 We're listening to the Naked Bible Podcast. To support this podcast, click at NakedBiblePodcast.com and click on the support link in the upper right-hand corner. If you're new to the podcast and Dr. Heiser's approach to the Bible, click on New Start Here at NakedBiblePodcast.com. Welcome to the Naked Bible Podcast, episode 205, The Sword and the Servant with David Burnett. I'm the layman, Tray Strickland, and he's the scholar, Dr. Michael Heiser. Hey, Mike, how you doing this week? Pretty good. Pretty good. Another busy week, but I've been looking forward to having David back on. Yeah, absolutely. Every time there seems to be some good topics to be had, so I'm excited about this episode, as I'm sure everybody else is. Yeah, this one will be in the Gospels. We just spent a lot of time in Hebrews, and then, of course, we do topical things, and a lot of them get oriented toward the Old Testament, so it'll be nice to actually pick up something in the Gospels. Well, we're glad to have David Burnett back with us. David, most of the audience is going to be familiar with you, but for those who aren't, our audience keeps growing, so there's going to be people out there who have never heard you. So tell people a little bit about who you are, where you're at, and those who do know you will get at least a bit of an update. Yeah, all right. Well, I'm David Burnett. It's good to be back. Good to be back with you guys. I am a PhD student in Judaism and Christianity in Antiquity at Marquette University. I am also a teaching assistant in the theology department here. Mike was my thesis reader and my master's, and we've been friends for many, many years, and I enjoy being on the Nekid Bible podcast. And let's see, updates. Well, coursework is insane. I don't recommend PhD to many people unless you want to go insane. Yeah, there you go. That about summarizes it. Yeah, my life for a while. That's right. One of my advisors, Dr. Andre Orlov, expert in apocalyptic literature and early Jewish mysticism, he has its famed Marquette. He has his moments of insanity, you know, where we are just dealing with some really enigmatic text and he opens it up and we sort of give our best interpretations of it and our most esoteric interpretations of it. And that's our little moments of insanity. And so that sort of comprises my life up here. Along with probably thousands of pages of reading too. Yeah, I don't even want to talk about it. There's that. People don't realize, you know, what really gets dumped on you. And nobody even thinks about it. That's just what you do or what you're supposed to do anyway. You try. I mean, you try to get it all in, you know. Well, we're going to return to the Gospels here. I know you spent a lot of time in the Gospels. So we're going to be in Luke at least, I guess primarily, but you've got what you're going to say is going to cast a wider net than that. So why don't you get us started here? Yeah, absolutely. So this study is sort of coming off of a paper that I gave in the synoptic gospel section at the Society of biblical literature in 2015. And the paper was entitled the sword and the servant reframing the function of the two swords of Luke 2235 to 38 in narrative context. And so we're dealing with the text is incredibly difficult. And it's incredibly controversial because of how it's been used over the centuries, how it's been received by the church and in the wider sort of public, especially as it pertains to Christian ethics. So this text of if you all are, if your listeners are not familiar with it, we'll just go ahead and read it and then talk about some of the issues surrounding it and why this is such a controversial passage. So the text is from Luke 22. If you're looking at a Bible, it's in Luke 2235 to 38 says, and he said to them, this is Jesus, when I sent you out with no money bag or knapsack or sandals, did you lack anything? They said nothing. And he said to them, but now let the one who has a money bag take it and likewise a knapsack and let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one. For I tell you that this scripture must be fulfilled in me. And he was numbered with the transgressors for what is written about me has its fulfillment. And they said, look, Lord, here are two swords. And he said to them, it is enough. So this passage is a difficult one. It's been interpreted many, many different ways. And it is set within the wider context of the Last Supper. Christ's Last Passover in Luke that starts up at the top of Chapter 22. Now this whole issue of selling your cloak and buying a sword and the two swords here, verse 38, when he said Jesus says to them, it's enough. It seems pretty enigmatic to tell someone that if they don't have a sword to buy one, and then when they show two swords, he says it's enough. When you've had other ethics given earlier in Jesus's ministry and on his journey, either in his preaching ministry or in his journey to Jerusalem, it seems that he's taught some sort of contradictory teachings to that. Loving your enemy, this kind of teaching, laying down your life. It doesn't seem like, it seems like quite of a jump to say, okay, now buy a sword. So popular interpretations of this text have ranged over the centuries. And there's some sort of common ones. And some of the common interpretations are that what Luke is talking about here, about, but now, you know, when I sent you out, but now that he uses, is referring to this sort of change in time period. This is in verse 36 of chapter 22. This comes from a famous in, at least in modern history, in biblical scholarship, comes from a famous Luke scholar named Hans Konselman, who has argued that this is referring to sort of the change of times, you know, when Christ was with the disciples, and then when he's gone is sort of this time of travail. And this is actually a pretty dominant interpretation of this passage. That sort of the time that they were with him, you know, they experienced great miracles, a close fellowship, but now it's sort of turned over to the wolves, you know, as he will die, be resurrected in the sin to heaven. And so it's sort of taking up swords is this sort of notion of defense. Some go as specific to say, you know, there'll be brigands along the way that they'll have to defend themselves, you know, in their travels out to reach the empire for Jesus, you know, with the gospel. And so that's a pretty common interpretation that the taking up of the sword actually refers to this sort of move of defense, you know, it's like to keep them alive as they're on their way preaching the gospel. Another interpretation has been that the swords are symbolic. So early patristics took this interpretation. But even modern commentators, this is still quite popular. And that this taking up of the sword or the two swords are sort of symbolic of the general sort of suffering of the church, you know, after Christ's ascension. So sort of, you know, the need for swords is kind of a metaphor for the trial that they are going to go through. And some some this this interpretation is still very popular because it explains later the later text in in this context in Luke that when the when the disciples take out a sword and cut off the ear of the high pre-servant and we'll look at that and Jesus rebukes them. So it's kind of funny that if you're telling people to take up a sword now and then once they do he rebukes them seems sort of contradictory. So people have sort of hovered around that interpretation. It's been pretty popular with commentators and articles and and even church fathers of the centuries that this is sort of a symbolic. Now this also been used in pop culture quite frequently this text, the sell your cloak and buy a sword. We know especially within American evangelicalism this is used a lot. This text is referred to all the time. Do one Google search and you'll find endless uses of this text. And some of those are in have been sort of popularized by some evangelical leaders to defend sort of the right to bear firearms in the gun debates that go on in in the United States. So saying that well Jesus said to sell your cloak and buy a sword. So obviously we're to defend ourselves go buy guns now. And so like that's sort of, you know, I wish I was kidding about this, but this has been tweeted and posted and written on and spoke on by from