Luke 22 (NRSVue)
35 He said to them, “When I sent you out without a purse, bag, or sandals, did you lack anything?” They said, “No, not a thing.” 36 He said to them, “But now, the one who has a purse must take it, and likewise a bag. And the one who has no sword must sell his cloak and buy one. 37 For I tell you, this scripture must be fulfilled in me, ‘And he was counted among the lawless,’ and indeed what is written about me is being fulfilled.” 38 They said, “Lord, look, here are two swords.” He replied, “It is enough.”
…
47 While he was still speaking, suddenly a crowd came, and the one called Judas, one of the twelve, was leading them. He approached Jesus to kiss him, 48 but Jesus said to him, “Judas, is it with a kiss that you are betraying the Son of Man?” 49 When those who were around him saw what was coming, they asked, “Lord, should we strike with the sword?” 50 Then one of them struck the slave of the high priest and cut off his right ear. 51 But Jesus said, “No more of this!” And he touched his ear and healed him.
Jesus leaves no room for achieving peace or justice through violence.
Here are some questions for discussion:
1. What kind of Messiah emerges from the story captured by Luke? If Jesus: refuses to fight, heals the wounded enemy, accepts being treated like a criminal, and forgives those responsible, what kind of king or Messiah is truly being presented?
2. If Jesus’ refusal to fight is not passive submission but a deliberate refusal to participate in violent power, how might this reshape our understanding of nonviolence? Could nonviolence be understood as a form of resistance rather than weakness? What might it look like for communities today to resist injustice while refusing to mirror the violence of their oppressors? What might it look like if those same communities went a step further and embraced Jesus’ radical desire to seek wholeness and healing for even the oppressors?
3. Non-violent is not the same as peaceful. Pastor Trey refers to those that are not capable of violence as not really nonviolent, it’s a condition not a conviction. Consider Matthew 5:21-22 where we are told that violence in our hearts is the same as violence at our hands. How do we navigate the urge for violence while maintaining peaceful, peace-filled lives?
If you’d like to dig a little deeper, consider the following:
1. In Luke 22:35 Jesus reminds the disciples, “When I sent you out without purse or bag or sandals, you did not lack anything, did you?” and they answer, “No, nothing.” Yet in Luke 22:36 he now says, “But now, whoever has a purse is to take it along… and whoever has no sword is to sell his cloak and buy one.” What has changed between the earlier mission and this moment? Why might Jesus remind them first of God’s past provision before mentioning swords?
2. Throughout the Gospels, the disciples often seem to expect a political or military Messiah. If Jesus’ healing of the servant’s ear and his arrest mark the moment when those expectations collapse, what might the sword symbolize in the disciples’ understanding of the kingdom? Likewise, what does the healing of an enemy—rather than defeating or overpowering him—reveal about the values of that kingdom?
3. The servant in Isaiah 53:7 is described this way: “He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; like a lamb that is led to slaughter.” How does Jesus’ response during his arrest mirror this description?
4. The Roman Empire exemplifies the concept of empire in a number of ways, one of which is through the phrase Pax Romana – but this peaceful (safe) empire was maintained through the threat of violent retribution and punishment for anyone stepping out of line. Does compliance with the law because of the threat of pain or punishment impact your idea of moral behavior?
5. How does the betrayal being marked with a kiss reflect on the difference between the intention of our actions and the appearance of our actions? How in our lives today do we see violence or oppression masked by a kind gesture or kiss?
For further contemplation, consider these prompts:
1. Fully capable but unwilling, Jesus sets the example of how to live a peaceful and peace-filled life despite knowing the violence of the world. How does His unwillingness to resort to violence help guide us through a violent world?
2. Pastor Trey talked about the implications of carrying a weapon. How might the two swords to fulfill prophecy differ? Where might the intent differ from the impact in the two scenarios? Would Peter have struck out violently had he been unarmed?