Hot answers tagged

7

The sword is an important symbol in Christian imagery, and does not always symbolize war and violence. In fact, the sword is a definitive symbol of the word of God. In the context of the passage you cite, history teaches us that the word of God is a source of discord among men. Consider these passages from the New Testament: (Hebrews 4:12 NASB) For the ...


5

Why did Christ say he came as a sword? Matthew 10:32-35 Whosoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven. But whosoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven. Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but ...


4

One of my favorite go-to books on this kind of topic is St. Augustine's De Consensu Evangelistarum, which includes a chapter on the calling of the apostles. The full chapter is worth a read, but here is my breakdown of it as it applies to this specific question. Statement of the Difficulty 37 The question may indeed be raised as to how John gives us ...


2

It seems more likely that Paul was referring to James the Just (Christ's familial "brother" or possibly a "brother" in name only), but we have no definitive way of knowing this. Some considerations: There is no agreement on whether or not Christ had a familial brother named James. Below is an excerpt from a commentary, "The Brothers and Sisters of ...


2

Now concerning virgins παρθενων I have no commandment of the Lord: yet I give my judgment, as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord to be faithful. I suppose therefore that this is good for the present ενεστωσαν distress αναγκην, I say, that it is good for a man so to be. -- 1 Corinthians 7:25-26 Concerning this passage: It should be noted that ...


2

He was just using it as an expression to make it known that whatever he was about to say needs to be taken as seriously as possible. Jesus has always told the truth but I cannot say if everything he said was taken seriously by the people he was speaking to. So it could have been used more in the context of "listen carefully to what I am about to tell you ...


1

The answer to your question is hinted at in the scriptural verses prior to Matthew 10:34 (1-33) and in a tiny fragment from the NT that is the oldest part of the NT ever found. Matthew 10:1-33 These twelve Jesus sent forth... preach, saying: The kingdom of heaven is at hand... I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves... they will scourge you in ...


1

Here's what the Catholic Haydock Commentary says about those verses: Ver. 31. Covenant. That made with the captives was not such. Their covenant is grown old, and at an end, as St. Paul shews, Hebrews viii. 8. They were not indeed divided, as they had been, Ezechiel xxxvii. 16. Ver. 32. Dominion. As a husband, (Hebrew; Calmet) or "Lord." (Haydock) ...


1

Jesus was actually saying the complete opposite--well, almost--of what you suggest. Now he was not saying that the old is somehow inferior to the new. Rather, he was saying that the old and the new are not compatible. Let me explain. First, new wine is incompatible with old wineskins. Since "new wine" when it is placed in a wineskin is not finished ...


1

Luke 5:33 is a reference to the past, in which we are told that Jewish tradition required frequent fasting: Luke 5:33: And they said unto him, Why do the disciples of John fast often, and make prayers, and likewise the disciples of the Pharisees; but thine eat and drink? Then verses 34-35 takes us to the new, and to what is to come: Luke 5:34-35: ...


1

If you look at the pattern in Matthew 5:20-44, Jesus is not telling us not to resist evil. Quite the opposite. Jesus responds in one of two ways to the old laws. He uses a direct command to in effect disobey the old law as in "Swear not at all" 5:33-34, and "Love your enemies.." 5:43-44. But,as in the case of 5:38-39, he first adds a "that" which I read not ...



Only top voted, non community-wiki answers of a minimum length are eligible