countless pulpits and platforms, whether it be churches or schools. So it's a little odd to sort of have to. I don't know. This is just me. But you know, if I'm thinking about the Second Amendment, I'm not thinking about the New Testament. You know, I mean, it's it's like there's a clear path to the one. But why do we, I mean, I guess, I guess I can imagine why people would would want to link, you know, the Second Amendment to something in the Bible or whatever. But it's kind of odd to hear, but I could see I could see people doing it. Yeah, you know, I think this is a problem that as we get into the passage, we'll see how deep this problem goes. But the problem is sort of surface readings of text, like proof texting that happens a lot within sort of more popularized American evangelicalism. It's just really odd to me, you know, what's wrong with saying, hey, we it's the Constitution. We have the Second Amendment and it's the law of the land. You know, it's the Constitution. Why do we have to sort of go beyond that? But anyway, you know, I don't want to veer off into that. It's just it's odd to my ear when we have a clear path to to, you know, an argument, you know, about the law of the land. Why do we have to kind of sprinkle a Bible verse on it? Like, I guess, why isn't the law of the land good enough? Because that's what it is. Well, that's in place. Right. But when that when this topic comes up in conversation, it's generally what Christians should do. Oh, OK. So so what I can I can give examples if you want them. But we don't want to protect. We don't want to take you. We don't want to take your time. Yeah, so let's dig into this text. So I actually take a quite a different interpretation of this passage and that the the call to sell your cloak and buy a sword is actually a prophetic enactment of the disciples denial of Jesus. And so this this this interpretation of selling your cloak and buying a sword actually being part of an enacted denial of Jesus, a prophetic enactment of denial of Jesus, a prediction of denial is actually taken up before coming from a 1964 article. But it does not actually frame the text within its narrative context. They sort of keep it immediately and refer to the passage after it. But but there is a structural element to this wider Luke and passage that sort of frames it where it makes sense. And but you have to juxtapose it over and against what's going on in Matthew and Mark. So this is an issue of the synoptic problem, but much more so an issue of narrative criticism. So when we talk about narrative criticism, when we take a text like this, we want to frame it within the actual structure of the story of that author and the unique voice or theology of that particular author and see what he's doing here because this is the synoptic problem often turns out to be the synoptic solution. Yeah. Well, yeah, the often you can get lost in trying to figure out which sources first and to completely miss the boat that these narratives are written stylistically and structurally with intent. Every author has something has an agenda. An agenda is not a bad word. Right. Exactly. And they're performative. You know, these these texts are performed. And so these texts are read openly and publicly and they're meant to be memorized and performed. So it's very important the actual structure of the story and there is a lot of unique elements in this wider story of the Last Supper and then Jesus's arrest, which I'm just going to go ahead and call sort of the disciples denial tradition because in synoptic perspective, if you look at all three, there's a lot of differences in Luke that are not in Matthew and Mark. Matthew and Mark are relatively uniform in these stories. There are differences between them, but structurally and thematically and even in the scriptures they use are pretty uniform. Luke veers off quite a bit and we're going to see that in these unique passages, it actually makes sense. My interpretation when you frame it within the within the context of the narrative as a whole. So let's just get into it. So right here when Jesus is addressing the disciples, this again is at the Last Supper and the sort of the immediate section that frames this story in 22, 35, 38, especially if you're looking at a text right now, it'll really help you see this. From verse 31 of chapter 22 to verse 62, you have sort of a chaiastic structure of the story. Now I hate using that term because this is one of the most overused terms in New Testament studies. It's like typology. Yes, it drives me nuts. That's why I hate saying it. And when I when I realized this and had it confirmed by multiple scholars before I said anything and then tested it at SBL and it was received well. And there's actually a woman scholar in the back and I can't remember her name. I wish I could that was telling me about lots of chaiastic structures through Luke that are used to frame the narrative. There's also been great studies on the construction of Luke's narrative in reference to kingdoms. So we cut like Samuel and kings in our Bibles in the Septuagint they're called one through four kingdoms. And in those in those texts, you frequently have in the Elijah Lysha stories, sort of chaiastic narrative structures going on and Luke is using the Elijah Lysha template a lot in his in the construction of the narrative. So it would be pretty common to see this, especially when you're writing sort of with a sort of pseudo Septuagintal writing style using egoneto like in the days of to break every section just like you're reading kingdoms. It's really interesting. Yeah, Luke's Luke's known for that for the for the readers who don't know what chaiasm is or a chaiastic structure in the in the course of we'll just say storytelling here in the course of the writer laying out an episode or episodes. You'll have a point by point kind of narrative sequence of things of events or items, you know, and it includes things that are said and things that happen. And then at some point they'll be a particular kind of hinge point. And then from that point on the story will mirror element by element the elements that have gone up to that event. So, you know, Luke might say 10 things and then he'll there'll be a climax and then the next 10 things that he says later will be mirror images of what he has said before in sequence in opposite sequence. So the term comes from the letter, you know, chai or key like an X, you have something leading to a middle point, then you hit the hinge point, then it goes back in the other direction. So I don't know if that helps, but you know, we can look it up. But that's what we're talking about with the chiasm or chiasmic structure. Yeah, let me, yeah, let me illustrate what I mean here because again, I don't want people to write it off because of this, because I've tested this with quite a few voices and what you find is... They're in scripture. Yeah. They're in scripture. There's quite a few in Luke as well. The all of chapter one is kind of a woman center text where you have Mary and Elizabeth meet in the middle. Richard Bacham and his two in the gospel women book has a great chapter on it, how the whole gospel starts that way. So this is sort of a common leucan way of structuring stories. But again, this helps in performance. So you sort of see what the central focus is of a discourse or a speech, and then it allows you to focus sort of the center of its attention. So the structure I'm proposing is when you look up at chapter 22, verse 31 through 34, is where you have like an A. And so if you were to label this A, B, C, and then you'd go B prime and then A prime, like they refer back up to those similar points. This is how it's structured. A would be Jesus foretelling Peter's denial. So he foretells Peter's denial in verse 31 through 34, addressing... As he addresses the whole disciple sitting at the table, he zooms in on Peter. And then there's a structure. There's Satan's demand for him in verse 31. Simon, Simon, behold, Satan is demanded to have you all. He wants to try all of them. And he says, but I've prayed for you, singular, that your faith may not fail. And when you've turned again, strengthen your brothers. And then Peter says to him, Lord, I'm ready to go with you both to prison and to death. So there's this sort of positive acknowledgement from Peter