I was recently listening to a radio talk show host talk about the right of American’s to own guns and he made the statement that even Jesus wants people to own guns.
He said that true Christianity is a Christianity that bears arms. He then went on to quote Jesus’ statement in Luke 22:36 where He instructs His disciples to sell their cloak so that they can go buy a sword. “See?” the talk show host said, “Any Christian who says we should not buy and own weapons is not a true Christian because they are contradicting Jesus Himself!”
I laughed at this sort of argument, but sadly, the radio host was deadly serious, and far too many Christians agree with him.
Far too many Christian see Jesus’ instructions to His disciples to go buy a sword as an endorsement by Jesus of gun ownership, and in some cases, an endorsement of violence. I am not of this persuasion.
For the record, I support the constitutional right of United States citizens to buy and own guns. But I don’t do so on the basis of Scripture. I support gun ownership for political, historical, and rational reasons. But none of that matters for this post.
The real issue I want to address is why Jesus told His disciples to go buy a sword in Luke 22:36. There are a couple things to note about this instruction from Jesus which shows us that the instructions of Jesus to His disciples to buy a sword cannot in any way be viewed as an endorsement from Jesus of gun ownership.
1. These Swords Were Not For Violence
First of all, we must recognize that whatever reasons Jesus had for telling His disciples to buy swords, the swords were not to be used for violence.
After all, when Peter actually used the sword that he was carrying, Jesus not only rebuked him and told him to put the sword away, but He also healed the damage that had been done by Peter’s sword (Luke 22:47-51).
Furthermore, when Jesus was put on trial, Jesus told Pilate that since His kingdom was not of this world, His followers would not fight (John 18:36). Obviously, if Jesus had wanted His disciples to use the swords they had purchased, Jesus could not have said this.
Jesus clearly knew, and His disciples seemed to understand (especially after learning from the rebuke of Peter), that Jesus did not want them to use their swords for violence.
So why then did Jesus have His disciples buy swords?
2. The Swords Were For the Fulfillment of Prophecy
Immediately after telling His disciples to buy a sword, Jesus gave them the reason why: “For I say to you that this which is written must still be accomplished in me: ‘And He was numbered with the transgressors’” (Luke 22:37).
Jesus told His disciples to buy swords so that He can fulfill this prophecy from Isaiah 53:12. Jesus wanted His disciples to buy swords so that it will appear to the authorities that He and His band of followers were transgressors!
That this is what Jesus meant is confirmed by the statement of Jesus in Luke 22:38 when the disciples show Jesus the two swords they had obtained. Jesus said, “It is enough.” In other words, “That will do.”
If Jesus was seriously condoning violence, two swords were not “enough” to accomplish anything, especially in the hands of a ragtag bunch of fishermen and tax-collectors who had no military training.
Jesus told His disciples to buy swords, not so that they would use them, but as a fulfillment of prophecy so that they would have the appearance of being transgressors.
To fulfill prophecy, Jesus had to be viewed as a transgressor. He had to at least appear to be a political revolutionary to the Jewish authorities for them to feel justified in arresting him. His cleansing of the temple a few days earlier was probably calculated for the same effect. So, to fulfill the prophecy and to provoke the Jewish authorities, he had to have enough weaponry to justify being viewed as a law breaking revolutionary (Greg Boyd, Go Buy a Sword )
So Go Buy a Gun if You Want To…
So if you live in a country that allows gun ownership, and if you are a law-abiding citizen, go buy a gun if you want to.
But don’t ever suppose that Jesus endorses gun ownership because He told His disciples to “go buy a sword.” That is a terrible misreading of Luke 22:36.
Been through that argument before… I didn’t fare so well. Maybe the words written down by you will make it deeper in someone’s heart.
Good job!
Great article! I have been wanting to write the same thing, and now I don’t have to 🙂 I am a big believer in the Second Amendment, but I won’t give up on good hermeneutics to defend it.
You should still write a post on it! The more posts out there on these sorts of topics, the better.
I Agree with you but I think there was also a deeper spiritual meaning to this. Jesus spoke often times in parables so that only the wise and understanding would pick up on it. And he says he who has a cloak sell it and buy a sword. I believe he is speaking of casting off self righteousness, which is really filthy garments In favor of standing on the word ( the sword of the spirit) And being clothed in Christ’s righteousness instead of our cloak.
