Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 26:52
Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.
52. all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword ] To this reason for non-resistance Christ added another, “The cup which my Father has given me shall I not drink it?” (John).
take the sword ] i. e. against rightful authority. The truth of this saying was exemplified by the slaughter of nearly a million and a half of Jews, who “took the sword” against Rome a. d. 67 70.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
52 54. These verses are peculiar to Matthew; each Evangelist has recorded sayings unnoticed by the others. It is easy to understand that in these exciting moments each bystander should perceive a part only of what was said or done.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Verse 52. Put up again thy sword into his place] Neither Christ nor his religion is to be defended by the secular arm. God is sufficiently able to support his ark: Uzzah need not stretch out his hand on the occasion. Even the shadow of public justice is not to be resisted by a private person, when coming from those in public authority. The cause of a Christian is the cause of God: sufferings belong to one, and vengeance to the other. Let the cause, therefore, rest in his hands, who will do it ample justice.
Shall perish with the sword] Instead of , shall perish, many excellent MSS., versions, and fathers, have , shall die. The general meaning of this verse is, they who contend in battle are likely, on both sides, to become the sacrifices of their mutual animosities. But it is probably a prophetic declaration of the Jewish and Roman states. The Jews put our Lord to death under the sanction of the Romans-both took the sword against Christ, and both perished by it. The Jews by the sword of the Romans, and the Romans by that of the Goths, Vandals, c. The event has verified the prediction-the Jewish government has been destroyed upwards of 1700 years, and the Roman upwards of 1000. Confer with this passage, Ps 2:4; Ps 2:9; Ps 110:1; Ps 110:5-6. But how came Peter to have a sword? Judea was at this time so infested with robbers and cut-throats that it was not deemed safe for any person to go unarmed. He probably carried one for his mere personal safety.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Then said Jesus unto him,…. That is, unto Peter,
put up again thy sword into its place, or sheath. This Christ said not only to rebuke Peter for his rashness, but to soften the minds of the multitude, who must be enraged at such an action; and which was still more effectually done by his healing the man’s ear: and indeed, had it not been for these words, and this action of Christ’s; and more especially had it not been owing to the powerful influence Christ had over the spirits of these men, in all probability Peter, and the rest of the apostles, had been all destroyed at once.
For all they that take the sword, shall perish with the sword. This is not to be understood of magistrates who bear not the sword in vain, are ministers of God for good, and revengers of evil works; but of private persons that use the sword, and that not in self-defence, but for private revenge; or engage in a quarrel, to which they are not called; and such generally perish, as Peter must have done, had it not been for the interposition of almighty power. Though this seems to be spoken not so much of Peter, and of the danger he exposed himself to, by taking and using the sword, and so to deter him from it, but rather of these his enemies: and as an argument to make and keep Peter easy and quiet, and exercise patience, since, in a little time, God would avenge himself of them; and that the Jews, who now made use of the sword of the Roman soldiers, would perish by the sword of the Romans, as in a few years after the whole nation did.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Put up again thy sword ( ). Turn back thy sword into its place. It was a stern rebuke for Peter who had misunderstood the teaching of Jesus in Lu 22:38 as well as in Mt 5:39 (cf. Joh 18:36). The reason given by Jesus has had innumerable illustrations in human history. The sword calls for the sword. Offensive war is here given flat condemnation. The Paris Pact of 1928 (the Kellogg Treaty) is certainly in harmony with the mind of Christ. The will to peace is the first step towards peace, the outlawing of war. Our American cities are often ruled by gangsters who kill each other off.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Put up again. Peter was still brandishing his sword.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
52. Put thy sword again into its place. By these words, Christ confirms the precept of the Law, which forbids private individuals to use the sword. And above all, we ought to attend to the threatening of punishment which is immediately added; for men did not, at their own pleasure, appoint this punishment for avenging their own blood; but God himself, by severely prohibiting murder, has declared how dearly he loves mankind. First, then, he does not choose to be defended by force and violence, because God in the Law forbade men to strike. This is a general reason; and he immediately descends to a special reason.