after Jesus addresses Peter's status. And then Jesus follows by this foretelling his denial. Saying in verse 34, Jesus said, I tell you, Peter, the rooster will not crow this day until you deny three times that you know me. So that's the A, that's the first part. Then when you move on into B, you see Jesus address the group. Jesus foretells the disciples denial. Now this is what I'm proposing for this particular section, our problematic section about the two swords. So he moves from addressing Peter, which again, this just to frame this for you, the start of this story, Satan asking to sift them like wheat, you're not going to find this in any other gospel. This is unique to Luke and there's a reason for that. So why is this material only in Luke and not any other gospels about Satan wanting to sift them? Well, you have to rewind back in Luke's gospel to sort of get the setting here. So we know from the synoptic gospels, if you're familiar with them, Matthew, Mark and Luke, that you have a temptation narrative of Jesus, right? After he's baptized by John in the wilderness, he's let out by Satan, well, he's let out by the Spirit and he's tempted by Satan, right? So in that temptation, we have some common elements. So in the temptation narratives in Matthew, Mark, let's just stick with Matthew and Mark for a moment. In that temptation narrative and you find it in Mark one and in Matthew four, we have angels that come to minister to Jesus, right? And Satan's tempting him, he overcomes the temptation and then angels come to minister to him. Well, in Luke, you have Jesus tempted by Satan, offering him the kingdoms of this world, but at the end of the trial, interestingly, there's no angels that come to minister to him as in Mark and Matthew. Luke actually leaves it for this story that we're looking at today. He puts it at the end of his gospel, has angel, a single angel ministering to him. But here in the temptation in Luke four, the narrator, the actual storyteller, says that Satan left him until an opportune time. So that's a unique feature to Luke, where before Satan just flees from Jesus. You know, he's like, he's overcome him, he flees and he sort of doesn't show up, right, in Matthew and Mark. But for Luke, Luke, the author says he left him until an opportune time. Luke's foreshadowing something. Exactly. And that opportune time, guess what, is our present passage, Luke 22, right at the beginning of the Last Supper when they're preparing for the last meal. And that's, it's fascinating. So Luke 22 starts by now the Feast of Unleavened Bread drew near, which is called the Passover, and the chief priests and the scribes were seeking how to put him to death, for they feared the people. So they're wanting to put Jesus to death. And then Luke says, then Satan entered into Judas, called Ascariot, who was the number of the 12th. And that's when he betrays him. So for Luke's narrative, this, now, the time of the Supper, this is the opportune time. So Satan actually is incarnate in Judas and Luke, and it actually betrays Jesus over. So what you're finding in Luke is this is sort of a cosmic confrontation in Luke. This is where Satan himself is actually in Judas coming head to head with the Messiah, you know, where the presence of God is. And so you're seeing this sort of cosmic clash here. And so Luke is framing his narrative, this narrative of the, at the meal, this sort of unique material he's bringing up. He's framing his narrative as a great temptation. So Satan has left him in the first temptation till an opportune time. Now he's come. And in this context in Luke, the story is framed as the great temptation where Satan is there, but it's going to tempt the whole bunch. That this temptation or trial is now not just Jesus, it's with the 12th. So they're being brought into this. Now, if you know Luke's gospel very well, there's, there's hints the entire way through the gospel leading to this point, right? So he's told his disciples in chapter nine to take up their cross and follow them, follow him. He mentions this again to what it, in the cost of discipleship, cost of discipleship section in 1427. He mentions it again. But in chapter 12, he actually says, blessed are the servants whom the master finds awake when he comes and they will recline at the table and serve them. So this, this notion of the, the disciples being awake when he comes and he'll serve them at a table. This is going to be important for the table scene later in Luke 22 when he, and then the prayer scene where he finds them sleeping and he's reclining with them at the table beforehand. So this is some interesting foreshadowing going on. And you also see this really prominently in Luke, earlier in Luke 12 in four through 12, where he mentions not to fear the ones that will kill the body and that if they, you know, if they persevere, he will acknowledge them before the angels. And so the one that speaks against the son of man could be forgiven, but the one who blasphemes the Holy spirit will not. So they're going to, they're going to deny Jesus. And you know, they're going to be forgiven. So these are, these are sort of foretellings of things to come, right? So they're going to go through these trials. They're going to be brought into temptation. Even the Lord's prayer. So the Lord's prayer is critical for this in Luke, in Luke 11, one through four, how does it end? But deliver us from, or lead us not into temptation. And this is the same word back from the temptation in Luke four, the periasmon, the trials, the temptations, right? And in some manuscripts, it even adds in the Lord's prayer, but deliver us from the evil one, right? The evil one, yeah. Right. So we don't, scholars mostly think that's an addition because the longer versions tend to assimilate Matthew's version of the prayer, but we don't know for sure. But the point is the prayer itself is about not being led into temptation. So everything's leading to this great temptation in Luke. And it's right here at the meal. Satan has his opportune time. This is the great temptation. So that's how this story is actually structured, the A and the B. So Jesus foretells Peter's denial, you know, Satan's asked to sift them, but when you turn, you know, so he assumes they're turning. So even the denial of the Son of Man, remember it could be forgiven. As Jesus has said earlier in the gospel, but now he turns in 35 to 38 to the, to the disciples as a whole. So you move from one to the whole group, right? So you move from your A to your B. And he said to them, plural, when I sent you with no money, when I sent you out with no money bag or knapsack or sandals, you did not lack anything. Or did you lack anything? It's a question. So this refers back to the sending out of the 12 and the sending out of the 70 or 72. That's just what I was going to bring up with the 70, especially is interesting here. It is because he mentions the stuff that he tells the 70, assuming that, you know, the disciples would have been told the same thing back in Luke nine. So the question again, there's a similar structure here. He addresses the disciples previous status, just like he addressed Peter's previous status, right? So he's like, he says, you weren't lacking anything. And then they have a positive response to like, no, we weren't lacking nothing, right? So they're, they said nothing. We weren't lacking anything. So when they were actually sent out and powered to preach the kingdom, right, to cast out demons, they weren't lacking anything. So, but now he says that's the critical point. So now you have the foretelling of their denial in the same way he just foretold Peter's denial. Now, mind you in Luke, he's very specific back in verse 34. He tells you exactly what Peter's going to do, right? Like the rooster will not crow until this day until you deny three times that you know me. Well, he's going to do the same thing here. So now when addressing the disciples, he says, he says, but now let the one who has a money bag take it and likewise a knapsack. Now these are the things that they did not need, right? So it's like they're going to operate in such a way where they didn't need those things. They weren't lacking anything. And they were still accomplishing what the proclamation of the kingdom, victory over demons. This is really important to remember. Is