Francois Ntone

Peace or a Sword: Peacemakers in the Kingdom of God

A Google search for the phrase “peace or a sword” reveals a surprisingly large number of websites that deal with a topic related to one of Jesus’ most surprising statements.  There is no doubt that Jesus’ message about the kingdom of God strongly emphasizes a focus on peacemaking.  In his Sermon on the Mount, he says peacemakers “will be called sons of God”, a clear indication that he sees peacemaking as a pursuit consistent with God’s essence (Matthew 5:9).  He advocates non-violent resistance and turning the other cheek (Matthew 5:38-41), and even urges his disciples to love their enemies and pray for them (Matthew 5:43-48).  He presents forgiveness as a divine requirement (Matthew 18:21-22, Luke 17:3-4, 18:23-35), suggesting that those who do not practice it do not deserve divine forgiveness.

As a Christian, I grew up with an awareness of these key elements of Jesus’ message.  Even though I read some of his more controversial sayings such as Matthew 10:34, I took it for granted that they were figurative statements meant to bring particular attention to specific situations, but did not violate his plain teaching.  In Matthew 10:34, Jesus says that he did not come to bring peace, but a sword.  Obviously that seems to directly contradict his teaching about love, peace and forgiveness.  But I was not particularly disturbed by this statement since I had no problem understanding it as a figurative way of saying that his message will naturally lead to conflict.  After all, he said other seemingly shocking things.  For example, he said:

“If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away.  It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell.” (Matthew 5:29)

There was never any doubt in my mind that Jesus was not, with these words, encouraging self-mutilation.  He was obviously using shocking language to push for a radical rejection of sin.  Similarly, in Matthew 10:34, he was not literally referring to a sword, but was warning his disciples about future tribulations.  Therefore I never even paid much attention to Matthew 10:34 until a fellow Christian brought it to my attention and presented it as an exception to Jesus’ normal advocacy of peaceful resistance.  At the time, I was taken by surprise and simply admitted that I was not prepared to discuss the matter, even though, deep inside, I strongly felt that his interpretation had to be flawed.

Peace or a Sword: Understanding Matthew 10:34-36

Many years later, while I was working on my (unpublished) book The Kingdom of God from Adam to Jesus, I had to address this passage in a rigorous manner, and therefore I looked at it more carefully.  I am presenting here the results of my analysis, and I am only focusing on Matthew 10 for simplicity.

Matthew introduces the controversial statement within the context of the sending out of the twelve disciples.  Jesus gives the disciples instructions regarding the content of their mission (Matthew 10:5-10), and the manner in which they are to interact with the people they encounter (Matthew 10:11-16).  In particular, when they face resistance, they are to react as follows:

“If anyone will not welcome you or listen to your words, shake the dust off your feet when you leave that home or town.  I tell you the truth, it will be more bearable for Sodom and Gomorrah on the day of judgment than for that town.  I am sending you out like sheep among wolves.  Therefore be as shrewd as snakes and as innocent as doves.” (Matthew 10:14-16)

The behavior described in these verses is consistent with Jesus’ general teaching.  His disciples are not to participate in quarrels with those who do not receive them, but are to leave and shake the dust off their feet, a gesture that means they cannot be accused of taking anything from the town, not even its dust.  The metaphor of “sheep among wolves” is very appropriate: the disciples are sheep, and sheep represent meekness, humility and non-aggressive behavior.  That is their nature, and they will never turn into wolves.  They are to beware of wolves who will naturally try to harm them.  Therefore they are to be shrewd because their mission is not intended to be suicidal.  They are to accept persecution only if it cannot be avoided.  And if they are not accepted, it is not for them to bring judgment on their adversaries.  Judgment belongs to God and will occur on the Day of Judgment.

