Latest Comment
(Bryan, Tue 14 May 2024, 16:30:05)
I was inspired to research the apologists' reasoning for why these particular verses of Matthew are actually good.
Well, it turns out, we're not supposed to treat Jesus's "sword" as a literal sword. Imagine that. Jesus acts as a polarizing figure, thus, dividing households. Since a real sword acts as a weapon that severs things, Jesus comes to "split" homes in half (son against father, daughter against mother) in a figurative sense of the word. ...because hey, not everyone believes!
Here's a quote from "GotQuestions.org":
"In a 'Christian culture,' fully committing to Christ can also bring about a sword. The devout follower of Jesus may be taunted, termed 'holier than thou,' misunderstood, or embarrassed. Even in the best scenarios, the lifestyle of a genuine Christian differs from that of someone who merely professes the religion."
(What makes a "genuine" Christian, by the way?)
If Jesus comes with "peace," then there's no struggle. The "sword", in this sense, would represent the obvious backlash that comes with believing in something that others may not. Woe is the believer, for sure. Convinced that the creator of the universe is in their back pocket, has given them a place at the dinner table in Heaven, but struggles so hard with living the one real life they know they are afforded. Forgive me while I pause for a moment to wipe away my tears.
It would seem that there'd be a better way to express this concept in the Bible than through confusing word play, but I come with a chocolate cake, not a stack of printer paper. (Did that make sense? Your fault, don't take it literally.)
Out of Context: Matthew 10:35 and The Trial of the Chicago 7