he saying, okay now, fellas, go ahead and take the things you don't need. In other words, go ahead now, you know, turn to your own self-sufficiency. Is that the point? Well, the point is, he's telling them exactly what's about to happen. Okay. They're going to do those things. They're going to do this. It's imperitival in the Greek, but this is an enactment. This is a prophetic enactment of the scene. You think of it as sort of a, like as a play or a drama, you're giving them this sort of dark scene. It's about to take place. You just said, Peter, exactly how he's going to deny you, even though he responded positively. Now the groups responded positively. Like, we weren't lacking anything. And he says, but now you're to sell, you're to, he has a money bag, take it and likewise a knapsack and let the one who has no sword sell his cloak and buy one. Now did they need a sword when they were sent out before? No, they had power. They could proclaim to the spirits and they would leave. They would preach the kingdom. They even healed. And so, but now it's like you're to sell your cloak and buy one. So the cloak is one of the few things he told them to bring. So it's this again, this is sort of an upside down. It's sort of a reversal of what's happened earlier. They had the power to address this earlier, but now they're going to rely on other things. They're going to sell their cloak and buy a sword for, and this is why this is the lynchpin verse 37. For I tell you that this scripture must be fulfilled in me. So he's basing what's happening with the selling of the cloak and buying a sword, the very things they need for the things that they don't need and taking up a sword that they did not need. He says, this is why it's to fulfill a scripture. He says, and he was numbered with the transgressors for what is written about me has its fulfillment. Now this is a quotation from Isaiah 5312. Now this is a very important text because this does not feature in Mark and Matthew. Often in Christian theology, when we think of Isaiah 53, it's, oh, the suffering servant. This is Jesus. You just sort of assume that it features in all the gospels. Well, you can argue that, yes, at times it's alluded to, sometimes maybe clearly, sometimes unclearly, but this is the only of the synoptic, only one of the three synoptics that actually quotes it explicitly. Mark and Matthew actually have another text they're relying on in this story. It's Zachariah 13. So in the disciples denial tradition, as we'll call it, just for the sake of argument here, in Mark and Matthew's telling of it, they use Zachariah 13, which, so Jesus is at the meal, so for example, in Mark, in Mark he says the scriptures are being fulfilled and then he refers to the previous quotation of Zachariah 13.7, which says, I will strike the shepherd and the sheep will be scattered. And then later in the story and his arrest in the immediate context of this sort of disciples denial story, they left him and fled in verse 50, when he gets arrested, right? So there's common elements in these stories, like across the tradition. So in Matthew, Mark and Luke, the common elements you see in each one of these stories are one, you have the prediction of Peter and the disciples denial. So you have that prediction in Matthew and Mark. You just sort of lose track of that in Luke because it sounds unique. But in Matthew and Mark, they both predict both of their denials. And the second thing, they both fail to pray, right? In the next scene, when they are taken out to the garden, they pray, we'll get to that. And then three, there's taking up of swords in each one. And then Jesus being arrested. So these are the common elements in each one. But if you notice from Mark and Matthew, if you look at those accounts in Mark 14 and in Matthew 26, both of those texts, Jesus says the scripture at the meal, just like we have in Luke, but in Luke, it's Isaiah 53, but he says the Zachariah 13 text at the meal in Mark and Matthew strike the shepherd and the sheep will scatter. And in both of those texts, it's very clear that the fulfillment of that scripture is talking about when the crowd comes to arrest Jesus, the disciples left him and fled. So the fulfillment of scripture motif in these disciple denial stories always happens within the immediate context of his arrest. That's very important because what people do when they see this text in Luke, let's fast forward back to Luke. When they see Luke use Isaiah 53 and he was numbered with the transgressors. What is the number one interpretation of this passage that you hear all the time? Yeah, people are going to be thinking, well, that's when he's put on the cross between the two thieves. Bingo, bingo. That is the dominant interpretation. Now what they do is that this is actually really interesting if we pay close attention to it is the reason for people to assume this is later scribes. Once we have a four fold gospel canon that later scribes, we know this for sure, multiple later manuscript. None of the early manuscripts have this, but multiple later manuscripts actually took this Isaiah 53-12 and he was numbered with the transgressors passage and they put it in Mark 15-28 when Jesus is crucified next to two robbers. This term is really important. It'll come up later in the Luke text. So you're going to suggest being numbered with the transgressors here in Luke. It's not about the crucifixion event. It's about the scattering and the whole point of it would be something like, I'm taken like any common criminal. I'm numbered among the transgressors or something like that. Is that correct? Well, it's more specific than that in Luke. Like an arrest. Yeah, in Luke it's actually the taking up of the sword. So the transgressors, the ones who are breaking the law are those who take up the sword. Oh, okay. You see? So the transgressors in Luke's context are going to be the ones who actually take up the sword. But more importantly, that's the group. But Peter will deny him. So already what we find here in this use of Isaiah 53 here in Luke, this will explain a lot. I would argue all of the unique material that we find in Luke's telling of the arrest story, the last supper, the prayer and the arrest story. Because the unique material, you can find the themes right in Isaiah 53. Like when he tells Peter that he's prayed on his behalf, that his faith may not fail. If Isaiah 53 is behind this overall passage, like kind of like a midrash, where you're sort of compiling pieces of a story to sort of fill in Isaiah 53. So you're taking synoptic tradition and you're sort of casting it in light of Isaiah. What do we find the servant doing in Isaiah 53? What does he do? He intercedes on behalf of who? The transgressors. He intercedes on their behalf. So if you have Isaiah in your mind, which any Jew would have in their mind at this period. The ones who forsake him are going to be tempted to forsake him or the transgressors. Exactly, exactly. This is the great temptation for Luke. Satan is here. They're going into the trial. He even tells them before the meal, right before we get to this passage, that you were with me in my trials and my father has prepared a kingdom for you and it's the same term. If we think of transgressor maybe in terms of being like unfaithful or faithless, that might help some listeners. Because again, our minds immediately go to the crucifixion scene. Right. But it's only these later manuscripts put that Isaiah verse in 1528. If you look in your Bibles in Mark 15, you'll see any modern Bible will sort of take verse 28 out. They'll just have like verse 27, verse 29. They'll take 28 out. They'll normally put down in a note because no other manuscripts have it. For those of you who are using ESV, if you go to Mark 1527 and just look at the numbers. You'll have verse 27, then it goes to verse 29. So verse 28 is not there and you'll get a footnote in ESV, some manuscripts insert verse 28. Which reads, and the scripture was fulfilled that says he was numbered with the transgressors. This is just like what happens and maybe people are more familiar with John chapter 5 with the angel in the pool and all that stuff. It's the same kind of phenomenon here. And there's good reasons for that. I mean, this is probably a later scribal harmonization. That's a popular theory. I have my own sort of views