Staff or no staff?

[Baptist Believer]

I'm teaching on Luke 9 tomorrow morning and I've been thinking about the differences between the three passages where Jesus gives instructions to the Twelve before sending them out.

In Matthew 10:9-10, Jesus tells them not to take/acquire a staff.
In Luke 9:3, Jesus tells them not to take a staff.
In Mark 6:8, Jesus tells then to take NOTHING BUT a staff.

Because of the context/chronology they seem to be true parallel passages, not just similar events.

My presupposition is that the Gospels (as well as the rest of the scriptures) are not full of contradictions. However, I'm not an wooden inerrantist, so a real contradiction about something relatively minor won't rock my faith.

As far as I know, there are not textual issues here, but some of you are much more knowledgable about those issues than me.

I have some thoughts about how to reconcile the passages without violating the plain meaning of the text - namely, Luke used Matthew as a source and it is a variation of Matthew's meaning not to acquire a staff that one did not already have in one's possession, but I'm not satisfied with that position.

Does anyone have some insight you can provide for our edification?

 

[rsr]

As far as I know, there are not textual issues here, but some of you are much more knowledgable about those issues than me.

I make no claims of special knowledge on this, but there is a textual variant at play. The TR and MT have staffs, while the CT has staff in Luke and Matthew. The first reading, then, would allow the disciples to carry one staff, but not more than one.

I have some thoughts about how to reconcile the passages without violating the plain meaning of the text - namely, Luke used Matthew as a source and it is a variation of Matthew's meaning not to acquire a staff that one did not already have in one's possession, but I'm not satisfied with that position.

Something like that seems to be the prevailing way to harmonize the passages, but I don't pretend to try to understand the nuances. Apparently Matthew uses a different word for take than Luke and Mark, but the contention is even though the latter use the same word, they use it for different meanings. A representative explication of the argument is at http://christianthinktank.com/nostaff.html.

 

[HankD]

The Mark passage may not be a parallel passage. Here they are sent out two-by-two but this is not mentioned in Matthew and Luke.

Personally I believe this is what is going on.

Similar missions while on His many preaching tours in Israel but with different marching orders for the soldiers as any good general would do for whatever reasons he chooses.

HankD

 

[Van]

Several efforts to harmonize Mark 6:8 ( take a staff) with Matthew 10:9-10 and Luke 9:3 (take not a staff or staves) have been made. Take no extra provision as your needs will be met by the Lord. If you have a staff - fine, but do not acquire an extra one. This view meshes with all three verses.

 

[Baptist Believer]

The Mark passage may not be a parallel passage. Here they are sent out two-by-two but this is not mentioned in Matthew and Luke.

Personally I believe this is what is going on

That's possible, but the general sequence of events before and after harmonize well together. And, as you know, just because there is a detail of Jesus sending out two-by-two in Mark, and the lengthy teachings involved in the commissioning recorded in Matthew does not mean they are different events. Luke has the least detailed mention of their adventure of the three synoptic Gospels.

Similar missions while on His many preaching tours in Israel but with different marching orders for the soldiers as any good general would do for whatever reasons he chooses.

So if there were multiple instances of sending out the Twelve before Jesus sends out the 70/72 (Luke 10:1,17), why would Jesus instruct them to take a staff on Mark's missionary trip and not on the trip(s) recorded in Matthew and Luke?

Also, is your primary reason to suggest two or more different missionary trips is to avoid any appearance of a "contradiction" or some other motivator?

 

[Baptist Believer]

Several efforts to harmonize Mark 6:8 ( take a staff) with Matthew 10:9-10 and Luke 9:3 (take not a staff or staves) have been made. Take no extra provision as your needs will be met by the Lord. If you have a staff - fine, but do not acquire an extra one. This view meshes with all three verses.

Yes. We had a tentative discussion of this question yesterday morning and the class wants to talk more about issues with "contradictions" and textual dissimilarities in the coming weeks. I was told yesterday that no one seems to want to talk about these things in church and it is corrosive to faith. We'll confront them head on in a few weeks like I used to do when working with the youth group.

