whose law (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Theology] >> Morality & Ethics



Message


bentzsur -> whose law (6/8/2008 9:18:14 AM)

the messiah said let your yes be a yes and your no a no. then why do we swear to tell the truth and nothing but the truth. as believers it seems to contradict what the messiah said




rcjames -> RE: whose law (6/8/2008 9:27:54 AM)

Swearing to tell the truth etc. is just a legal thingy so those who testify cannot claim they did not know they would be held accountable for what they said.

It is redudancy for a Christian to do, but we are to obey the law.


Thanks
RC




bentzsur -> RE: whose law (6/8/2008 9:31:05 AM)

so is the law of man on an equal level to the law of Yah.




rcjames -> RE: whose law (6/8/2008 10:09:04 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bentzsur

so is the law of man on an equal level to the law of Yah.


Of course not.

And informing a court that you will tell the truth in no way interferes with the Biblical instruction about being truthful.

Thanks
RC




Qtman -> RE: whose law (6/8/2008 10:13:35 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rcjames

quote:

ORIGINAL: bentzsur

so is the law of man on an equal level to the law of Yah.


Of course not.

And informing a court that you will tell the truth in no way interferes with the Biblical instruction about being truthful.
Thanks
RC



So true RC. Also if testimony is not given under oath then the court has little power to do anything about someone that does not tell the truth. It's called perjury.




BerianAardvark -> RE: whose law (6/8/2008 2:27:23 PM)

quote:

So true RC. Also if testimony is not given under oath then the court has little power to do anything about someone that does not tell the truth. It's called perjury.


Exactly, as RC said, it is a "legal thingy" which allows the courts to take action if the testimony proves to be false.

If you look at the context:

"Again, you have heard that the ancients were told, 'YOU SHALL NOT MAKE FALSE VOWS, BUT SHALL FULFILL YOUR VOWS TO THE LORD.' "But I say to you, make no oath at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God, or by the earth, for it is the footstool of His feet, or by Jerusalem, for it is THE CITY OF THE GREAT KING. "Nor shall you make an oath by your head, for you cannot make one hair white or black. "But let your statement be, 'Yes, yes' or 'No, no'; anything beyond these is of evil. (Matthew 5:33-37)

But the oath in a court does not ask that you swear BY anything, it is merely asking that you affirm that you will tell the truth...and too many people (even some Christians) won't tell the truth even if they swear to do so.

As one commentary puts it:

The Mosaic Law contains several prohibitions against swearing falsely by the name of God (Lev 19:12; Num 30:2; Deu 23:21). To swear by God's Name meant that He was your witness that you were telling the truth. The Jews sought to avoid the impropriety of swearing falsely by God's Name by substituting heaven, earth, Jerusalem, or their head as that by which they swore.

Jesus condemned such circumvention of the law as sheer hypocrisy and forbid any form of swearing or oaths in ordinary conversation.

This passage also forbids any shading of the truth or deception. It does not, however, forbid taking an oath in a court of law. Jesus Himself testified under oath before the High Priest (Mat 26:63 ff). Paul also used an oath to call God as his witness that what he was writing was true (2Co 1:23; Gal 1:20). (BELIEVER'S BIBLE COMMENTARY)

Tim




SovereignIsHe -> RE: whose law (6/8/2008 2:34:57 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bentzsur

so is the law of man on an equal level to the law of Yah.


God ordained the civil government for the sake of order(Romans13.) The laws of man that are not in conflict with the law of God are to be obeyed no less than any of the 10 Commandments...

John




fiat_lux -> RE: whose law (6/11/2008 3:06:56 PM)

quote:

the messiah said let your yes be a yes and your no a no. then why do we swear to tell the truth and nothing but the truth. as believers it seems to contradict what the messiah said


If you are concerned about the moral or theological implications, in many cases you're permitted an affirmation rather than an oath.

This, as I understand it, was first introduced because Quakers introduced more or less the same objection you just have.




phosadaud -> RE: whose law (6/11/2008 3:45:27 PM)

I think this is one of the most understood verses in Scripture. It's not a command to not make an oath, it's an exhortation to tell the truth even when you don't make it an official oath.




fiat_lux -> RE: whose law (6/11/2008 3:51:28 PM)

quote:

I think this is one of the most understood verses in Scripture. It's not a command to not make an oath, it's an exhortation to tell the truth even when you don't make it an official oath.

I think the argument would probably be that an oath would be misleading because it would imply that what I say without the oath is of less value or of less truth.

In any case, as I say, it's more or less irrelevant here provided one can make an affirmation rather than an oath, which would seem to solve the problem, if indeed there was one.




SonInMe1 -> RE: whose law (6/12/2008 8:11:39 PM)

quote:

so is the law of man on an equal level to the law of Yah.


This depends soley on the definition of the word......is.

[;)]




bentzsur -> RE: whose law (11/29/2008 2:33:13 AM)

think long and hard on some of your responses.




Page: [1]



Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.5 ANSI