on why, but it's definitely a later harmonization. But they're seeing connection with the language of robbers because Luke uses that language of robbers in this scene. We'll see. And so people assume that in Matthew and Mark well it says he's crucified next to these robbers. And it uses the term Liston, these robbers or Briggins kind of. That's the term used in Matthew and Mark. So they sort of sort of assume, oh, that must be counted amongst the robbers. That must be what he's talking about. But Luke doesn't use that term in the crucifixion. Luke just uses I can't even talk right now. Cacurgus, just meaning like literally workers of bad criminals. So that's the term he uses. He doesn't use robbers for those hanging on either side of him on the cross. Because the term robber for him and his narrative will function very specifically. And we'll see that in the following scene. And so when he speaks of numbered with the transgressors, it's these who are taking up the sword. This is to fulfill scripture. So look in verse 38. He says right after that, after he says for what is written about me, has its fulfillment. He says, and they said, look, Lord, here are two swords. And he said to them, it is enough. Now this is a toughie, right? Like, first of all, you know, you have the 12 that he's addressing. What the heck are you going to do with two swords? You sure as heck aren't going to take on, you know, Rome with two swords. He's not meaning, oh, that, that'll do. That's sufficient. Right. He's not like, oh, yeah, you got the right amount. You just needed to, you know, that's obviously not what's going on here. There's obviously something else. But why to, you know, this is if you're familiar with the Luke story in general, or just Jewish storytelling in general, what do you need to validate that someone is actually a transgressor? You need, you need two or three witnesses. You see, you need two or three witnesses to validate that you were actually a transgressor. And so the whole point of this, just like he in the A structure, he perceives Peter's denial, then he zooms in B to the whole group and he tells them, this is what you're going to do. Now you are to do this because the scripture has its fulfillment in me. And what did we see in Matthew and Mark that both of those texts have that scriptural fulfillment motif going on with Zachariah and both of them are fulfilled in the arrest scene. So let's keep going and see if that actually works out. It's his, it's his way of saying, okay, we don't have a lone wolf acting here. It's kind of his way of saying the bunch of you approve. You're all in this together. You know, you're, you're, you're assenting, you know, to what's going on here. And there's, there's a lot of narrative features and sort of, you know, that stick out, you know, like the positioning of characters, right? Like the characters position, you know, Peter's like real close to it. I'll go with you to prison under death. You know, he's wants to go right there with them, right? And then the disciples are like, no, we didn't need anything. You know, we did exactly as you told us kind of a thing. But now they're going to do the opposite of that, right? So, and they're saying, look here, we have two swords and he says that's enough. So the thing that they didn't need before now is going to be the thing that makes them transgressors. They're going to be counted with the transgressors. So Jesus must be counted with the transgressors. The transgressors here are those that take up the sword. And we'll see this. So that's where you move on to the prayer scene. This is the very center of the narrative section. The immediate narrative section is the prayer. And this is what, what are they praying? Not to be led into temptation. This is the crux. This is the C. So if A is for telling Peter's denial, B is for telling the disciples denial, right smack in the middle, we have this prayer that they are not led into temptation. And that's what they actually pray. And what, what does he say? He says, when he came to them, verse 40, pray that you not enter into temptation. This is the prayer that he taught them to pray before. Lead us not into temptation, right? So this is part of the Luke and theme. Satan has waited till this opportune time. Now he's literally coming in Judas and he's telling them to pray that they're not led into temptation. And then Jesus is alone praying. He's the last one. So right here in verse 43, you have this interesting Luke in addition again, and there appeared to him an angel from heaven strengthening him. So there's that angel strengthening him tradition from the temptation, but Luke has saved it for the very end. So you, and all throughout Luke, this is a really interesting theme that people miss because they don't pay attention to narrative is it throughout Luke's narrative, the righteous or sort of the ones that are with him are always sort of recognized by the angels of heaven. Right? Like if you, if you acknowledge me before the father, you'll be recognized for the angels of heaven, you know, the angels of heaven rejoice when you find the lost one. You know, there's all this sort of being aligned with the angels is sort of you're on in the right place. Crispin Fletcher Louie has an interesting monograph on Luke and angels in this respect. But the point being is the angel is ministering to Jesus. The others, they're not praying the prayer. And so we already sort of at the, this sort of climactic section, we find them sleeping. And this is exactly what he sort of alluded to back in chapter 12 about blessed are the servants whom the master finds awake when he comes, you know. So this idea is you don't, you want to be awake. You want to be able to pray that you're not led into temptation and you can be successful in the trial. But what we have is a failure and immediately that's how the story turns. And you even have a little sort of mini chiasm, you know, he tells them to pray, they don't pray. And then it's like he has to reiterate it, you know, in verse 46 and he said to them, why are you sleeping? Rise and pray that you may not enter into temptation. So it's like, okay, we get it, Luke. We, you know, we, this is the center. We get what you're doing here. And then while he was still speaking, boom, you have this sort of narrative hinge, right? You've created this huge tension and the narrators just like immediately, right? Like while they're speaking, there came a crowd. So here comes the crowd and who's leading them? Judas. But we know from Luke, this is literally Satan. So Satan is literally come to face them. This is the great temptation. Will they fail? You know, it is really interesting that Luke inserts the detail about the angel here. Isn't it? You know, especially with that, you know, it just makes it so much clearer. And if you pay attention. Yeah. And omits it at Luke four. That's right. That's right. It's sort of. He just moves it to again. Yeah. He moves it all the way up. He's sort of walking you through it. And if you've been paying attention in Luke. To all this temptation narrative, then you get it. You know, you would catch it, especially in the Lord's prayer. You know, the disciples are teaching. Teach us how to pray. You know, it's like, this is how you do it. So and now they're found. Not praying the moment they need to be. And so this is where the hinge happens. So you've got your A. You've got your B. This is the C. And then boom, you got your B prime back to the disciples. What happens? So Judas comes in this scene for the betrayal to kiss him. And verse 49, here it is. And when those that were around him saw what would follow. They said. Now this is very important. It's a they here. Right. This is the disciples. This is not Peter. So many times what we're not listening to an actual narrative. Our minds naturally try to harmonize things. And so we miss crucial points in the narrative that sort of teach us what's going on in the story. Right. So you don't want to take John's gospel, for example, that is Peter does it. And impute it on to Luke, because that you'll lose the framework. So in Luke's, it's the group, they, when he addressed the they, the disciples about the swords, it says, and they said, Lord, shall we strike with the sword? And notice it doesn't say just and one of them. It said, or and