so, if Jesus forbade us making promises, explain marriage vows etc?

[Junia]

so i have to never make promises to anyone again? so i cannot ever sign anything? oh. so i i go into hospital and have to pay for a procedure i can never sign the form to promsie i agree to their terms? mobile phone contract????

 

[John Helpher]

But these things are not optional. if you want to practie medicine you ahve to swear theoath, if you want to be a barrister you have to swear an oath as well.... you are not allowed to practice either of those professions in my country without doing those vows. unless of course christians can get an exemption? they prob could, maybe thatis how they do it?

Some governments, groups, etc allow for alternatives like affirming, which is just a fancy way of saying, "my yes is yes".

but surely obeying Jesus doesnt mean we cant practice certian good professions or ever be a witness or defendent in court of law???

That depends. The Bible contributors made it clear that friendship with the world is enmity with the world and that while we are in the world, we are not of the world. Those little prepositions can be a bit confusing by the communicate an important distinction.

If the only way to be a doctor is to act contrary to Jesus' standards then it is better, by far, to side with Jesus. It's a shame that such things are sometimes the case in the world, but that's just the reality in some cases.

 

[Junia]

Some governments, groups, etc allow for alternatives like affirming, which is just a fancy way of saying, "my yes is yes".



That depends. The Bible contributors made it clear that friendship with the world is enmity with the world and that while we are in the world, we are not of the world. Those little prepositions can be a bit confusing by the communicate an important distinction.

If the only way to be a doctor is to act contrary to Jesus' standards then it is better, by far, to side with Jesus. It's a shame that such things are sometimes the case in the world, but that's just the reality in some cases.

oh ok. thanks you have explained it well.

hey did Jesus say anywhere that women priests are fobidden? because i feel called to prophetic ministry?

 

[John Helpher]

idont think friends ever require vows to lend money.

You should watch some Judge Judy episodes. She's got a really good take on the kind of small claims which come before her court, where family members sue one another over smallish loans (like a few thousand dollars, or even a few hundred). Her advice is that family and friends, if they want to help one another, should do so as a gift rather than as a loan, as so often people take advantage of the emotional relationship as an excuse not to repay. I must say unless there's a very solid relationship built of earned trust and respect, it is better to offer assistance as a gift rather than a loan in such cases.

but if you need a home to live in, you need to sign a contract? even if you rent you sign a contract?

I think each circumstance should be evaluated on its own merit. Remember that the point is to let your yes be yes. It is possible to sign a contract with such an understanding. This is where wisdom comes in. The main thing is to be verrry careful of the temptation to cheat on the standards.

 

[Junia]

You should watch some Judge Judy episodes. She's got a really good take on the kind of small claims which come before her court, where family members sue one another over smallish loans (like a few thousand dollars, or even a few hundred). Her advice is that family and friends, if they want to help one another, should do so as a gift rather than as a loan, as so often people take advantage of the emotional relationship as an excuse not to repay. I must say unless there's a very solid relationship built of earned trust and respect, it is better to offer assistance as a gift rather than a loan in such cases.



I think each circumstance should be evaluated on its own merit. Remember that the point is to let your yes be yes. It is possible to sign a contract with such an understanding. This is where wisdom comes in. The main thing is to be verrry careful of the temptation to cheat on the standards.

wise woman, is Judge Judy. i personally never loan money- if i ahve it to give and i want to give it, i just say no need to pay me back. othrwise it puts as train on friendships. i think money should never come between people becaus people are more important

 

[John Helpher]

so i i go into hospital and have to pay for a procedure i can never sign the form to promsie i agree to their terms? mobile phone contract????

You don't have to promise to make an agreement. You can just let your yes be yes. A promise essentially eliminates your ability to change if God tells you to change. Obviously, if you say, "Yes I agree to pay these various fees" then you are obligating yourself to pay those fees, because that's what letting your yes be yes means in practical terms. But, lets say you agree to pay hospital fees and die on the operating table. You'd no longer be able to pay, but you've not broken your word in the same way as you would have had you promised to pay, since you were not responsible for your own death in that circumstance and the implication of your "yes" was that you'd pay so long as you're able.

 

[truefiction1]

So, if Jesus forbade us makng promises, how do we explain the belief amongst christians that marriage vows are ok? christian doctors swearing the Hippocratic Oath? Christians swearing on Bible in court?

this is off the back of a thread i was reading earlier and one poster commented on how we should obey Jesus, and he mentioned that making promises is something Jesus forbade?

