|
Bro. Turner:
Jesus
said, "Swear not at all" and "whatsoever is more
than these (Yea, yea; Nay, nay) cometh of evil" (Matt.
5:33-37). How does this apply to the oaths required in some
state's court?
Reply:
The
O.T. taught "Thou shalt not swear falsely" (Lev. 19:12),
and "perform unto the Lord thy vows" (Num. 30: 3-f).
But, as "Expositors" puts it, "The scribes
misplaced the emphasis. They had a great deal to say, in
sophistical style, on the oaths that were binding and not binding,
nothing about the fundamental requirement of truth in the inward
parts." Jesus exposed their devious ways of getting around
God's law — by showing all of their oaths (by heaven, earth,
etc.) involved God, and were binding.
But
primarily He attacked their reason for oaths, saying in effect, a
repeated "yes" or "no" should be all the
emphasis needed by honest people.
"Whatsoever
is more cometh of evil" seems to say that were it not for the
evil of untruthfulness and distrust in the world, nothing more
would ever be needed.
I
do not believe Jesus is laying down a law prohibiting calling God
as our witness under any circumstance. Paul, Rom. 1:9, says,
"For God is my witness..." (See Phil. 1:8; 1 Thes. 2:5;
2 Cor. 11:31.) In Gal. 1:20 he says, "Before God, I lie
not." In 2 Cor. 1:23 he says, "I call God for a record
upon my soul" ("for a witness" A.S.) or Marshall
translates, "Now on my life I invoke God as witness."
I
have testified in court but few times in
| |
my life. The first time I
asked the Judge if I might "affirm" rather than
"swear" — and he granted the request. That amounts to
little more than a technicality of terms. On a later occasion I
answered, without special permission, "I affirm..." but
that fooled neither God, the Judge, nor me. It just made me feel
better. If it would make you feel better you might try it — I
think most courts will honor that statement.
In
a very real sense, the "oath" on the Bible, in civil
court, is a remnant from the days when reminding men that they
stood before the God of Heaven as they gave testimony, would
promote truthfulness. There is an incongruity in a court that
discourages belief in God, yet asks witnesses to speak as
"before God." Let us hope we will see a recognition of
the need for God in all facets of life, before our Godless nation
is destroyed.
*******************
Bro. Turner:
How
could Paul justify his repeated use of God's name — in such
expressions as "God forbid" Rom. 6:2?? LM
Reply:
Let's
not get so holy as to out Paul Paul, or out Jesus Jesus. The Greek
of Rom. 6:2 and like places is often "me genoito" or
"May it not be." The
translators have apparently used the idiom "God forbid"
because they felt Paul was calling upon God, in a sense, to check
any such conclusion as some were drawing. Paul was not taking
God's name in vain — in many cases was not even using the words
assigned to him by translators.
[Previous
Article] [Next
Article]
|