

Five Stars.

It was a filet knife used for fishing.

If you look at the greek word it means small blade/dagger for fishing.

A sword, as we know it, would have took off his head. Not his ear.

Not an incorrect translation, just an incorrect interpretation.

That's after all wicked people have been cast into hell, and Jesus is in charge.

No need for weapons then.

Im loving the insight into this.....

I keep posting a verse from the bible and keep getting banned

its the one about spiritual wickedness in high places..


wtf is going on...

(Though, if it WAS just a knife for fishing, why would Jesus say, those who take the sword will perish by the sword....or in this case "dagger", as that implement would not cause someone to Perish?)

BillyBob her n i think it waz Boogyman beasts n stuff in da forest.... gonna git em cryin out loud.... yisiree .... once ya git ooutta town.... its whaever gonna git ya


Last Edited by DGN on 02/15/2015 11:11 PM

It is not me banning you......

This ^ ^^

Think God someone came to rebuke these violent heathens