Drew
Member
Here, I suggest is the fundamental problem with all attempts to explain Luke 22 in terms of Jesus telling us we can use swords to defend ourselves - they invariably strikethrough the bit about prophecy fulfillment, the proponents of such arguments taking it upon themselves to do this:
And He said to them, “When I sent you out without money belt and bag and sandals, you did not lack anything, did you?” They said, “No, nothing.” 36 And He said to them, “But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one. 37For I tell you that this which is written must be fulfilled in Me, ‘And He was numbered with transgressors’; for that which refers to Me has its fulfillment.” 38 They said, “Lord, look, here are two swords.” And He said to them, “It is enough.”
Do you see the problem?
When we take it upon ourselves to effectively replace Jesus' explanation for the swords with our own, how are we not committing an egregious violation of respect for scriptural authority?
And He said to them, “When I sent you out without money belt and bag and sandals, you did not lack anything, did you?” They said, “No, nothing.” 36 And He said to them, “But now, whoever has a money belt is to take it along, likewise also a bag, and whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one. 37
Do you see the problem?
When we take it upon ourselves to effectively replace Jesus' explanation for the swords with our own, how are we not committing an egregious violation of respect for scriptural authority?