I wouldn’t use this verse to support the RKBA, but I think it’s a stretch to say that the swords were to create an illusion of being numbered among transgressors. He was to be numbered among actual transgressors, which I think has broader application beyond his own disciples, historically speaking. 🙂
That’s a good point
What is RKBA?
Right To Keep and Bear Arms
To me, and no offense I saw this post from a friend who commented, both interpretations seem to be equally filled with assumptions that really can’t be hermeneutically derived without first applying those assumptions. I.E. when Peter said I have these two, and Jesus responds that is enough… For the whole group? Or just for peter. The instruction seemed to be for the whole group, and Peter says, “I have two” (of my own). Jesus telling him that was enough seems to be directed at Peter. Secondly Just because Jesus didn’t want to stop His arrest with the sword, does not mean that he was speaking out against the use of those swords for personal defense, it could be that simply in that moment He didn’t want them to fight this arrest.
For the other side, notice how Jesus adds that to a list of things that they would now need when He was gone? If the sword were just for that moment why would he have added it to a list of actual items that would help them survive? The ancient world was rough, much like today. One would have to defend themselves sometimes, just like they would need sandals, knapsack and money bags.
Of course it is an absolute mistreatment of Scripture to say that it is “Unchristian” to not own a gun, it does give some credence to personal defense via weapons. God Bless and thanks for taking the time to write your thoughts!
Luke 22:38: And they said, “Look, Lord, here are two swords.” And he said to them, “It is enough.”
How can that just be Peter?
Maybe that’s in the translation. Maybe His words meant, to Peter and ‘they’, ‘That’s enough!’ [sit down and shut up or words to that effect]
Jesus never asked His disciples to get into armed conflict, retaliation or revenge. If He did He would be contradicting His clear teachings in Matthew 5:38-48 and Luke 6:27-35. The first church was never armed. The singular case where Jesus asked His disciples to buy swords was clearly meant to fulfill scriptures and prophecies concerning Him (Jesus) as He even stated in the story in Luke 22:36-38
See Matthew’s account of the usage of thesword and fulfillment of scriptures and prophecies around Jesus. Pay special attention to what Jesus said about using swords:
“But Jesus said to him, “Friend, why have you come?” Then they came and laid hands on Jesus and took Him. And suddenly, one of those who were with Jesus stretched out his hand and drew his sword, struck the servant of the high priest, and cut off his ear. But Jesus said to him, “Put your sword in its place, for all who take thesword will perish by the sword. Or do you think that I cannot now pray to My Father, and He will provide Me with more than twelve legions of angels? How then could the Scriptures be fulfilled, that it must happen thus?” In that hour Jesus said to the multitudes, “Have you come out, as against a robber, with swords and clubs to take Me? I sat daily with you, teaching in the temple, and you did not seize Me. But all this was done that the Scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled.” Then all the disciples forsook Him and fled.” (Matthew 26:50-56)
“The first church was never armed” what do you base this statement on? I haven’t seen any indication at all either way about the church’s self defense status. If it is true, it was probably more a matter of poverty than anything else.
The first church was not that poor….so it could not be a matter of poverty…
“Nor was there anyone among them who lacked; for all who were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the proceeds of the things that were sold,” Acts 4:34
Still, you haven’t proven that they weren’t armed… so the supposed reasons for not being armed are of little import. do you have a verse for that? Also… there’s a lot Acts after chapter 4…
They were arrested, harassed, beating and even killed – no record of any resistance by them with or without arms.
They were followers of Jesus Christ who said this to His disciples –
“You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also. If anyone wants to sue you and take away your tunic, let him have your cloak also. And whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two. Give to him who asks you, and from him who wants to borrow from you do not turn away. “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven; for He makes His sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward have you? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet your brethren only, what do you do more than others? Do not even the tax collectors do so? Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect.” Matthew 5:38-48
So… an argument from silence. Gotcha.
You either follow Jesus and His teachings or follow the world and bear as much arms as you want to.
You are completely incorrect. This is a clear instruction TO be armed. We are told repeatedly to protect and provide – which includes security – for our own. Our own is not just our family, but our kinsmen.
[God does NOT change, and God Himself oft instructed our true Israelite forebears in armed conflict, including annihilation of the ungodly. He ‘allowed’ enemies to remain so that generations ‘not trained in war’ could learn it…]
Remember too that Peter was armed; it was against roman statute for a non citizen to be armed. You think Jesus didnt KNOW that Peter was carrying?!?!?
