Some people have claimed that Jesus is a violent Savior.
Did He endorse human-on-human violence? Was He, at His core, a figure who approved of, and perhaps even encouraged, the use of force? There are some verses people have used to say that He was. He told His disciples to buy swords, and He led by example by making a whip of cords when rebuking a group of people at the temple.
In 2013, Reza Aslan published a book called Zealot: The Life and Times of Jesus of Nazareth. In it, Aslan (by the way, can we all agree how cool of a name that is?) used the following passages in the New Testament to argue that Jesus had violent aspirations and was a revolutionary figure seeking political upheaval. That argument was not original to Aslan. He borrowed heavily from a line of skeptics stretching back at least to the 1960s who not only claim that Jesus was violent, but He also allowed and encouraged His disciples to be violent. Many Muslims today try to use these passages to convince Christians that Jesus isn’t the peaceful Savior they think He is.
Let’s look at these passages carefully, because a careful look is exactly what the claims do not survive.
I have come to bring a sword.
The first verse is Matthew 10:34, where Jesus says:
Do not think that I came to bring peace on earth. I did not come to bring peace but a sword.
If you lift that verse out of its context and read nothing else, it can sound alarming. But the next verses remove all ambiguity. Jesus continues:
For I have come to “set a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law’; and a man’s enemies will be those of his own household.” He who loves father or mother more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who loves son or daughter more than Me is not worthy of Me. And he who does not take his cross and follow after Me is not worthy of Me. He who finds his life will lose it, and he who loses his life for My sake will find it.
Matthew 10:35–39
Jesus, in context, is talking about division within families—the kind of division that happens when some members of a household follow Him and others do not. He is not calling for armed conflict. No careful and honest reading of the tenth chapter of Matthew could conclude that Jesus is promoting any kind violence, much less physical violence. Anyone who cites this verse for that purpose is either unaware of the rest of the passage, or they are hoping you will be.
Slay them before me.
The second verse is Luke 19:27. Jesus says:
But bring here those enemies of mine, who did not want me to reign over them, and slay them before me.
Taken alone, that is a striking statement. Again, the blunder begins when we ignore context. Read the rest of the passage and realize that it is not Jesus speaking in His own voice about His own intentions. It is Jesus telling a parable. He is sharing a story about a king who utters these words. Throughout the gospel account of Luke, Jesus tells many parables. He tells one about an evil judge who ignores a persistent widow in Luke 18. He tells one about a farmer who sows seed in Luke 8. He tells one about a vineyard owner who orders a fruitless tree to be cut down in Luke 13. He tells one about a woman searching for a lost coin in Luke 15. None of us would conclude from these parables that Jesus is an evil judge, a farmer, a vineyard owner, or a woman. We understand that He is using memorable stories to illustrate deeper truths. Luke 19:27 is no different. The parable begins all the way back in verse 12. In the previous verse, Luke tells us the reason why Jesus told this story about a king: “because He was near Jerusalem and because they thought the kingdom of God would appear immediately.” It says nothing about Jesus endorsing violence, any more than the parable of the wicked tenants makes Him a landlord.
Go buy a sword.
The third verse is Luke 22:36. This is the one that tends to generate the most confusion, as well as the most misuse. Jesus says:
But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one.
The argument goes: Jesus told His disciples to buy swords, so Jesus must have been endorsing human-on-human violence.
Surprise, surprise: context is critical here. Jesus is preparing His disciples for what comes next. In a few weeks, He will tell them, “You shall be witnesses to Me in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the end of the earth” (Acts 1:8). So He lists items they will need for the journey, like money and a knapsack. But then He mentions a sword. Why would traveling preachers need swords? Sure, a tool like that would be useful on the road for cutting meat, cleaning fish, and clearing a path. But practicality is not the direction Jesus takes the conversation. Keep reading. Right after He tells them to acquire swords, Jesus gives the reason:
“For I say to you that this which is written must still be accomplished in Me: ‘And He was numbered with the transgressors.’ For the things concerning Me have an end.” So they said, “Lord, look, here are two swords.” And He said to them, “It is enough.”
Luke 22:37–38
Jesus quotes Isaiah 53:12: “And He was numbered with the transgressors.” Whatever conclusion you come to about the purpose of the swords, it must be connected to this passage of Scripture, because that is the reason Jesus Himself gives for mentioning the swords. The need wasn’t for the future. It was immediate. Together, Jesus and the disciples were about to fulfill prophecy.
That also explains His answer when the disciples tell Him they already have two swords: “It is enough.” Enough for what? Two swords among eleven men who are about to scatter across the nations would be laughably insufficient for any kind of military campaign, or even for self-defense against persecutors. But two swords were enough for the prophecy. Having swords among the disciples was enough for Jesus to be treated like a criminal, counted among the transgressors, and in that way identified as the Suffering Servant Isaiah wrote about, the Messiah, the Savior.
That is exactly what happened a few hours later, when Judas led the rabble to arrest Jesus. Peter drew one of those swords and cut off the ear of Malchus. Jesus shut down this violent tendency immediately by healing the man’s ear and saying, “Put your sword in its place, for all who take the sword will perish by the sword” (Matthew 26:52).1 Then He turned to the crowd:
Jesus said to the chief priests, captains of the temple, and the elders who had come to Him, “Have you come out, as against a robber, with swords and clubs? When I was with you daily in the temple, you did not try to seize Me. But this is your hour, and the power of darkness.”
Luke 22:52–53
They came out against Him as if He were a robber, and they arrested Him. Scripture was fulfilled, and He was numbered with the transgressors.
