The Lord is awe-inspiring, fearsome, fascinating, intriguing, majestic, and full of splendor: breathtaking! Here is what I saw of him today and what came to my heart and mind in John 18:10,
"Then Simon Peter, who had a sword, drew it and struck the high priest's servant, cutting off his right ear."
When the soldiers and officials from the chief priests came to arrest Jesus, Peter (always impetuous and impulsive) drew his sword and cut off the right ear of Malchus, the high priest's servant. From this I'm guessing Peter was a southpaw. It seems to me that if Peter was right-handed, he would have had to take Malchus' head off to get to his right ear... (just conjecture on my part). In any event, what was Peter doing with a sword?
That question is an important one. Its importance is found in that it illustrates the prevalence of a handicap many people impose upon themselves when they read and study the Scriptures. That handicap is the mistake of reading and studying the Scriptures through the lense of preconceived theology. Rather than allowing the Scriptures to speak for themselves in helping us develop our theology over time, we often form our understanding of the Scriptures by what our preconceived theology dictates. This can often bring both our understanding of the Scriptures and the maturity of our theology to a standstill.
Many think Jesus was a pacifist and condemned any possession or use of weapons and that Peter's possession and use of a sidearm would be wrongful from the get-go.
Take a look at this passage, "Then Jesus asked them [his disciples], 'When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?' 'Nothing,' they answered. He said to them, 'But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. It is written: "And he was numbered with the transgressors"; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment.' The disciples said, 'See, Lord, here are two swords.' 'That's enough!' he replied." Luke 22:35-38.
These swords were the sidearm of the day. Our equivalent today is not a machete or a foil used in fencing, but a Glock or Smith & Wesson, etc. Sounds like Jesus advocated for carrying a sidearm, doesn't it? And to insure it is not just "metaphorical language", we read his disciples laid claim to two of these, which Jesus said would be enough. Enough for what? One of two was used by Peter to whack off Malcus' ear. (Who do you think carried the other one?) Jesus did tell Peter that "all who draw the sword will die by the sword", Matthew 26:52. But, he didn't tell Peter to get rid of his sword, he told him to reholster it, "Put your sword back in its place..."
The wedding in Cana, where Jesus turned water to wine, found in John 2:1-10, is another example of this trap. I clearly recall a professor telling us, "I refuse to believe Jesus provided wine for a drunken brawl in Cana. It was grape juice he turned the water into!" His preconceived theology forced his interpretation of that passage rather than the other way around.
When we enter the sacred ground of Scripture, we need to check our theology at the door as we enter. Let the Scriptures speak for themselves (goodness knows, they don't need any help from me!)
Anything of the Lord capture your heart from Scripture today? Share what moved you about him from your Bible reading today. I'd love to hear from you!
If you have someone you would like to receive these ruminations, send me their email address. I'm happy to add them to the list. If you are receiving this and would like to be removed from the list, just reply and let me know.
"Then Simon Peter, who had a sword, drew it and struck the high priest's servant, cutting off his right ear."
When the soldiers and officials from the chief priests came to arrest Jesus, Peter (always impetuous and impulsive) drew his sword and cut off the right ear of Malchus, the high priest's servant. From this I'm guessing Peter was a southpaw. It seems to me that if Peter was right-handed, he would have had to take Malchus' head off to get to his right ear... (just conjecture on my part). In any event, what was Peter doing with a sword?
That question is an important one. Its importance is found in that it illustrates the prevalence of a handicap many people impose upon themselves when they read and study the Scriptures. That handicap is the mistake of reading and studying the Scriptures through the lense of preconceived theology. Rather than allowing the Scriptures to speak for themselves in helping us develop our theology over time, we often form our understanding of the Scriptures by what our preconceived theology dictates. This can often bring both our understanding of the Scriptures and the maturity of our theology to a standstill.
Many think Jesus was a pacifist and condemned any possession or use of weapons and that Peter's possession and use of a sidearm would be wrongful from the get-go.
Take a look at this passage, "Then Jesus asked them [his disciples], 'When I sent you without purse, bag or sandals, did you lack anything?' 'Nothing,' they answered. He said to them, 'But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. It is written: "And he was numbered with the transgressors"; and I tell you that this must be fulfilled in me. Yes, what is written about me is reaching its fulfillment.' The disciples said, 'See, Lord, here are two swords.' 'That's enough!' he replied." Luke 22:35-38.
These swords were the sidearm of the day. Our equivalent today is not a machete or a foil used in fencing, but a Glock or Smith & Wesson, etc. Sounds like Jesus advocated for carrying a sidearm, doesn't it? And to insure it is not just "metaphorical language", we read his disciples laid claim to two of these, which Jesus said would be enough. Enough for what? One of two was used by Peter to whack off Malcus' ear. (Who do you think carried the other one?) Jesus did tell Peter that "all who draw the sword will die by the sword", Matthew 26:52. But, he didn't tell Peter to get rid of his sword, he told him to reholster it, "Put your sword back in its place..."
The wedding in Cana, where Jesus turned water to wine, found in John 2:1-10, is another example of this trap. I clearly recall a professor telling us, "I refuse to believe Jesus provided wine for a drunken brawl in Cana. It was grape juice he turned the water into!" His preconceived theology forced his interpretation of that passage rather than the other way around.
When we enter the sacred ground of Scripture, we need to check our theology at the door as we enter. Let the Scriptures speak for themselves (goodness knows, they don't need any help from me!)
Anything of the Lord capture your heart from Scripture today? Share what moved you about him from your Bible reading today. I'd love to hear from you!
If you have someone you would like to receive these ruminations, send me their email address. I'm happy to add them to the list. If you are receiving this and would like to be removed from the list, just reply and let me know.
No comments:
Post a Comment