This is clear – we are to be armed and be ready to defend ourselves and our family and brethren. Period.
If you read that particular scripture more carefully, you’ll see Jesus is asking to get swords ‘so that he may be counted among the lawless’ which fulfills the OT scripture for the coming of the Messiah (because, as you said, it was against the law to be armed). The swords were for fulfillment, not protection. And when Peter uses the sword later, Jesus immediately heals the man and scolds Peter.
Additionally, even if you don’t care about the critical context that I’ve outlined above, why is there no record of a disciple ever using a sword as they went into the world (that I know of)? All the disciples died horrific deaths because of their faith yet never defended themselves with a sword? If this verse is to be taken as you say, surely they would’ve used the swords that Jesus ‘commanded them to go get for protection’? Right?
Thanks, think I’ll do both.
I’ll ascribe to the notion of sanely and prudently arming yourself to protect life, limb and household. But to say that Jesus commanded it is just silly.
I think most people wouldn’t extrapolate to a command to arm one’s self for all believers… just that the concept of arming one’s self was not in opposition to Jesus’ teaching.
you would be surprised. I HAVE run across people who think like that. In my humble, I think that arming yourself is prudent and should be a conscience issue between you and God. I don’t believe God favors a pacifist over someone who will fight at this point. I DO question motives. I also insist that before you run out and buy a gun and sit down, in the dark, shut off all media and electronics and think. Walk yourself through the process, mentally, of taking another human being’s life. Ask yourself why you would do that. And ask how quick you would be to do so. It’s a sobering and sacred thing to take the life of another human, even if it’s justified. We aren’t designed to kill. We have to be trained to.
I’ve heard it used that way, just not in the majority. I carry a concealed weapon every day, everywhere legal… but I’d be more inclined to use a principle of “providing for the needs of my family” than Luke 22:36 :).
I consider it my duty to protect the family God has submitted to my care. Understanding a few things about the nature of the politics of our country, I have little choice.
Oy vey! Sorry if this is insulting, but only in America would this even get discussed. The idea of pairing a discussion about a willingness to shoot another person to death with your gun and following the way of Jesus is nauseating. Incompatible, indefensible, and in most of the world inconceivable.
I had heard that this was to support prophecy, but it seemed a rather lame arguement. Your explaination clears things up quite well. Thank you. (y)
I have been a victim of gun violence and I will never own a gun. Having a gun would not have helped me to protect myself when I was mugged, because of the way the person approached me. The Lord spared my life. If you have more faith in a weapon than the creator of the universe, I feel sadness for you. I am not naive, we live in a dangerous world, but I’m astonished at the level of fear so many Christians seem to have in this country.
Thank you, Faith, for your comments. So refreshing. Bless you! I totally agree with you.
I often puzzled over Jesus command here to go and buy a sword, and am not entirely convinced by your explanation, Jeremy, though it is certainly more plausible than the acceptance of His instruction as a right to own weapons. His command to put away the sword and His admonition that those who resort to such will die by such is so much more weighty than the instruction to go and buy a weapon. It is almost laughable too that two swords should be enough for a band of disciples trying to defend themselves. Peter’s enthusiastic failure in this is proof enough of that. So for the time, in the absence of any other plausible explanation, I shall rest on what you say, Jeremy. Thank you. I do enjoy your blog. It always causes one to re-think and re-look at things.
You’re welcome Jem, and thank you for the kind words, and I also like Jeremy’s interpretation of the passage.
When I read the header, “Go buy a sword! Luke….” I thought, ‘No need; he already has a lightsaber…’
I have never believed that Luke 22:36 should be interpreted allegorically however it is also unwarranted to say that we have been commanded to be armed. Most Christians would agree that we are supposed to help those in need but most of us interpret that as giving money (we Americans always interpret things in terms of money). The commands to help others in need extends beyond giving money it includes defending those who are being attacked. So, for example, if you see someone being mugged you have the responsibility as a Christian to come to their aid. Whether or not you are armed when you do that is up to you.
For a good non-allegorical discussion of many Bible passages dealing with self defense please check out The Biblical View of Self-Defense.
