Wenn „meine“ Interpretation des Schwert-Motivs umstritten ist, dann gibt es sicher auch andere Interpretationen – mich würde es freuen, wenn wir „meine“ und diese anderen, die ich nicht kenne, hier diskutieren könnten.
Zum Beispiel:
France, NIC Matthew, zu 10:34
The “sword” can hardly be understood literally, as the literal use of the sword is explicitly forbidden in 26:51-52; it is a metaphor for conflict and suffering, as in Luke 2:35. Cf. the saying about Jesus coming to “throw fire on the earth” in Luke 12:49, which is followed by a parallel to the present saying in Luke 12:51 but with “division” in place of the metaphor of the “sword.”
Luz, Matt 10:34-36
The unusual formulation and the unusual statement demand an explanation that is given in v. 35 with language from Mic 7:6. Jesus uses the “short sword” or “saber” to “sever” the families. In contrast to Rev 6:4, the explanation of “sword” does not suggest war. “Peace” (......) is more than the opposite of “war.” The split in the families is carried out drastically, in extreme formulations. The three appearances of “against” and the location of “hostile” early in the sentence intensify the enmity that the mission of Jesus creates in families.
Black: Not peace but a sword: Matt 10:34ff; Luke 12:5 ff. in: Bammel/Moule, Jesus and the Politics of His Day
They are found in the 'double tradition', the source Q - which seems to have weathered continuous criticism - and appear in a variant form in Luke: 'do you suppose I came to establish peace on earth? No, indeed, I have come to bring division'' (NEB) (... for ..., 'sword'). In both Matthew and Luke this saying is followed by an adaptation of Mic. 7: 6,2 so that, for the common source of both evangelists, the conflict of division, which Christ here declares he had come to bring, was not one within nations, or even within a single nation, but within families - a situation all too familiar in Christian missionary history.
Im Rundumschlag aller möglichen Verständnisse/damaligen Verwendungen siehe Sim, The sword motif in Matthew 10:34, HTS 56(1) 2000, S. 84, ...Contrary to the views of most scholars, this study has argued that the motif of the sword in Matthew 10:34 does not reflect the original wording of Q but is more probably the result of Matthean redaction. In determining the meaning of this symbol for the evangelist, it was found that Matthew's intentions were perhaps more nuanced and more complex than scholars have recognised. As is normally acknowledged, the sword is not a literal sword which the Matthean Jesus brandishes to call his followers to an uprising against the Romans; on the contrary, it is a symbol which has eschatological overtones.