We don't have marriage vows. Orthodox Christian couples are married by God, and those in attendance are merely witnesses to this sacred event.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

Jesus discusses this matter elsewhere...

Woe unto you, ye blind guides, which say, Whosoever shall swear by the temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of the temple, he is a debtor! Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifieth the gold? And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever sweareth by the gift that is upon it, he is guilty. Ye fools and blind: for whether is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifieth the gift? Whoso therefore shall swear by the altar, sweareth by it, and by all things thereon. And whoso shall swear by the temple, sweareth by it, and by him that dwelleth therein. And he that shall swear by heaven, sweareth by the throne of God, and by him that sitteth thereon.
Matt: 23:16-22

The Pharisees had developed a highly elaborate system to distinguish between binding and non-binding oaths, that was essentially a cover for lying. The modern equivalent would be making a promise with your fingers crossed.

 

[Strong in Him]

sure ,i get what youa re saying but does that mean christians cant get married then?

No.
Jesus talked about marriage, and the relationship between God and his church is that of bride and bridegroom.

FWIW, I think that Jesus was saying that we should have such integrity, that our "yes" or "no" should be enough and acceptable - rather than swearing "on my life", "in God's name" or anything else. "On my life/my children's lives, I have never ...." means "I cannot emphasise strongly enough that I have not done ....". I believe Christians should be so honest, and do what we say we will do, that swearing should not be necessary at all; we should be able to give our word and keep it.

And a marriage is a covenant. God made covenants with his people; he told Abraham that his descendants would be numerous and gave him the sign of circumcision. He Noah he would not flood the earth again and gave the sign of the rainbow.
God has made promises to us; he has not forbidden us to make promises to him, or each other.

 

[Aussie Pete]

Thanks for thinking of me, WUiHL.

One of the most common themes when it comes to interpreting Jesus' teachings is that, when it comes to those teachings of his which require radical, dramatic change contrary to respectability, societal expectations, and especially personal desire, the resulting interpretations usally either end up promoting the exact opposite of what Jesus taught or become essentially inconsequential.

Very few people simply believe Jesus. I agree that interpretation is necessary, but the way this works in practical life is that people almost always end up correcting Jesus with the phrase, "What he really meant was..." as though Jesus was somewhat of a buffoon who wasn't particularly good at articulating his thoughts.

Here's the text from the KJV:
Matthew 5
33 Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths:

34 But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God's throne:

35 Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King.

36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black.

37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

Compare this to some of the comments made so far:



Jesus says, "not at all", but Sketcher says what Jesus really meant was to avoid theatrics when swearing. It's okay to swear, so long as you believe the best about yourself when you're doing so; the opposite of what Jesus actually said.



Nope. Another case of what he really meant. Poor Jesus; if only Dkh587 were there at the time; he could have let Jesus know about this "swearing falsely" caveat. But;, look at again at what Jesus said: "Not. At. All."



Are people starting to see a pattern here? Jesus simply said don't do it; not at all, but all these people don't want to hear that. What he meant was don't swear with theatrics. Don't swear frivolously. Don't swear falsely. But that's not what he said. He said don't swear at all, for any reason. Only say yes or no.



But, in the very same paragraph ViaCrucis also says:



How convenient. Don't swear by the temple because you should have integrity, BUT you can swear in a court of law, (presumably because integrity is not needed in a court of law)? The logic doesn't follow. It is inconsistent, and that is because it is an issue of convenience. ViaCrucis has no problem accepting that he should not swear by the temple, because doing so is not something likely to inconvenience him. He's not a Jew and the temple is not part of his system of culture or respectability.

But swearing in a court of law is very much a sign of system respectability. I mean, if you don't put your hand on a bible and swear to tell the truth, people might believe the worst about you? Yes is yes and no is no was okay for the land of Israel back in Jesus' day, but it's simply not good enough for our modern day courts of law!



And finally, Aussie Pete promotes much the same sentiment, except he couldn't even be bothered to put it in his own words. The article basically says we should not make hasty, emotional swears, while Jesus says we should not do it at all. It makes a fairly weak attempt at justifying swearing using some Old Testament examples which completely ignores the fact that Jesus begins his prohibition against swearing by saying, "yes, the OT says you can swear, but I say..."