 

[HankD]

That's possible, but the general sequence of events before and after harmonize well together. And, as you know, just because there is a detail of Jesus sending out two-by-two in Mark, and the lengthy teachings involved in the commissioning recorded in Matthew does not mean they are different events. Luke has the least detailed mention of their adventure of the three synoptic Gospels.

So if there were multiple instances of sending out the Twelve before Jesus sends out the 70/72 (Luke 10:1,17), why would Jesus instruct them to take a staff on Mark's missionary trip and not on the trip(s) recorded in Matthew and Luke?

I don't know but my guess is that when he sent them out two-by-two perhaps they were sent on missions of greater distance and a staff would help them traverse the country-side or perhaps it was hilly or mountainous with bad or rocky roads where a staff would be of great use.

Also, is your primary reason to suggest two or more different missionary trips is to avoid any appearance of a "contradiction" or some other motivator?

Yes part of my motivation but not all. However I have learned from previous experiences both from studying scripture and the experiences of life that there are often "contradictory" events which are not contradictory at all just events needing an explanation to distinguish them apart.

Having been in the military I know that a campaign may consist of several different missions during its life span with different rules of engagement.

HankD

 

[Baptist Believer]

I don't know but my guess is that when he sent them out two-by-two perhaps they were sent on missions of greater distance and a staff would help them traverse the country-side or perhaps it was hilly or mountainous with bad or rocky roads where a staff would be of great use.

Obviously, we're speculating here, but that makes sense to me.

It was suggested yesterday that the staff could also be used as a modest defensive weapon. Nothing like the "rod" of a shepherd or a sword, but still it's something.

Yes part of my motivation but not all. However I have learned from previous experiences both from studying scripture and the experiences of life that there are often "contradictory" events which are not contradictory at all just events needing an explanation to distinguish them apart.

My experience as well.

 

[Alcott]

It seems as if it should help to take a staff. Meetings every morning, 8:30 sharp!

 

[Baptist Believer]

Any others thoughts on this issue? I'm preparing this Sunday's lesson where we will hit this question head on.

 

[kyredneck]

Any others thoughts on this issue?

Here's some other's thoughts:

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
8. and commanded them] Now follows a brief summary of the charge, which the Lord proceeded to give them on this occasion, and which is recorded at far greater length by St Matthew, Matthew 10:5-42.save a staff] They were to go forth with their staff as they had it at the time, but they were not (Matthew 10:10) to “seek,” or “procure one carefully” for the purposes of this journey. The “staff” in Matthew 10:10, depends on “acquire not” or “provide not for yourselves” in Mark 6:9.

Pulpit Commentary
Verse 8. - They should take nothing for their journey, save a staff only. St. Matthew says (Matthew 10:10), according to the best authorities (μηδὲ ῤάβδον), they were not to take a staff. St. Luke says the same as St. Matthew. The meaning is that they were not to make any special provision for their journey, but to go forth just as they were, depending upon God. Those who had a staff might use it; those who had not one were not to trouble themselves to procure one. The scrip (πήρα) was the wallet for food. They were to take no money in their purse (μὴ εἰς τὴν ζώνην χαλκόν); literally, brass in their girdle. St. Mark, writing for Romans, uses this word for money. St. Luke, writing for Greeks, uses the term (ἀργύριον) "silver." St. Matthew (Matthew 10:9) says, "provide neither gold, nor silver, nor brass."
http://biblehub.com/commentaries/mark/6-8.htm

 

[Baptist Believer]

Here's some other's thoughts

Thank you. I'm leaning that direction, but I want to present multiple points of view. I honestly haven't given it much thought until recently. When I first encountered this many years ago as an agnostic, it was allegedly evidence that the Bible was "full of mistakes." I recognized the foolishness of those remarks at the time, and didn't worry about trying to reconcile every last detail in the scripture since I don't have a theology that demands it. However, I have a good class of Bible students, and some of them are very concerned about such matters. I want to be as prepared as possible to guide them through any issues that arise in a faithful way.

Do you essentially agree with what you have quoted or do you have additional insight?

You (and the others who have already commented here) usually have good insights and I want to have the benefit of your thoughts if you have anything else to offer regarding this matter.