Glenn
“Not by might, not by power, but by my Spirit says the Lord….The darkness that is upon is Spiritual and can ONLY be defeated by Jesus Christ himself…
Using this one verse as a proof text to either support gun ownership, or not is ludicrous. What next? Should we all try walking on water because Jesus invited Peter to do so as a measure of faith. As I read all scripture I see a God who understands defending one’s self and family. When I read 1Timothy 5:8 I understand providing for one’s family to be the essentials of life, as well as defending those lives. I do not see gun ownership to be a lack of faith anymore than having car, life, or medical insurance. I would not want to answer for allowing my grandchildren to be raped and murdered while I stood by…Watch the movie “The Mission” which posites the warrior mentality versus the pacifist mentality. It will make you think.
I agree with some of what you said. I don’t think that Christians should arm themselves because they believe it is a commandment from Jesus. Jesus spoke to His disciples specifically to buy the swords but I don’t see any evidence He was advocating that everyone buy a sword. It is well know that the disciples carried swords. It was part of life in a violent world not very different from the evils we face in modern society (the weaponry is simply different). There is certainly nothing wrong with arming yourself to protect yourself and your family. This is a NON-ESSENTIAL to being a Christian. What IS ESSENTIAL is the heart of anyone who is armed or not-armed! You can commit murder whether you are armed or not. (1 John 3:15) “Whoever hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life abiding in him.” and even evil thoughts are counted as malicious: (Matthew 5:22) “But I tell you that anyone who is angry with a brother or sister[a][b] will be subject to judgment. Again, anyone who says to a brother or sister, ‘Raca,’[c] is answerable to the court. And anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell.”
Where I disagree with you is that I do think it is a stretch to draw a conclusion that Jesus commanded the Disciples to buy swords to fulfill prophecy. While Jesus did some things that fulfilled prophecy, I personally don’t believe He had to do anything to influence the opinion of the masses surrounding Him and His Disciples. The religious establishment certainly did not accept them and already thought os them as blasphemers and transgressors.
Your inference that those who arm themselves are transgressors would not have held true at all. The Pharisees would have had to turn their backs on King David and listed him as transgressor….clearly they did NOT see him in any such light! The religious establishment was looking for a conqueror in Messiah, one that would literally deliver them from the oppression of the Romans. They wanted a fearless leader with a sword on a white stallion leading the charge (the type of Messiah seen in Revelation), but clearly missed the point… His fight was to conquer SIN, not specifically the Roman establishment.
Later, the scholars of the times realized that Messiah had not come when He was prophesied to come. When you ask even today’s rabbis why the Messiah didn’t come 2000 years ago as He was supposed to… they will tell you, “We weren’t worthy”. Of course, that prompts the question: ‘If we are worthy, are we in need of a Savior?’ It is precisely because they were not worthy that Messiah came (on time) … to save them from the penalties of their sins… they just couldn’t see it. (God, Himself, blinded them and hardened their hearts so that non-Jews could be saved.
In the end, you and I came to the same conclusion…”So if you live in a country that allows gun ownership, and if you are a law-abiding citizen, go buy a gun if you want to.” But, there is no sound Biblical ground to suggest that Jews and Christians are supposed to simply allow al Queda or ISIS or any common thug to come into our homes and kill us while we turn the other cheek. Murder is a sin (what Jesus was talking about) … clearly different than killing in self defense or in war. – While we are accountable for any blood we “spill”, the accountability for the protection of our families is greater.
Jesus is certainly loving and forgiving, but He returns with a sword in His hands – not turning a cheek to evil.
Let any man (or woman) be convinced in his (heart) about arming him (herself).
True that jesus taught to turn the other cheek.
True that Jesus said those who live by the sword shall die by the sword.
True that Jesus fulfills prophecy.
But also true Jesus said to sell your cloak and buy a sword.
All these are true and not contradictory.
If someone strikes you, what is the context from which Jesus speaks? Deadly force?
If you have died by the sword what context was living by the sword? A pacifist life?
If Christ fulfills prophecy by being regarded with the transgressors what’s the context for purchasing a sword? Did Jesus think they had none?
Who is the instruction for when the disciples are already armed? By already being armed are they living by the sword? Is it possible to turn the other check while armed?
Which is greater, a principle of nonviolence or a principle of justice? Does justice require violence? Never, sometimes, all the time?
Does God have an army? Could Jesus call down legions of angels? Is it all for show?