But here a question arises. Is it never lawful to use violence in repelling unjust violence? For though Peter had to deal with wicked and base robbers, still he is condemned for having drawn his sword. If, in such a case of moderate defense, an exception was not allowed, Christ appears to tie up the hands of all. Though we have treated this question more copiously (218) under Mat 5:39, yet I shall now state my opinion again in a few words. First, we must make a distinction between a civil court and the court of conscience; (219) for if any man resist a robber, (220) he will not be liable to public punishment, because the laws arm him against one who is the common enemy of mankind. Thus, in every case when defense is made against unjust violence, the punishment which God enjoins earthly judges to carry into execution ceases. And yet it is not the mere goodness of the cause that acquits the conscience from guilt, unless there be also pure affection. So then, in order that a man may properly and lawfully defend himself, he must first lay aside excessive wrath, and hatred, and desire of revenge, and all irregular sallies of passion, that nothing tempestuous may mingle with the defense. As this is of rare occurrence, or rather, as it scarcely ever happens, Christ properly reminds his people of the general rule, that they should entirely abstain from using the sword.
But there are fanatics who have foolishly misapplied this passage, so as to wrest the sword out of the hands of judges. They contend that it is unlawful to strike with the sword. This I acknowledge to be true, for no man is at liberty to take the sword at his own pleasure, so as to commit murder; but I deny that magistrates—who are God’s ministers, and by whom he executes his judgments—ought to be viewed as belonging to the ordinary rank. And not only so, but by these words of Christ, this very power is expressly ascribed to them: for when he declares that murderers must be put to death, it follows, that the sword is put into the hands of judges, that they may take vengeance for unjust murders. It will sometimes happen, indeed, that men addicted to the shedding of blood are punished by other means; but this is the ordinary way in which the Lord determined that the fierce cruelty of wicked men should be restrained from rioting with impunity. Certain doctors of what is called Canon Law have ventured to proceed to such a pitch of impudence as to teach, that the sword was not taken from Peter, but he was commanded to keep it sheathed until the time came for drawing it; and hence we perceive how grossly and shamefully those dogs have sported with the word of God.
(218) Harmony, vol. 1, p. 298
(219) “ Entre la jurisdiction externe ou civile, et le jugement spirituel, qui a son siege en la conscience;” — “between external or civil jurisdiction, and the spiritual judgment, which has its seat in the conscience.”
(220) “ Si quelqu’un use de violence pour repousser un brigand;” — “if any one use violence for repelling a robber.”
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(52) All they that take the sword.St. Matthews record is here the fullest. St. Mark reports none of the words; St. Luke (Luk. 22:51) gives only the calming utterance, Suffer ye thus far; St. John (Joh. 18:11) adds to the command to put the sword into its sheath the words, The cup which My Father hath given Me, shall I not drink it? a manifest echo of the prayer that had been uttered before in the hour of His agony. The words which St. Matthew gives are obviously not a general rule declaring the unlawfulness of all warfare, offensive or defensive, but are limited in their range by the occasion. Resistance at that time would have involved certain destruction. More than that, it would have been fighting not for God, but against Him, because against the fulfilment of His purpose. It is, however, a natural inference from the words to see in them a warning applicable to all analogous occasions. In whatever other cause it may be lawful to use carnal weapons, it is not wise or right to draw the sword for Christ and His Truth. (Comp. 2Co. 10:4.)
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
52. Sword into its place The sword has its place, but its place is not the hands of the apostles. Our Lord does not command the sword to be flung away. As a recognized instrument of governmental authority, the stern asserter of law and peace, it has its place. Take the sword perish with the sword It is plain that this was intended as stating the result of any attempt at resistance on the part of the disciples. But it is expressed with comprehensive wisdom, so as to be true as a general law. At least it states a law of contingency to which all who follow the profession of arms are to submit. We take the sword under the full chance of perishing by it.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘Then Jesus says to him, “Return your sword into its place, for all they who take the sword will perish with the sword.” ’
Jesus then turned to His disciple and said firmly, “Return your sword into its place, for all those who take the sword will perish with the sword.”
