I am so discouraged—but hardly surprised–by this response to a post of mine from Friday about the acquittal of Kyle Rittenhouse.
I was reminded that Jesus told his disciples to get swords (Luke 22:36) and that Jesus did not come to “bring peace, but a sword” (Matt. 10:34).
Sadly—or infuriatingly—this response perfectly reflects the biblicism of fundamentalism, a biblicism that distorts who Jesus is and who we are called to be as imitators of Jesus, a response that is destroying the witness of the church in North America, and prompting so many to deconstruct their faith.
Is it any wonder that so many desiring to follow Jesus are deconstructing a fundamentalist faith?
This is fundamentalist proof-texting biblicism at its worst, and here is why.
This biblicism fails to let “Scripture interprets Scripture” (a core principle in read the Bible).
This fundamentalist biblicism fails to ask questions about what a verse really means, and just thinks the meaning is “plain and clear”.
In Luke 22:36 Jesus tells his disciples to have a purse, and a bag, and to get a sword if they don’t have one.
In our Second Amendment world, conservatives interpret this to mean that Jesus is encouraging a sword for self-defense, just like we are given the right to bear arms (= guns).
“This MUST BE the PLAIN and CLEAR meaning”, people think.
But no. This is American biblicism at its worst.
Why? Because…
• If Jesus was implying self-defense through weapons, he wouldn’t have said that two swords were enough (Jesus said this two verses after the “get some swords” verse, when an enthusiastic disciples showed him all the swords they already had) (Luke 22:38).
Two swords WOULD NOT BE ENOUGH is Jesus meant “literal” self-defense against the Jewish temple guard or Roman soldiers. You would need a bunch more than two.
So Jesus couldn’t have meant it literally.
• And 14 verses later, when a disciple defends Jesus by cutting off a dudes ear, Jesus rebukes the disciple for the violence (Luke 22:49-53).
In Matthew’s telling of the story, Jesus definitively says that if they were going to start a rebellion that he had angels enough for all the fighting, so swords wouldn’t be needed anyway (Matt. 26:52-53).
In fact, Jesus rebukes the disciples saying that “all who draw the sword will die by the sword” (Matt. 26:52).
So Jesus could not have LITERALLY meant that they should have swords for self-defense.
Not Peace, but a Sword
BUT, a self-defense advocates told me, JESUS SAYS HE DIDN’T COME TO BRING PEACE, BUT A SWORD (Matt. 10:34), so again, by implication the other sword passage must be literal.
This again fails to let scripture interpret scripture.
FIRST, the parallel saying in Luke12:51 says, “Do you think I came to bring peace on earth? No, I tell you, but division.”
Jesus’ ministry, and the gospel itself, demands a decision. And a decision for or against Jesus will cause division.
And a sword is a literal tool of division.
So in Matt. 10:34 this tool is used metaphorically to make a point about Jesus’ ministry (because Jesus himself is the sword that divides people, not some literal weapon that we are supposed to use for self-defense).
SECOND, Jesus himself blesses the peacemakers, not the warmongers (Matt. 5:9).
THIRD, the entire example of Jesus’ life is directed toward peace with others, even while warring against the spiritual powers.
So to use this ONE text (Matt. 10:34) connected to ONE other text (Luke 22:36), interpreted “PLAINLY and CLEARLY” to contradict so many other scriptures is a blatant distortion of these verses.
Instead of trying to read all of scripture according to these two verse, we should read these two verse according to all of scripture.
And we should read all of scripture through Jesus.
The Flaw of Fundamentalist Biblicism
Of course, many fundamentalist don’t see it this way because they have a world view that
• Focuses on the individual brain
• And individual bits a “data” (from the Bible)
But all life–and interpreting the Bible—is really about connection and relationship. So we have to read the whole Bible, and interpret it through Jesus.
Unfortunately, 100+ years of faulty training in fundamentalist biblicism has caused a fundamental misunderstanding that nature of discipleship, of following the example set for us by Jesus.
Is it any wonder that so many desiring to follow Jesus are deconstructing a fundamentalist faith?
OTHER RESOURCES:
Deconstructing Fundamentalism without Destroying Faith (ecourse)
“Let the One Who Has No Sword, Buy One” (on the two swords passage)
What did Jesus mean by coming to bring a sword
Disrupt reliance on social media algorithms by signing up for my newsletter (below on mobile, up on the side on a computer).
And please share this if it has been helpful or thought provoking.