Ecclesiastes 3:1-8 King James Version (KJV)
3 To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven:
2 A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted;
3 A time to kill, and a time to heal; a time to break down, and a time to build up;
4 A time to weep, and a time to laugh; a time to mourn, and a time to dance;
5 A time to cast away stones, and a time to gather stones together; a time to embrace, and a time to refrain from embracing;
6 A time to get, and a time to lose; a time to keep, and a time to cast away;
7 A time to rend, and a time to sew; a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;
8 A time to love, and a time to hate; a time of war, and a time of peace.
I am from Northern Ireland. I shudder to think of the consequences in our past if gun ownership laws had been the same back then as American law now is. Instead of a few thousand deaths in our troubles there would have been many, many, many more. How many more innocent Americans will die by the living by the sword mentality. Surely just observing the gun laws of Britain or other countries is evidence of a better way. With regards to Christianity being in favour of it. That is just plain absurd. Utterly absurd. This was a really good and rational explanation of the need of swords at the arrest of jesus Jeremy. The reasons put forward by others for the right to bear arms are equally bad and unrational in equal measure. And to equate this with Christianity and the gospel. Well. What more can I say. The heart of man is truly wicked. I would nearly say these people are neandrathal but to be honest that would be an insult to early man.
But then I am not an American. And it, s maybe none of my business. But mankind is becoming global rather than national. One of the benefits of the world wide Web. Needless to say—don, t think I, ll be running for president any time soon. I sorta like your present president Mr Trump though. I like his plain straight forward communication. I don’t think he has the intelligence to do it any other way. Which is likable and sort of honest to a degree. His business skills are useful though for running the show. And he, s different. Worth a go. Wish he was running northern Ireland at present. Our state of affairs needs a good business acumen. Ours is run on tribal politics and crazy fundamental “Christian” ideology, s. Square wheel stuff.
Americans and guns!!!!!!! This is so blatantly and obviously mismanaged and wrong that it defies belief. Honestly!!! I shudder to think what would have happened here in Northern Ireland history if we had of had the same gun laws as America. Why does America hold on to this insane right to buy arms. Its not the baring of arms that concerns me its the buying of arms that seems to have gone berserk!! And the buy 1 get 1 free at Walmart mentality. I,m so glad we do not have these laws or availability of weapons for sale where I live. I probably would have murdered my neighbour by now!!! Well actually I would not have but at least that option has been removed from my list. America really has become a laughing stock in the eyes of the world on this issue. Though it, s not that funny to be honest. It’s horrific. And we in the rest of the world have to suffer the regular news coverage of these atrocity, s. Yes n. Ire has shared a lot of its atrocity on the news as well. But we have moved on. Slowly. So move on America. Even if slowly.
Every Christian has a right to defend themselves and family. At the time of Jesus’ crucifixtion, Satan tried twice to stop this from happening through Peter. Jesus taught many things about the Commandments and the civil laws of their day. Don’t you that Christ taught through through the apostle Paul in ROMANS 13, that those who bear the sword are Ministers of God. And being that our constitution gives us the right to bear arms falls in line with biblical teachings. God bless.
That picture is atrocious. Guy carrying without a holster AND the gun is fscing the wrong way.
Not a great way to make it look like you have any clue what you’re talking about.
The words Pay Attention show up over 100 times in the bible. Listen.
Jesus Christ told his disciples he who lives by the sword dies by the sword at no time whatsoever did Jesus Christ tell his disciples to buy swords!!!
Is your position that Jesus didn’t want the disciples using the swords in any circumstance? Do you think that the disciples interpreted it in that way when he quoted from Isaiah? They understood that the swords were only to make him look like transgressors?
Would have swords even have made them look like transgressors to the people in their day? …. it doesn’t seem to add up to me. After all the fact that they had swords had nothing to do with why Jesus was counted as a transgressor..transgressors. The scripture was fulfilled when he was punished as a transgressor, not when he looked like one. They weren’t looking to count the disciples as transgressors even Peter after cutting the man’s ear wasn’t looked at as a transgressor… It just seems far fetched to say that the bringing of the swords was the fulfillment of professy.
Instead I think it makes more sense if Jesus, knowing that he would be counted among the transgressors (and not because of anything to do with having swords), was saying get a sword because they’re coming for me, the scripture was about to be fulfilled whether they were ready or not… I think the fact that Jesus told them to get a purse and a bag is further evidence of this… a purse and a bag didn’t make them look like transgressors, but it did help them to be prepared.