one or and Peter, it says and one of them. So it's, it's talking about like the solidarity of the group. Right. They're sort of all on this board. Shall we all strike with the sword? So one of them comes up and strikes with the sword. Right. Struck the servant of the high priest and cut his off his right ear. And Jesus said, he does not say, okay, good. That's why you got the swords. You know, you're ready now. No, it's the opposite. Jesus says no more of this. He rebukes him and he touches his ear and heals him. Now again, we find a unique passage only to Luke in no other, not even John. This is really surprising. Not even John includes the healing of the servants ear. Now why is this? Why is it we find this only the healing of the ear only in Luke? It's not in Mark. It's not in Matthew. Because again, if we think about store framing the story, if I was right, that Isaiah 53 is behind the framing of this story, just like Zachariah 13 was behind the story of Matthew and Mark. Right. So Isaiah 53, who are the ones that are? How does healing take place in Isaiah 53? Does the healing of Israel and the healing of the nations? Does it take place by the servant picking up the sword and slaughtering all his enemies? And then the great healing comes? No. It says by his stripes, we are healed. Isaiah 53. This is the notion. He's drawing the themes. Quite a contrast. Right. This is what Luke is doing. He's doing sort of Jewish exegesis of Isaiah 53 and structuring his narrative with it. It's the healing comes when they give up the swords, when they give up to the enemy. So not only does he not Jesus not take the sword against his enemy, he literally heals his enemy. This is night and day upside down. Different. This is exactly what he in the prediction of the disciples denial. He has said the things that they were not lack, they were lacking nothing when they sent, when he sent them out and they're going to take the very few things they had and sell them for the things that they did not need. And so this is exactly what's happening. They're taking up of the sword. And so they strike. He heals them. Hopefully you're here in the Isaiah imagery here. Yeah. They're trusting in their own, their own means, you know, what, what they think they're going to need is that that's the transgression. Right. And if you're from the transgression and those texts, like if, if, if people know Isaiah, because people knew Isaiah backwards and forwards back then they knew the servant songs, the servant songs are used all the time in context of Israel's redemption. And if you're, if you think Isaiah 53, eight and nine are leading up to that verse 12. And what do they say? This is Isaiah 53, eight and nine says by oppression and judgment he was taken away. And for his generation who considered that he was cut off from the land of the living, stricken for the transgression of my people. So that his, his people are the ones transgressing. That's the focus of the text. It's not talking about, oh, all you horrible nations and oh, you know, total depravity and everyone's a center. That's not what it's talking about. It's, it's talking about the transgression of his own people. And then it says verse nine that he made his grave with the wicked and with the rich man and his death, although he had done no violence that you see. So Luke is, Luke is just capitalizing on this theme, though he had done no violence, counted with the transgressions of his people. Right. So his own, his own people are taking up the sword now. And now this, if it, if it's not thick enough, listen to what he says here because Jesus addresses the crowds right after he heals them in 52. He says, then Jesus said to the chief priests and the officers of the temple and the elders who had come out against him, have you come out as against a robber with swords and clubs? So who are the ones carrying the swords here? The ones. It's the Israelites, the chief priests of the temple. Yeah, but it's, but even more so for the sake of the narrative is with Satan. Like that's Luke's point. In the temptation, what does back in chapter four, what is Satan offering him? He's offering him the kingdoms of the world. He takes them even up to the temple itself. And so the, which in Jewish cosmology as your listeners sure know is the pinnacle of the whole world. This is like, he's offering them the entire world and he's staying faithful to the end, overcoming the temptation, right? Promise the kingdoms of the world because how did the kingdoms of the world secure that power? In Jewish thought, this is very important for Jewish apocalyptic thought because Jewish apocalyptic is running right through Luke, especially with all the Satan stuff and the casting out of demons and spirits. So in Jewish apocalyptic, war and violence was attached to the fallen angels in the corruption of the world. Your listeners probably know this well in the Enoch tradition or the washers. Exactly. It's these fallen angels that, that in sort of some traditions are led by Azazel or, or Shemi Azza or Belial or Mastema or in this case, Satan, right? Like the chief of them all that offers them all the kingdoms. So in the fallen angels traditions, they taught them the making of weapons and shields, weapons of warfare, right? Because in Genesis six, that was what brought judgment on the world is it was filled with violence. That's the whole point. It was filled with violence and wickedness. And this is what Isaiah 53 is literally turning upside down. It's saying that the one who had no violence in him is the great servant who will lead to the, to the healing of the people. And how does he do it? Not through the sword, but by his own stripes, by his own torment, by his own trial. So this is the point of Luke. It's he's saying, you've come at me as against a robber with swords and clubs. So the ones bearing the swords are literally the, the Satan's armies in Luke is sort of the image, you know, that these people with swords being led by Satan to, to conquer the Lord's anointed, you know. And so when the disciples take up their swords, what is the symbolism here in the narrative? Whose side are they on? You see it? You see, it's, it's, they've, he's, Jesus is now left alone. He's the righteous one. Even if, even if you're, I mean, I'm sure you're going to have some commentators, you know, talk about the provocation here to, you know, to lead to the Messiah's death, but the question remains the same. Exactly. Whose side are they on? Whose side are they on? Right. They become sort of part of this inverted picture. See the structures flawless here though, because that, so the disciples have denied just as he predicted, you know, just as he sort of enacted prophetically. Right. And so, you know, people who, I mean, I'm going to put myself in here too. I mean, as, as you read through the passage, you know, the, the common thing that would float through your mind when you say denial is you would sort of parse that through Peter. Peter's denial is verbal. But, but what we have here is a denial by behavior. That's right. Yeah. It's, it's, you know, if the A is, is verse 31 through 34 prophesying Peter's denial, and then the B is prophesying, prophesying the disciples and now exactly what would take place, the taking up of swords, which is exactly what they do inverse. So the C would be the prayer, not to let be led into temptation. That's verse 39 through 46. That's the crux. So then we're back at this B prime, verse 47 through 53, which is a pericope in and of itself is the disciples denying and then the mirror to a is going to follow with Peter. Exactly. Now, if I'm, if I'm wrong, then, then. Well, I can't be wrong because the narrative like bears this out. No, listen, because the narrative bears this out. Mark and Matthew do something different here. Mark and Matthew immediately following this scene, right, has Jesus taken to Caiaphas house. Right. And then they have the whole scene there. And then following that scene, Peter denies. Well, Luke rearranges the material because it doesn't get his thing. Right. He goes right to the verbal denial. Yes. Immediately to Peter's denial in verse 54 through 62. So this is, this is a perfect chiasm. And again, forget it with the old chiasm. Yeah. Okay. I hate it too, but this is right in your face. Like this is, this is meant to be