Nothing, it goes to your method of reasoning.
My method of reasoning is simply to stop a crime if one is able.
I'm not ignoring it. As I said, the word means a small sword or a big knife. He didn't tell them to use it for dense and when Peter did Jesus rebuked him.
I've already explained the double edged sword ain't no toothpick. It was the most lethal weapons of the time. It's what the Roman soldiers used in battle, and they were VERY successful in battle. They could carve up an enemy trying to swing a broad sword in no time.
You are only assuming what Jesus meant when He told them to buy a sword. Let's not do that. By the very nature of the type of sword He mentioned, He sure didn't have domestic intentions for a machira.
There's nothing in the text condoning it. Jesus is simply acknowledging that it exists. If He had said the prostitute had defended her house would you argue that prostitution was OK?
Irrelevant. But, no, I wouldn't.
Everything I see says it was a large knife like a dagger or a small sword. What "could" be done with it doesn't determine what Jesus intended them to do with it. One can kill with a baseball bat too, but if one said take a bat that doesn't mean that intend it for that purpose.
Oh, for heaven's sake. Please do some simple research on the Roman machira and learn what an effective fighting weapon it was. Far superior to any other sword used by Rome's enemies.
Just because something can be used for a purpose doesn't mean that that is it's intended purpose.
This is just laughable.
Jesus was sending them out to the nations, they would have need to prepare food, cut rope etc. A knife would be necessary for the them to get along.
Your attempt to diminish a machira to that of a pocket knife is amazingly silly.
I'll tell you the reason Jesus told them to buy a machira. The countryside was full of bandits. Paul even noted as much in 2 Cor 11:26 (NIV).
I must have missed that in text. I thought Jesus said, those who live by the sword shall perish by the sword.
He was making the point of violence. Defending Jesus wasn't appropriate, and Peter was just being violent. That was the point. Jesus wasn't getting all disarmament on them, as you seem to want to believe.
Do you suppose that Abraham used a sword when he went to offer Isaac?
The Bible is clear enough. He used a knife. Not a machira.
KJV Genesis 22:10 And Abraham stretched forth his hand, and took the knife to slay his son. (Gen 22:10 KJV)
It's the same word, the translators just chose to translate it differently.
For your information, the OT was written in Hebrew, and the NT was written in Greek. So, no, it isn't the "same word". Not even close.
He was trying to thwart God's plan? How exactly do you know that? Standing there facing armed men isn't time for self defense? If not when is. Come on man!
Jesus had already told them that He must die. The fact that none of them seemed to grasp that is a different issue. And, yes, Peter WAS trying to thwart God's plan. It was NOT God's plan to defend Jesus and rescue Him from the mob. Where have you been????
What you can't wriggle your way out of is the FACT that Jesus told His disciples to sell a garment to buy a highly effective fighting weapon.
she asks while hiding the rolling pin behind her back.. ..
:yes
they are ganging up on me