Again, I appreciate your input.

 

[kyredneck]

Do you essentially agree with what you have quoted or do you have additional insight?

Lol, you said:

I'm not an wooden inerrantist, so a real contradiction about something relatively minor won't rock my faith

Ditto. You said:

I honestly haven't given it much thought until recently.

Ditto. You said:

I want to present multiple points of view.

I'd do exactly that. Ditto. You said:

I have a good class of Bible students, and some of them are very concerned about such matters. I want to be as prepared as possible to guide them through any issues that arise in a faithful way.

I think they're fortunate to have a diligent teacher like you. I used to teach in a non-denom group many years ago, I also took it seriously, and in the process learned a great deal when preparing the lessons.

"Some of them are very concerned about such matters"; you know, there's soooo many astounding, mind blowing, awesome, types, shadows, allegories, continuity, fulfilled prophecies, etc. contained in His marvelous word that is absolute proof it's
God-breathed, it's hard for me to get too worked up over something like this. It's actually petty to me. But it's not to them and you're the teacher and you're doing exactly what I would do.

Yes, what I posted sounds as good as anything else.

 

[The Biblicist]

I'm teaching on Luke 9 tomorrow morning and I've been thinking about the differences between the three passages where Jesus gives instructions to the Twelve before sending them out.

In Matthew 10:9-10, Jesus tells them not to take/acquire a staff.
In Luke 9:3, Jesus tells them not to take a staff.
In Mark 6:8, Jesus tells then to take NOTHING BUT a staff.

Because of the context/chronology they seem to be true parallel passages, not just similar events.

My presupposition is that the Gospels (as well as the rest of the scriptures) are not full of contradictions. However, I'm not an wooden inerrantist, so a real contradiction about something relatively minor won't rock my faith.

As far as I know, there are not textual issues here, but some of you are much more knowledgable about those issues than me.

I have some thoughts about how to reconcile the passages without violating the plain meaning of the text - namely, Luke used Matthew as a source and it is a variation of Matthew's meaning not to acquire a staff that one did not already have in one's possession, but I'm not satisfied with that position.

Does anyone have some insight you can provide for our edification?

You might take a look at this website:

http://christianthinktank.com/nostaff.html

The essence here is to take what you have, most presumably had a walking stick, but if you don't have it, don't go and procure it before leaving.

 

[John of Japan]

It was suggested yesterday that the staff could also be used as a modest defensive weapon. Nothing like the "rod" of a shepherd or a sword, but still it's something.

The staff is much more than a "modest defensive weapon," but can be a deadly weapon in trained hands. Remember that one of David's mighty men faced a man with a spear and defeated him with a staff (2 Sam. 23:21). Remember that a staff is a shepherd's weapon (Ps. 23:4). Remember the staff fight when Robin Hood met Little John.

To this day, staff fighting is taught in the Asian martial arts. As one who has learned and taught how, I could kill you several different ways with a staff.

 

[Jkdbuck76]

The staff is much more than a "modest defensive weapon," but can be a deadly weapon in trained hands. Remember that one of David's mighty men faced a man with a spear and defeated him with a staff (2 Sam. 23:21). Remember that a staff is a shepherd's weapon (Ps. 23:4). Remember the staff fight when Robin Hood met Little John.

To this day, staff fighting is taught in the Asian martial arts. As one who has learned and taught how, I could kill you several different ways with a staff.

Bojutsu? Or the Chun? Or both?



Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

 

[Salty]

To this day, staff fighting is taught in the Asian martial arts. As one who has learned and taught how, I could kill you several different ways with a staff.

Thats very good to know, my VERY GOOD friend!

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

Bojutsu? Or the Chun? Or both?



Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

Irish stick fighting

 

[Jkdbuck76]

Filipino stick fighting.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

 

[John of Japan]

Bojutsu? Or the Chun? Or both?

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk

Well, the Wing Chun of course, but also a Hung Gar staff form and a Fukien form with some ground work (with a staff!), and a two-man form my sihing worked up for demos and my son's students improved. Never did do the bojutsu but have seen it done. Great stuff.