That, "but I say" is so emblematic of the attitude most people take toward Jesus' teachings; they don't actually care about what he says. Jesus represents little more than a formulaic deity who must be "accepted" through various flowery speechs about him coming into their heart, but rarely (if ever) actually obeyed, which is something Jesus himself addressed even back in his own time when he asked supposed followers of his, "Why do you call me, Lord, but do no obey me"?

So Paul should be condemned for making a vow?

 

[hedrick]

Jesus condemned oaths that invoke irrelevant things, I think because they’re showy with no meaning. I swear by the temple? What does even mean? Is the temple going to do something if you lie? There’s nothing wrong with making commitments, as long as they are carefully considered. But a wedding vow is simply a promise. It’s not an oath invoking impressive but irrelevant authority. As a simple commitment without an irrelevant oath, it is consistent with Jesus teaching that your word should be enough. The marriage vow is your word.

 

[Neostarwcc]

Christ did not forbid us from making promises. He condemned the frivolous swearing of oaths, because oath-swearing came from a place of insincerity. This doesn't mean that a Christian can't swear to tell the truth in a court of law, or swear themselves to their spouse. It means that we shouldn't have say, "I swear by the Temple in Jerusalem!" because we should be persons of integrity whose yes means yes and no means no.

-CryptoLutheran

^ This. Christ was mostly talking about those who back in the day would say "I swear to God" or something similiar to that and then broke that promise or treated that promise like an empty promise. Jesus also told us that if we were going to make a promise (Especially on his name) that we should make sure to keep it.

This is kind of the same as saying the Lord's name in vain but it's worse. It's making a promise in the name of God who's supposed to be your Lord and savior and add extra oomph to your promise but, unfortunately many of us use "I swear to God" as an empty promise and feel nothing about it.

For example, a pothead knowing that he was marijuana in the car will try to get away with a search by telling the cop "There's no pot in my car! I swear to God!". Then the cop searches his car anyway and finds the pot anyway. That's what Christ was talking about.

If you're making a promise in the name of God (or not in the name of God), you should make sure you keep it. Or else it's sin and God WILL judge you for it.

 

[Andrewn]

Not if it's clear to the lender that, while you agree to repay, you make no promise to do so. You're letting your yes be yes, which allows for change. The lender understands there is a risk that circumstances of whatever kind may prevent repayment of the loan and agrees to accept that risk.

This would be dishonest. Jesus never said to not make promises and keep them. He said, "Let your yes be yes and your no be no." That means to make promises and keep them.

if you want to practie medicine you ahve to swear theoath, if you want to be a barrister you have to swear an oath as well.... you are not allowed to practice either of those professions in my country without doing those vows.

These are promises one makes and keeps. You can call them vows if you like but it is the same thing. We should be promise keepers, Jesus encouraged us to do so.

But Jesus also said do not swear at all, not by heaven, not by earth, not by Jerusalem, and not by your own head. Christian countries have followed this rule for 2000 years. The result is that most people don't know what the word "swear" meant in Jesus' time. This is one sin that we do not do any longer in the West. But it is common among Muslims for example. To swear is to invoke the name of (a sacred being) in an oath. This is the "obsolete" definition mentioned in Merriam-Webster dictionary.

The Apostle Paul made a vow, that is a promise, no problem with that. He also called on God as his witness in 2Co 1:23; Gal 1:20; and Phi 1:8. No problem with this either. Jesus did the same thing. I am conflicted about swearing on the Bible in a court of law. These were used in the past but now witnesses are not obligated to swear an oath on the Bible, so I don't have to think too much about it. Similarly, the Hippocratic Oath does not invoke the name of God.

The bottom-line is that Christ's command against swearing has nothing to do with making promises, commitments, pledges, or vows. He actually commanded us to be promise-keepers.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

So, if Jesus forbade us makng promises, how do we explain the belief amongst christians that marriage vows are ok? christian doctors swearing the Hippocratic Oath? Christians swearing on Bible in court?

this is off the back of a thread i was reading earlier and one poster commented on how we should obey Jesus, and he mentioned that making promises is something Jesus forbade?

So in summary, (feel free to read the passages below in your own translation, I just used the forum bible) I find that the "Do Not Swear" passages in Matthew and James are not saying do not make oaths, they are saying do not make oaths in a deceitful manner, just say I will do it, or I will not do it.

Here is what Jesus said in Matthew 5:

33 Again, ye have heard that it was said to them of old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the Lord thine oaths: 34 but I say unto you, swear not at all; neither by the heaven, for it is the throne of God; 35 nor by the earth, for it is the footstool of his feet; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King.