performative. This is meant to be climactic. And all the material is catered to Isaiah 53. And which is what you would expect to see if Luke is departing from the use of Zachariah 13 and reframing it with this text. And so this is exactly what you have in verse 54 through 62. Peter denies three times. Just like Jesus said. So the structure is perfect. Now remember up above here when the disciples denied, what does he call them? Those who come with the swords and clubs, he calls them robbers. Right. He said, you come out. You have come out as against a robber. You. So who this is the irony in Luke. The ones who should be fearing the sword are the robber. Right. They're the evil doer. You know, but now they've treated Jesus like robber. Now this term is very crucial in Luke, because it's only used two other places. One of those is in the Good Samaritan. And what was the point of the Good Samaritan parable? Right. Is the robber is the one that leaves the man beaten on the side of the road. Right. Left for dead. And it's the robber. It's the least. It's the least us. It's the same term. Right. He's the one left for dead. And what's the point of the Good Samaritan parable? Which again, this is only unique to Luke. You don't have Good Samaritan in Matthew. You don't have Good Samaritan in Mark. This is part of Luke's narrative. Right. So Luke is using this story to lead to these climaxes. And in the Good Samaritan parable, the point is who will be the neighbor to the man who is among the robbers. Right. His own people. And again, the same theme from Isaiah, his own people passed the guy by. Who is left with the robbers. So who's going to be there with him? Who's going to care for the guy that's taken away by the robbers? You see, the whole parable itself is sort of geared towards this climax in the end. It's like, you've come at me as if I was the robber with the swords and clubs. You see. So who's going to be left with the guy that's beaten up by the robbers? They're the robbers. And if you don't know that they're the robbers, you got to fast forward to the only other time this term is used. This least on and it's in chapter 19 at the cleansing of the temple, 1946. And we all know this one really well. When Jesus is in the temple, what does he say? You know, he's he chases out those who are selling. And he says, you've made it a den of robbers. It's a be a house of prayer for all nations. That's from Isaiah 56. And then he quotes from Jeremiah seven says you have made it a den of least on of robbers. So this is this is the thing going into our sort of arrest scene in Luke is that now they've come against him as if he was the robber, you see. So it's sort of this climactic scene where like we know who the robbers are. But now we know who the one who is going to be beat up and left for dead is it's Jesus himself. So who will be with him, right? Who will who will actually persevere pray that they're not led into temptation and overcome the trial? None of them. He's left by himself. So it's sort of the narrative has positioned Jesus just like Isaiah's servant, the righteous one. How decals and we even know this. It's this is so powerful. So when you get to Luke's crucifixion of Jesus, right? And he's crucified. You have this insurion who in Matthew and Mark is the first one to sort of recognize that he's what the son of God, right? In Matthew and Mark, they proclaim surely he's the son of God or in market could be a son of God, right? That's the that's the point is this ironic, this insurion, the first one to proclaim it. But in Luke, you don't have that in Luke. You have the centurion say surely he's the righteous one. How decals the guy from Isaiah. He puts the words of Isaiah 53. Exactly. Exactly. So Luke is purposely structuring the whole story this way. And if you're not paying attention to these cues, you're going to rip this text out of its context like many interpreters have. And they're going to they're going to interpret that pericope by itself. And you miss the weight of the story. You miss the tension of the story. Which the disciples deny him. Peter denies him and he goes at the cross alone. Now this is the same Jesus who told those same disciples that they are to take up his cross and follow him. He's told them when you are delivered up, the spirit will give them the words to say, you know, if you do not deny me before the father, you know, you'll be recognized with the angels, you know. So again, all the themes have been running to this climax, the great temptation in Luke. And so this is how the text needs to be read. So to take up the sword for Luke, then literally meant joining on the side of Satan. Yeah, it was a betrayal. It was a betrayal of Jesus. And if this was just a one off sort of, oh, well, David, maybe that's just talking about, you know, Jesus had to accomplish his atonement. And so they couldn't, you know, this wasn't a battle. It was just about the atonement. And it wasn't meant for like ethics for all time or anything. So really, then what do we have an axe? Where the faithful, when they're, when they're brought to trial, when they stand before the rulers, which is what happens when they turn, Jesus says in the text, right? When you turn Peter, what happens in acts? The same Peter that's betraying them and leaving them is the same one preaching to the faces of the ones who killed them boldly. And when, when the spirit comes, just like Jesus said, the spirit led them and led them through temptation, right? So this whole thing is they're able to become martyrs in acts. You have Stephen saying the very words of Jesus and you have the son of man recognizing him, acknowledging him, just like the parables of Luke, they'll be recognized in heaven. And you have Stephen as the martyr, not taking up swords, but actually saying the words of Jesus and dying, being stoned outside the camp, kind of an image and heaven is, heaven is recognizing it, just like the gospel of Luke had said. So you see that this taking up of swords then is literally the opposite of what Jesus is saying. Yeah, we would expect that given it's Luke and acts. Bingo. Luke and the same author, you know. Right. These are things, these things go throughout, there are great works on the narrative unity of these two. I know there's problems, but these are definitely to be read as two books, you know, Luke one, Luke two, you know. So this is what my proposal and I think this makes sense of the entire narrative. It really makes sense out of the structure again. We may need to, it might be a good idea and I can produce this unless you already have it. I was going to say, put the chiasm on the episode page and people can reference that. I have, I'm going to the handout that I gave out when I gave this paper back in 2015. I'm going to give, I'll send the PDF to y'all and everyone can have it for free. We'll just put it up on the website. And the article is being, well this is being developed into an article that I hope to get published this summer. So I have some publishers I'm talking to right now. So it won't, it's not publication yet. Coursework is eating my life away. So when I actually have a free moment, I will get to this and we'll get it. We'll try to get it to the publisher. But for now you can have the outline that I gave out as handouts at SBL. And it actually has the chiasmic structure. And it also has so the unique, I have an outline of the unique sort of elements of the Luke and story and their relation to Matthew and Mark. And if we could summarize again, as we wrap up, you know, basically the argument in a nutshell is that Luke is tracking on Isaiah 53. And in his presentation of the elements of Isaiah 53 in the episodes that we just talked about, he structures that presentation chiastically. So that your attention is drawn first to Peter, then to the disciples, then you get the prayer and then it's back to the disciples and then back to Peter with the denials. And again, to me structurally, it makes good sense. And especially, I have to ask myself, if the structure alone was there, is that persuasive enough? Probably. But when you add Isaiah 53 into it, and again, it would be different to what the disciples use as Isaiah 53. Then it looks right accidental. But this is very intentional. I mean, to have Luke just defer, you know, I'm not going to use these