Could Erick or any religious conservative please explain to me what they think would be the position of Jesus on guns or if they think that Jesus would possess a gun? Thank you very much. Best regards, Justin

While I don't see anything in God's Word that prohibits believers from defending themselves, their families and communities by force if necessary, at the same time I don't think Luke 22 is a good support for that conclusion. In that particular passage Jesus has one point: to be 'numbered with the transgressors'. This had nothing to do with self-defense.

There are two types of swords typically used and referenced in Scripture: a large sword commonly used in battle and carried by soldiers, often double-sided, and a short sword more representative of what we would consider a dagger. Luke 22 uses the shorter dagger. It was the type of sword that could be easily concealed and was commonly carried by people like the Zealots who would use them to try to attack Roman soldiers in crowded area.

regards, Justin

Thank you all for this discussion. I really appreciate you taking the time to explain to me your point of view. It's great to have an intelligent and civil discussion with people who have a different opinion than me. Best regards, Justin

An important consideration in interpreting this passage is the question Jesus asked prior to answering the question about paying taxes. The coin likely bore the image of the Emperor Tiberius and an inscription that was an abbreviated form of the Latin that translates, "Tiberius Caesar, Worshipful Son of the god, Augustus." So in asking about the coin's image and inscription he is pointing out to His Jewish audience that the coin is a graven image inscribed with a blasphemous claim that Caesar is the son of a god and worthy of worship, but he does so in a way that the Roman authorities wouldn't understand as a challenge to Caesar's authority. When viewed in this context, Jesus' teaching isn't to pay your taxes, but rather it is a restatement of Joshua's exhortation to "Chose this day whom you will serve" (Joshua 24:15). He is telling his audience that Caesar is demanding more than just tribute, he is demanding worship and they need to choose whom they will worship.


The proper use of self-defense has to do with wisdom, understanding, and tact. In Luke 22:36, Jesus tells His remaining disciples, “If you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.” Jesus knew that now was the time when His followers would be threatened, and He upheld their right to self-defense. Just a short time later, Jesus is arrested, and Peter takes a sword and cuts off someone’s ear. Jesus rebukes Peter for that act (verses 49–51). Why? In his zeal to defend the Lord, Peter was standing in the way of God’s will. Jesus had told His disciples multiple times that He must be arrested, put on trial, and die (e.g., Matthew 17:22–23). In other words, Peter acted unwisely in that situation. We must have wisdom regarding when to fight and when not to.

I agree that you have the correct interpretation. Jesus was instructing them that their mission was dangerous (sell your cloak and buy one). I think it is a good example of self defense. All throughout Paul's ministry he used his Roman citizenship as a defensive weapon. The difference is defense and not aggression. The heart is what matters. If the heart is right, the weapon will only be used when necessary, when the heart is wrong, all sorts of evil will come. When Jesus tells Peter that those who live by the sword, die by the sword. If disciples had fought the Romans/Sanhedrin in an armed conflict, they would have all died. Having a defensive weapon for protection, is not "living by the sword".

Jesus was contrasting their spread of the Gospel in the future, to when he had sent them out earlier. He was explaining to them that they needed to prepare to be men and need the things of men to do the work of God, money and supplies, including a sword (as others have mentioned was a short, defensive weapon, more of a knife than what we would think of as a sword). The disciples then start looking right then, and Jesus tells them it is enough, as in enough of that discussion. He wasn't trying to get them physically prepared to be sent at that moment, but offering them instructions for after his death and resurrection (which was what he had doing with the Last Supper that preceded this discussion). He tells them that the time is at hand "numbered with the transgressors", which is a quote from Isaiah prophesying Jesus' atoning death. The contrast is that Jesus was with them in earthly form the first time they were sent and their safety was guaranteed. The next time, he will be with them through the Holy Spirit and they must live as normal humans, needing money, supplies and protection.

I typically fully agree with you, et, but I can't in this instance, as the context fully proves otherwise. Jesus specifically quotes Isaiah 53:12, but ONLY that part that references being "numbered with the transgressors." Additionally, if this had ANYTHING to do with actually defending themselves, Jesus would not have said that 2 small daggers would 'suffice' for 11+ people. This was all and only about the fulfillment of the scriptures. Again, the case can be made, but Luke 22 is a very BAD place to do it as it requires very poor exegesis to arrive at that conclusion, and no issue is important enough to warrant poorly translating God's Word in order to arrive there.

A sword or knife was a useful tool for much more than self-defense against another human; there were wild animals to be concerned about. There was a need for the preparation of food, etc. I don't find Jesus suggesting the use of a sword for offensive or defensive purposes. The sword is mentioned by Paul in his letter to the Ephesians; "put on the full armor of God" and the armor included the sword which was defined as "the sword of the spirit, which is the word of God". I use a knife for many things not related to self defense, and I do not feel completely dressed without it! We need also to remember, death for Christ and those IN Christ is not the end, but the beginning of something much better! It would be wonderful beyond words if the Bible answered ALL our questions, but it doesn't, we Christians do; however, have our "Google it" system with prayer!

The self-defense argument was merely to explain why they were armed, and Peter used the sword against Malgus in what he considered to be a threat to Jesus and acted instinctively. There is no other possible reason why they were armed. I agree with the shorter weapon reasoning, which was exclusively used for self defense and protection.

Not being an expert on the bible I cannot say Jesus would like or dislike guns. I do know from going to a catholic school for 10 years that Jesus destroyed a temple taken over by money traders and beat them , that thou shall not kill actually translates to thou shall not murder , making the meaning entirely different . Christians cannot be CO's based on religion . I was taught that you are allowed to defend yourself and loved ones so that would mean jesus would accept guns knives swords ,as far as I was taught at Sacred Heart School in N Y anyhow .