I’m not saying I know all of how this prophecy works or everything that was in the mind of Christ in this moment. But we can say for certain that Jesus was not telling eleven men to equip themselves with two swords for violence. Rebuking the first man to swing one is not the response of someone who had just told these men to buy swords for violence, armed conflict, and self-defense. Plus, there is a historical test we can use to cement this conclusion. We’ll get to that in a minute.
He made a whip of cords.
That brings us to the most dramatic passage: John 2:13–17:
Now the Passover of the Jews was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. And He found in the temple those who sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers doing business. When He had made a whip of cords, He drove them all out of the temple, with the sheep and the oxen, and poured out the changers’ money and overturned the tables. And He said to those who sold doves, “Take these things away! Do not make My Father’s house a house of merchandise!” Then His disciples remembered that it was written, “Zeal for Your house has eaten Me up.”
Is this Jesus at His most zealous? He makes a whip, overturns tables, and drives them out. Someone reading this passage quickly might picture Jesus attacking people with His whip. But a careful reading shows something more specific and meaningful. Ignore the context, and Jesus is having a temper tantrum. Read the context, and Jesus is carefully warning an entire nation of God’s impending judgment.
Bible students often refer to this passage as “Jesus Cleanses the Temple.” In reality, He is trying to prepare these people for the destruction of the temple. When the other gospel accounts record a similar interaction near the end of His ministry, Luke places it right after this:
Now as He [Jesus] drew near, He saw the city and wept over it, saying, “If you had known, even you, especially in this your day, the things that make for your peace! But now they are hidden from your eyes. For days will come upon you when your enemies will build an embankment around you, surround you and close you in on every side, and level you, and your children within you, to the ground; and they will not leave in you one stone upon another, because you did not know the time of your visitation.”
Luke 19:41–44
When Jesus arrives at the temple and sees the moneychangers taking advantage of poor worshipers, He lets His thoughtful zeal show through. And this was not a spur-of-the-moment reaction. Mark tells us that when Jesus first entered the temple, He “looked around at all things,” and since it was already late, He went out to Bethany with the twelve (Mark 11:11). He came back the next day and drove out those who bought and sold. Jesus saw it, slept on it, and came back with a plan.
John’s account shows the same deliberateness. Jesus makes a whip of cords, and that takes time. A whip of cords is known as a tool for driving livestock. He uses it to do just that, and nowhere does the text indicate that humans receive the whip. In fact, the wording of John 2:15 points the same direction. The “all” He drove out can be read as “both sheep and cattle,” which is how the NIV translates it. Once the livestock are out, Jesus turns to those who are selling doves and tells them, “Take these things away! Do not make My Father’s house a house of merchandise!” Note: He was no longer using the whip because the livestock were already driven out.
In Luke’s account, He quotes Jeremiah 7. Jeremiah came with the same warning: Stop committing violence against your brethren, and stop trusting in the temple to save you when you have a wicked heart! If your salvation is the temple, beware: the temple and your salvation will be destroyed soon.
No, Jesus did not whip people on this occasion, and it is clear by reading the text carefully. What is more, we have a prophetic test for this. Isaiah 53:9 says of the coming Messiah:
He had done no violence,
Nor was any deceit in His mouth.
If Jesus struck a person in that temple, He disqualified Himself from being the Messiah that Scripture promised. The fact that those who crucified Him could not point to an act of violence He committed speaks volumes.
So where does all of this leave us?
Let’s stop allowing others to tell us who Jesus is and actually read the gospel accounts for ourselves. Read Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. And as you read, ask yourself an honest question: Does Jesus truly look violent in this text?
Then, read Acts. This is the historical test. If Jesus was a violent Savior who endorsed violence among His followers, we ought to see that reflected in what His followers actually did. The book of Acts is the fulfillment of Jesus’ final commands on earth. It covers the first 35 years of church history, led by inspired apostles and prophets. At the end of each gospel account, Jesus commands His disciples to go on a journey into the world (with the two swords mentioned in Luke) and preach the gospel. Acts is where we see them doing just that. And what do they do when they face opposition? They raise neither fist nor sword. They are beaten, imprisoned, and killed, and they keep preaching. Peter, the very man who swung a sword in the garden, later wrote:
But when you do good and suffer, if you take it patiently, this is commendable before God. For to this you were called, because Christ also suffered for us, leaving us an example, that you should follow His steps:
1 Peter 2:20–252
“Who committed no sin,
Nor was deceit found in His mouth”;
who, when He was reviled, did not revile in return; when He suffered, He did not threaten, but committed Himself to Him who judges righteously; who Himself bore our sins in His own body on the tree, that we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness—by whose stripes you were healed. For you were like sheep going astray, but have now returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.
And Peter doesn’t stop at telling Christians not to retaliate. Just a few verses later, he says we should “seek peace and pursue it” (1 Peter 3:11). Paul says the same: “If it is possible, as much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men” (Romans 12:18). Following Jesus is not just about keeping peace; it is also about making peace, just as He said: “Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God” (Matthew 5:9).
The Jesus of the New Testament is not a violent Savior. He is a crucified Savior—One who absorbed violence rather than inflicting it, and who calls His followers to do the same and to pursue peace. The claims made about His violent tendencies do not survive an honest reading of the text. And the text is available to you. So read it.
Related to the violent Savior claim is this question: “I know I should pray the Psalms, but what about the Psalms that call for violence? Is it okay if we pray those Psalms too?” Let’s dig into that question with this study.