passages because I got something else I want to draw attention to. We're going to track on Isaiah 53 and the whole, you know, interplay with the robbers and the transgressors and the violence and the non-viol, all that. That is a pretty compelling package. Yep. And just to, as a reminder to cap it off, it's the whole scriptural fulfillment motif that's being used is used in Matthew and Mark with Zachariah, and it is immediately fulfilled in his arrest. So this is the same model of scriptural fulfillment that's being used, but it's a different text with a different theme. So it's still the overall same message. Nobody's changing the story. It's just how things are presented and why the author has in mind what he wants, the nuances he wants to get across. And the theological point cannot be overstated that it is for Luke the salvation comes by the righteous one, the one faithful to death, even death on a cross and for that reason he's given a name above every name. This is just like Philippians 2. I'm quoting Philippians 2, but this is the theology of Luke. The idea that it's the faithfulness unto death not taking up a sword against his enemies because Jesus believes that at the coming of the Spirit it's enabled him to live this life and that God will vindicate him in resurrection. And this is the ethics that go forth into Acts that those who have been empowered with the Spirit they no longer fear because they have seen their master raised from the dead and he has sent them on power from on high which we also forget about that empowers them for this life so that they face the same people that crucified Jesus to their face without any fear of death. They've brought no swords they've brought no weapons because they know the same God that raised their Lord from the dead is the same God that will vindicate them. The same ethic you see in Paul in Romans 12 and 13 is the same ethic you see. Brothers never seek to avenge yourselves. Then the government they bear the sword, they are the avenger but brothers you never seek it. What do you do to your enemies? You beat them up, you take up your guns and fight them. No. He says what do you do to your enemies? You clothe them, you feed them because guess what, that's the only thing that ultimately heaps coals on the head with his swords. This is the whole point in Luke is that Jesus taught them don't fear the one that has the power to take the body but fear the one that has the power to cast you into Hades. That's the point or whatever it is. But you get the point. That's Luke's theology and we can't shy away from it you have to face it, head on and deal with it because it is a tough call for Christians and I know this is a difficult thing. It's a tough call for Christians in developed countries and in the West. If you're in a third world or you're in the underground church or something like that this is where you're at because that's literally where you're at. We feel conflict with it because we're not in such an immediately disadvantaged situation like they are. For modern Christians in the West this is a hard message. Christian Witness hinges on this mic in response to our enemies how do we beat them? Do we beat them by joining the nations and taking up our arms against them or do we beat them by the witness of the cross? By fidelity to God even to the willingness of death it's unlocking through faith the very power of God. That's the point in Luke. It's all about the spirit. It's the power of God. I'll tell you what I think of. I think of these consider the context if you're in Iraq or Iran or someplace like that I know people who have been both peripherally and fairly immediately involved in situations where you have believers in these countries and they live with the reality of ISIS and the Islamic supremacy and all that and you actually have for lack of a better way to put it you have direct divine intervention because they don't have anything else to trust and these stories about Jesus came to me in a dream and told me to leave Islam for the future and they do it and they suffer tremendous cost doing it. It's for real. You get these situations where people respond in this way and they are willing to put their own lives on the line the lives of their own families to be a witness and the whole church thousands and thousands of people wind up becoming Christians because they see these people do the insane thing of being willing to die in response to a person's story then the gospel gets preached we look at it and it's hard to evaluate every situation over there but you've had again I know a few people like I said either peripherally or pretty close to the situations and it's like this is what we were told to do we believed in Jesus we left Islam and we were told to go out and preach and they're willing to do it unto death and these just amazing things come out of it but that's a really hard message It is tough for somebody in the modern world and in the West I was just going to say I have to be honest about my own struggles with it with the historical, narratival exegesis of a difficult passage but then once you're past that and you see it in its context and you can't go back you can't unknow that that you're forced to deal with it and we know from Christian history that this sort of text had been taken and twisted and reused to justify violence to justify taking the sword and to enact violence on one's enemies this same text I think Christians it's time for us in the West I can only speak for my own sort of culture but it's time for Christians to start looking at this text differently and to look at it in its context and stop using it to bolster violence stop using it to justify violence that has to end I hope I can do my part so if anyone's needing material anyone needs to when you've heard this, well what do I do with this text Jesus is saying to buy a sword send them the podcast send them the outline whatever it takes because I want to be a contribution here in this way because it is wrecked me having to deal with this passage and trying to be faithful to this is even harder and so we need each other we need to be honest with the text let the text be the text let the text speak let it say what it's going to say and then you deal with it don't try to take it and woo it and try to make it mean something that it does not mean quite the opposite stop trying to make it sound the opposite alright I rant over well thanks for being with us again it's really it is fascinating you listened to the podcast you've been on before we especially gravitate toward intertextuality how scripture uses scripture and this was a good episode for that being able to track with Luke again to think his thoughts after him and his method after him and where that goes I especially like stuff like that so thanks for sharing that with us and we'll make sure people get access to the outline and whatever else you can send us on the episode page well I appreciate y'all I'm glad to be on and I'll for sure do it again and we'll have some more fun alright thanks a lot alright thanks guys alright Mike well another good episode I don't know why I bought these two swords now so I guess I'm gonna have to take them that was premature I bought these two swords here thinking I was doing the right thing did you save the receipt well that's good then you should be alright yeah but I only got two so could be good yeah well I'm glad we did the topic it's a tough one a tough discipleship topic but that's what happens sometimes with scripture you gotta look at what it says and then struggle with it alright well we wanna thank David Burnett wanna thank everybody else for listening to the Naked Bible Podcast thanks for listening to the Naked Bible Podcast to support this podcast visit www.nakedbibleblog.com to learn more about Dr. Heizer's other websites and blogs go to www.ermsh.com alright David before I let you go I just wanna say that I have a proposal too about that two swords that you might need to think about and that is that three is just too many oh Trey that's all I got that's all I got you only got two hands three is too many so just consider that I know you're doing a lot of work with it just wanna throw that out there if I can help you develop that just let me know your piercing insight that was bad alright I don't have the drums to do that