Although re-examinations of accepted conclusions are to be welcomed, Dale Martin's recent revisionist article, 'Jesus in Jerusalem: Armed and Not Dangerous', is here rebutted. Contra Martin, carrying a sword for self-defence was the default position, not subject to penalty, let alone a token of revolt. 'Love of Enemies' is the awkward original teaching of Jesus, read in the light of later interpretations of the fall of Jerusalem and its Temple as divine vengeance. The reduced Passover of the Last Supper accounts betokens later practice, not Jesus' rejection of his people's cult.