It was a timely warning that the sword had no place in what He had come to do. It was an instrument of death, not an instrument of life, whereas their responsibility would be to take out life. Jesus was not talking about war or self-defence. He was talking about aims and attitudes in religious matters. And His words were just commonsense. The sword is not something to be used lightly, and not at all in the affairs of God, for violence simply breeds violence, and leads to death not life.
‘Return you sword to its place.’ Perhaps there is here an echo of 1Ch 21:27, when the avenging angel did the same when David sought forgiveness through sacrifice. The disciples were to see that they were not to be avenging angels, but messengers of hope and forgiveness.
‘All those who take the sword will perish with the sword.’ Compare ‘he who sheds man’s blood, by man will his blood be shed’ (Gen 9:6). But there the thought was positive, justice must be meted out for murder. Here the thought is rather of the necessary eventual consequences. The man of violence must expect to die violently, and that included those who were just now surrounding Him with swords and staves. It would also not have taken the disciples long to work out that to behave like this was not to love one’s enemies and be perfect as their Father in Heaven is perfect (Mat 5:44-48).
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Mat 26:52 . Put back thy sword into its place ( , Joh 18:11 ; , 1Ch 21:27 ). A pictorial representation; the sword was uplifted .
, . . .] All, who have taken a sword, will perish by the sword , an ordinary axiom in law (Rev 13:10 ) adduced for the purpose of enforcing His disapproval of the unwarrantable conduct of Peter , not a (Euthymius Zigabenus, comp. Grotius), nor “an ideal sentence of death ” (Lange) pronounced upon Peter all such interpretations being foreign to our passage. Luther, however, fitly observes: “Those take the sword who use it without proper authority .”
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
52 Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword.
Ver. 52. Put up again thy sword ] See Trapp on “ Joh 18:11 “
For all they that take the sword ] Without a just calling, as those sworn swordsmen of the devil, the Jesuits, whose faction (as one saith of them) is a most agile sharp sword; the blade whereof is sheathed at pleasure, in the bowels of every commonwealth, but the handle reacheth to Rome and Spain. Their design is to subdue all to the pope, and the pope to themselves.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
52. . ] ‘ tuum gladium : alienissimum a mea causa.’ Bengel.
= John. The sheath is the place for the Christian’s sword ‘gladius extra vaginam non est in loco suo, nisi ubi subservit ir divin,’ Bengel: see note on Luk 22:36 . Our Lord does not say ‘ Cast away thy sword;’ only in His willing self-sacrifice, and in that kingdom which is to be evolved from his work of redemption, is the sword altogether out of place.
… ] Peculiar to Matthew. There is no allusion, as Grotius and some of the ancients thought, to the Jews perishing by the Roman sword (‘crudeles istos et sanguinarios, etiam to quiescente, gravissimas Deo daturos pnas suo sanguine,’ Grot., Euthym [176] ): for the very persons who were now taking Him were Romans . The saying is general and the stress is on it was this that Peter was doing ‘taking up the sword’ of his own will; taking that vengeance which belongs to God, into his own hand.
[176] Euthymius Zigabenus, 1116
. is a command; not merely a future, but an imperative future; a repetition by the Lord in this solemn moment of Gen 9:6 . This should be thought of by those well-meaning but shallow persons, who seek to abolish the punishment of death in Christian states.
John adds the words , ; on which see notes there. 53, 54 are peculiar to Matthew.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Mat 26:52 . : Jesus could not encourage the use of arms by His disciples, and the order to sheathe the weapon He was sure to give. The accompanying word, containing a general legal maxim: draw the sword, perish with the sword (the subsequent history of the Jewish people a tragic exemplification of its truth), suitably enforces the order. Weiss thinks that this word recorded here was spoken by Jesus at some other time, if at all, for it appears to be only a free reproduction of Rev 13:10 (Meyer, ed. Weiss). This and the next two verses are wanting in Mk. and Lk.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
place: i.e. its sheath. Greek. topos. Not the same word as in Mat 26:36.
take the sword, &c.: i.e. on their own responsibility (Rom 13:4).
shall perish. Compare Gen 9:6. with = by. Greek. en.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
52. . ] tuum gladium: alienissimum a mea causa. Bengel.