At some point, full blown persecution will become unavoidable:

“Be on your guard against men; they will hand you over to the local councils and flog you in their synagogues.  On my account you will be brought before governors and kings as witnesses to them and to the Gentiles.  But when they arrest you, do not worry about what to say or how to say it.  At that time you will be given what to say, for it will not be you speaking, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you.” (Matthew 10:17-20)

In the above, Jesus is making the disciples aware of the cost associated with following him, and is giving them some comfort with the idea that they are not alone: the Holy Spirit will give them the right message, so that persecution itself will become an opportunity to testify.  Again, the focus remains on their message, and violent resistance under persecution is not even a consideration.  But right after the above words, some new characters are brought into the picture:

“Brother will betray brother to death, and a father his child; children will rebel against their parents and have them put to death.  All men will hate you because of me, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved.  When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another.” (Matthew 10:21-23)

These verses describe a violent, even lethal conflict between relatives, a perverted situation.  Obviously it is not the disciples who betray their brothers to death or put their parents to death.  This is a description of ungodly behavior among the unrighteous.  The disciples themselves will be victimized by this state of affairs, for they are hated by the unrighteous who happen to be “all men”, or the overwhelming majority.  As Jesus told the disciples before, they are to be shrewd under such circumstances and flee to safer places as necessary.  If they stand firm in their commitment to the principles of the kingdom of God he taught them, they will be saved at the end.  Of course, this salvation has to do with their souls rather than their bodies, as seen below.

Verses 10:23-32 elaborate on these ideas, explaining that persecution is inevitable: the disciples cannot avoid it, just like Jesus himself, their master, cannot avoid it (10:24-25).  They should not be afraid but should rely on God’s providence with the understanding that even if their physical bodies are killed in the process, their souls are safe (10:26-31).  There is also a reminder that those who follow Jesus will have rewards, while those who oppose him will have to answer to him and his Father (10:32-33).

Then comes the controversial passage, which is reproduced below in its entirety:

“Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth.  I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.  For I have come to turn                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          ‘a man against his father, a daughter against her mother,                                                                     a daughter-in-law against a mother-in-law – a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household’” (Matthew 10:34-36)

It is important to understand that these verses are merely a continuation of the ideas initially presented in Matthew 10:17-23, after the additional comments given in 10:24-33.  Indeed, the conflict between relatives had already been introduced in 10:21, and in 10:22, Jesus had already pointed out that much of that conflict, especially when it comes to its impact on the disciples, is because of him.  Therefore when he says that he came to bring a sword, he is merely using different words to repeat what he had already said: his message will be a source of conflict, where the unrighteous will display particularly ungodly behavior and will victimize the disciples.  But in addition, in 10:34-36, he is quoting Micah 7:6, thereby directly linking the situation he is predicting to a prophecy by Micah.  The context of Micah’s prophecy is given in Micah 7:1-7.  In particular, the prophet describes the following situation:

“The godly have been swept from the land; not one upright man remains.                                    All men lie in wait to shed blood; each hunts his brother with a net.                                        Both hands are skilled in doing evil; the ruler demands gifts, the judge accepts bribes,    the powerful dictate what they desire – they all conspire together.” (Micah 7:2-3)

Here, Micah describes a state of affairs where ungodliness prevails, and the righteous have been swept away as a result of the wickedness of the unrighteous.  Interestingly the unrighteous here seem to include “all men”, just as the disciples’ persecutors were “all men” in Matthew 10:22.  The conflict between relatives in Micah 7:6 belongs in that context.  Therefore the elements described by Jesus are also present in Micah’s vision: ungodliness is rampant, and the righteous are victims of the unrighteous who are in the majority.  This obviously means the sword mentioned by Jesus is used by the unrighteous, not by the righteous.  Jesus’ disciples are still sheep and have not turned into wolves.

Peace or a Sword: The Sword as a Metaphor

While the metaphor of a sword may initially appear shocking, it is not unexpected to those who believe that Jesus is the fulfillment of prophecies in the book of Isaiah.  In Isaiah 49:2, the Servant of the Lord declares that God made his “mouth like a sharpened sword”, which clearly indicates that the sword represents the words coming out of his mouth.  The book of Revelation elaborates on this idea by symbolically putting a sword in the mouth of the Christ (Revelation 1:16, 2:16, 19:15).

That Jesus’ words have been used by Christians to justify violence is rather disturbing.  It is either an unfortunate misunderstanding or a refusal to accept the radical rejection of sin advocated by their Lord and Savior.  In other words, Christians often want to receive the rewards coming from belief in Christ while avoiding the cost associated with discipleship.  True Christian teaching maintains that one should “not repay anyone evil with evil” (Romans 12:17), but “must overcome evil with good” (Romans 12:21).