For the record, I don’t currently own a gun, and don’t find it that necessary for me at the moment… I agree this scripture shouldn’t be used to tell Christians we should all own guns and definitely shouldn’t be used to promote violence.
However, I believe I see some problems with your interpretation too. I think Jesus probably did tell them to buy a sword to be prepared. Jesus obviously didn’t want them to use them to protect him since he stopped Peter and rebuked them, but Jesus could have been suggesting that in the coming days they may be necessary for protecting themselves and/or the people with them.
I’m open to the idea that there could be a hostile situation in this day and age as well in which a Christian may want to own a gun to be prepared, but like I said I haven’t yet.
Hope this finds you well brother! This is just meant to be iron sharpening iron as it says in Proverbs. Feel free to let me know if you think I got something wrong. I’d be happy to consider a response from you.
Joshua
O…sure …they were about to be attacked more and worse than ever and Jesus said to buy weapons ..of course he did…wouldn’t anyone with any brains or common sence have one? And not to use as a sybol not to use as walking sticks,not to hang on the wall..but .to defend them selves..do you think God wants his people slaughtered?
Owning a sword does not mean Jesus condoned violence. Protecting yourself is not violence. Jesus condemned Peter probably because the servant was not a threat.
Idiosyncratic not exactly exegetical
Lots of speculation as to what Jesus was meaning to say. What we do know is that up until his crucifixion Jesus did not condone violence. We also know that the Apostles did not use swords to spread the Gospel or to defend themselves.
Christ literally instructed his followers to arm themselves, but when Peter took it upon himself to use deadly force to affect an undesirable situation, he was rebuked by our Messiah, saying, “He who would take by the sword, will surely perish by the sword.” The instruction is obvious to me and falls somewhere between your interpretation and the far-right cringe-republican take. We are to be ready, and ABLE to defend ourselves, as the Enemy is always prowling, looking for those he might consume. This is instruction is tempered by the warning that I interpret as, “If you become the aggressor, using violence to alter things that YOU have decided need altering…then, your fate is to die by that same violence. The Almighty has set the Enemy loose, for awhile – causing the great delusion so that His glory will be revealed to all man, and truly, the veil will be removed and every eye will see and every knee will bend, and know that He is God. We must be prepared to defend ourselves and loved one’s until His great work is done. At the end, our children will beat our “swords” into plowshares, and the wolf will lie down with the lamb. I will be armed, and watchful to defend myself and my loved ones, never using my tools of violence to subject others to the same violence I am prepared to defend against. Seems like such an easy instruction and those, like yourself, who would twist Messiah’s words to support a political ideology of an unarmed populace is definitely a tool of the enemy.
Here is another way to consider the two swords…. Jesus was the WORD made Flesh….The WORD is Spiritual….From the viewpoint of Spirit… the swords were matter….These are the Swords of Spirit…( ).
These swords can separate words to show how to become One with Spirit. When the human mind considers these Swords as Spiritual tools to aid the mind to become one with Spirit.. They are indeed enough..
Here is how the mind can use these tools ( ).. When the mind moves within its own words and opens them up…The mind moves in sync with Spirit like this as it begins to see signs of His Spirit along His Way…..Ie….The word movement… (Move) (men) (t)… Ie..take up your cross (t) and follow me.
According Webster..the human mind is not allowed to do this…because the alphabet is as set in stone. When the mind opens up its blocked learned words… the mind opens up to His Spirit…The mind can find lots of the Signs of Spirit when the mind does this. Here is an example of the word mind…Open it u….m(in)d….Those the direction for the mind to go within itself and there is the real md…the real Healer..The Holy Spirit
Here is the sign that the human mind can be here and there at the same time…(t)here.
The letters that were with God in the beginning are G O D…and Spiritual . The word of the flesh without Spirit is the word sin…With God and the mind opens up the word sin… it can easily become a si(G) along His Way.
Namaste
This doesn’t make sense to me because if 2 swords were not enough to accomplish a rebellion, then how were they enough to “appear” to be rebelling?
The Real Person!
The Real Person!
I do not agree with your interpretation of this. Jesus did not manipulate circumstances in order to fulfill prophecy