= John. The sheath is the place for the Christians sword-gladius extra vaginam non est in loco suo, nisi ubi subservit ir divin, Bengel: see note on Luk 22:36. Our Lord does not say Cast away thy sword; only in His willing self-sacrifice, and in that kingdom which is to be evolved from his work of redemption, is the sword altogether out of place.
…] Peculiar to Matthew. There is no allusion, as Grotius and some of the ancients thought, to the Jews perishing by the Roman sword (crudeles istos et sanguinarios, etiam to quiescente, gravissimas Deo daturos pnas suo sanguine, Grot., Euthym[176]): for the very persons who were now taking Him were Romans. The saying is general-and the stress is on -it was this that Peter was doing-taking up the sword-of his own will; taking that vengeance which belongs to God, into his own hand.
[176] Euthymius Zigabenus, 1116
. is a command; not merely a future, but an imperative future; a repetition by the Lord in this solemn moment of Gen 9:6. This should be thought of by those well-meaning but shallow persons, who seek to abolish the punishment of death in Christian states.
John adds the words , ; on which see notes there. 53, 54 are peculiar to Matthew.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Mat 26:52. , THY sword) most foreign to MY cause.-, place) The sword, when out of the scabbard, is not in its place, except when it ministers to the wrath of God.-, they who take) When God does not give it them.- , by the sword) Thus the LXX. use (to die by the sword); 2Ch 23:14, and Jer 21:9.-, shall die) This word implies a punishment in kind.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Put: Mat 5:39, Rom 12:19, 1Co 4:11, 1Co 4:12, 1Th 5:15, 1Pe 2:21-23, 1Pe 3:9
they: Mat 23:34-36, Gen 9:6, Psa 55:23, Eze 35:5, Eze 35:6, Rev 13:10, Rev 16:6
Reciprocal: Gen 4:15 – Therefore Exo 21:12 – General 2Sa 12:10 – the sword 1Ch 21:27 – he put Luk 22:38 – It Act 5:37 – he also Heb 5:7 – unto
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
6:52
Some people use this verse to condemn capital punishment, but instead of condemning it the opposite is true. To take the sword under the circumstances where Peter did is the act of a private, unofficial man. Had he gone to the limit in his act it would have caused the death of the servant and that would have made him a murderer since he did not represent the law. And if that had occurred, Jesus said that he should himself have perished with the sword, that being one of the means of lawfully executing a murderer under the criminal law of the land.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Mat 26:52. Thy sword; not mine!
Into its place, i.e., the sheath (Joh 18:11). Peter was still standing with drawn sword.
For all they that take the sword. A general proposition in regard to unwarranted recourse to measures of violence.
Shall perish with the sword. The special reference is to Peter. In taking the sword he had been imprudent, and exposed himself to a superior force; had been revolutionary, for these came with authority; had been cruel, for the mutilation of a human being in a spiritual cause is uncalled for. His life would have been forfeited to the sword, had not our Lord interfered and removed the effects of his blow. Any special application to the armed band who came to take Him seems unlikely. But as a rule, the violent perish violently. The circumstances of this occasion (Peter trying to kill, and the band representing authority, even though abused), as well as a comparison with Gen 9:6; Rom 13:4, warrant an application to the justice of capital punishment for murder. The great lesson is: The Church, a spiritual body, may use spiritual weapons only (comp. 2Co 10:3-4); never carnal and violent measures.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
26:52 (14) Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that {y} take the sword shall perish with the sword.
(14) Our vocation must govern our zeal.
(y) They take the sword to whom the Lord has not given it, that is to say, they who use the sword and are not called to it.