by greenhornet 13 Replies latest watchtower bible
I believe the WT spin on that verse is that the swords were carried as self-defense...against "wild animals"! Lions and tigers and bears and such.
Someone with access to the WT-CD could do a search on that text. I seem to recall a Questions From Readers on it.
You can't make this stuff up!
Don't have a WT CD handy, but here's what my rusty memory can provide.
When it comes to self-defense "Christians" (card-carrying JWs) are not to plan ahead for violence. Whatever that's supposed to mean. If cornered, with no other way out, a Christian may, in good conscience, defend themselves perhaps using "whatever is at hand" to help them. "Whatever is at hand". Give me a break. What is it with this kind of slip-n-slide, double speak? We're telling you not to "plan ahead" but (wink, wink,) you can use "whatever is at hand". Oh yeah, hand guns are definitely a Watchtower no-no if you're thinking about using them against humans. At least in my neck of the woods.
I don't want a hand gun in my house, (I have no quarrel with those who do, BTW) but for some reason I started storing my baseball bat under my bed after this QFR. Not that I'm planning ahead, mind you. I just want to be ready if I happen to get an uncontrollable urge for "batting practice" at 3 A.M.
Open Mind
Insight book, entry"Arms, armor":
The fact that two swords were available among the disciples on the night of Jesus’ betrayal was not unusual for those times (Lu 22:38), and there is evidence that for Galileans in particular it was not uncommon to carry arms. (See TheJewishWar, by F. Josephus, III, 42 [iii, 2].) Jesus’ words at Luke 22:36, "Let the one having no sword sell his outer garment and buy one," would not indicate that his disciples were about to enter into a hazardous life. Rather, he desired to have a sword available among his followers on that night in order to demonstrate clearly that, though they would come into circumstances that could easily provoke armed resistance, he did not intend to resort to the sword but would give himself up voluntarily in harmony with God’s will. Thus, when Peter did react and try to put up armed resistance, lopping off the ear of Malchus, Jesus ordered him: "Return your sword to its place, for all those who take the sword will perish by the sword." (Mt 26:52; Joh 18:10, 11) Certainly, Peter’s sword and the other one at hand would have availed little against such a large group of armed men, and by trying to use them, they would undoubtedly have ‘perished by the sword.’ (Mt 26:47) More important, such attempted delivery of Jesus would have failed, being completely contrary to Jehovah God’s purpose. (Mt 26:53, 54) As it was, later that day Jesus could plainly state to Pilate: "If my kingdom were part of this world, my attendants would have fought that I should not be delivered up to the Jews. But, as it is, my kingdom is not from this source."—Joh 18:36.
It's rather interesting that Mark (14:47) is not quoted -- in the Markan story the anonymous sword wielder is not reproved; only in Luke is the victim named, and healed...
Edit to add the Josephus passage referred to in the Insight book:
These two Galilees, of so great largeness, and encompassed with so many nations of foreigners, have been always able to make a strong resistance on all occasions of war; for the Galileans are inured to war from their infancy, and have been always very numerous; nor hath the country been ever destitute of men of courage, or wanted a numerous set of them
There is a web site called corneredcat.com. She has some very good info on how a christian handle this. I really learned a lot from her. What she says make a lot of sense.
