“Whoever has no sword, let them sell their coat and buy one.” (Luke 22:36)
“Do not resist one who is evil. But whoever would strike you on the right cheek, turn to them also the other.” (Matthew 5:39)
“But if you do evil, be afraid, for the ruler does not bear the sword in vain; the ruler is the servant of God to execute God’s wrath on the wrongdoer.” (Romans 13:4)
I am no friend of guns or other deadly weapons. I choose not to own or possess a gun. I promptly sold the guns I inherited from my parents. I believe that if you truly believe in total depravity (which I do), then easy access to guns is like pouring gasoline on a fire.
However, I reject simplistic solutions to the problem of gun violence. If we want to be simplistic and ban guns, we should ban Muslims and the mentally ill, both of whom have been responsible for numerous mass killings. The reason why we shouldn’t do so is obvious: only an extremely small percentage of either group has actually been responsible for such killings. The same is true for gun ownership.
The relevant biblical teaching on the subject of weapons is complex. Few opt for the literal “Do not resist one who is evil” in cases where deadly crime is threatened. Paul’s endorsement of the ruler’s power of the sword has more to recommend it. This would legitimate deadly force, but only for law enforcement, not for the self-defense of the private individual.
Jesus’ declaration that whoever has no sword should sell their coat and buy one is the strongest argument in favor of private weapons for believers. Jesus is predicting that life will get worse. The cross is just the beginning. Jesus sends his trainees out at one point with not even a stick to defend themselves from bandits (nor even a wallet, we might add). Now, self-defense may even require them to sell their coat to buy a sword, a costly financial investment.
Is this a genuine word of Jesus? I don’t blame anyone for asking that question; it does sound like an insertion by someone who wished to soften the nonviolent teaching of Jesus. But the very unlikely persistence of this saying in such a strong Gospel tradition to the contrary testifies to the likelihood that it is genuine. However, we must also note that within a few hours, Jesus disarms Peter by saying, “Put your sword back in its place. All who take up the sword shall perish by the sword.” (Matthew alone gives us this piece of information.)
Few public figures who advocate gun control, from the president to Hollywood stars, are willing to give up their armed bodyguards, nor should they be expected to (although consistency might obligate them to practice what they preach). Violent evil often responds only to the threat of deadly force against it. The option of force should be permitted not only to ruling authorities, but also to private individuals who wish to defend their loved ones against crime.
The question is whether the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution has protection against crime in mind, or, as some read it, whether it also intends to provide for armed resistance against tyranny on the part of the ruling power. Jesus gives us no warrant or permission to go there. Jesus did not advise his followers to purchase a sword to fight back against Rome. Neither did his followers attempt armed resistance when Nero’s and Domitian’s men came to arrest them later.
TOM HOBSON of Belleville, Ill., a PC(U.S.A.) pastor for 29 years, is an adjunct professor at Morthland College, West Frankfort, Ill. He is author of “What’s on God’s Sin List for Today?” (Wipf and Stock, 2011).