36 Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, for thou canst not make one hair white or black.

37 But let your speech be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: and whatsoever is more than these is of the evil [one].

Here is how James (James 5) interpreted it

12 But above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by the heaven, nor by the earth, nor by any other oath: but let your yea be yea, and your nay, nay; that ye fall not under judgment.

In Matthew 21, Jesus gave a real life example through a parable. Something that would have happened in a number of circumstances so the names don't matter.

28 But what think ye? A man had two sons; and he came to the first, and said, Son, go work to-day in the vineyard.

29 And he answered and said, I will not: but afterward he repented himself, and went.

30 And he came to the second, and said likewise. And he answered and said, I [go], sir: and went not.

31 Which of the two did the will of his father? They say, The first. Jesus saith unto them, Verily I say unto you, that the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of God before you.

32 For John came unto you in the way of righteousness, and ye believed him not; but the publicans and the harlots believed him: and ye, when ye saw it, did not even repent yourselves afterward, that ye might believe him.

 

[Strong in Him]

hey did Jesus say anywhere that women priests are fobidden? because i feel called to prophetic ministry?

No.

Though a prophet is not the same as a priest.

 

[Tolworth John]

you need to sign a contract

A contract is not a vow or an oath sworn to convince another.
It is an agreement or a promise that is enforceable through the courts.

If you find yourself in court, as a witness or in jury service you can swear to tell the truth on the Bible or affirm that you will tell the truth.
In my experience atheists etc will not use the Bible, I chose to as a Christian. The oath made no difference to my behaviour, but I did not want to identify as an atheist

 

[chilehed]

So, if Jesus forbade us makng promises...

If.

 

[ViaCrucis]

oh ok. thanks you have explained it well.

hey did Jesus say anywhere that women priests are fobidden? because i feel called to prophetic ministry?

I realize this wasn't asked toward me, but if I might take a stab at answering, keep in mind that I will be speaking from a Lutheran point of view:

In the Lutheran tradition we maintain that it is the Church that calls and ordains pastors. Because we reject the concept of sacerdotalism, i.e. we reject the idea that clergy are a special class of believers, vested with special authority from God, etc. Rather we teach that all Christians are priests (Greek hiereis Latin sacerdotes) of God. The English word "priest" however can be confusing, as it is used to translate these Greek and Latin words, but is also used to refer to the Greek presbyteros (Latin presbyter, from whence comes to us through older forms of English as prestor, prest, and finally priest); that is "priest" refers to presbyters (often translated as "elders" in English Bibles).

That is to say we believe that God gave the Office of the Keys to the entire Church, the giving of the Keys to St. Peter wasn't to the exclusivity of Peter (and his successors), but is indeed properly the possession of the entire Church. And it is the Church which calls and ordains persons to exercise the Office of the Keys, and to minister to the flock through the preaching of the Word and the administering of the Sacraments. The Apostolic ministry was not lost to time, nor are new apostles called out from the ether; rather the Apostles themselves established bishops to shepherd the churches in their stead, and so those whom the Church calls and ordains as ministers of the Gospel are acting in the same apostolic authority. It is likewise prophetic, for the gift of prophecy is the gift of preaching the Word and edifying the Body of Christ.

Thus those who teach a multitude of "offices" are teaching contrary to Scripture and to the historic praxis of the Church.

God has vested the authority to call and ordain to His Church. Some might say they feel called to ministry, there's nothing wrong with that of course, but ultimately it's not their call to make, but the Church's. Which is why St. Paul when he speaks of those ordained as clergy says they shouldn't be neophytes (new converts), to be someone entrusted with the responsibility for the spiritual well-being of Christ's people is something to be treated seriously, that is why catechetical schools, universities, and seminaries have been set up by the Church since antiquity. The Lord says, "To whom much has been given, much is required"--pastors are to be educated, trained, and made prepared for their sacred duties.

Now, after all of that, can a woman be a priest? Well, as a member of the universal priesthood of all believers, of course, every baptized Christian is that already by virtue of being a Christian. Can a woman be a pastor? That's a question with two competing answers depending on who you ask:

1) The traditional answer is no, primarily because women have never traditionally been ordained to the pastorate. It has nothing to do with a woman's ability or inability, but simply because many traditionalists don't see a precedent which permits it.

2) On the other hand there are many who see no reason to prohibit women from serving in the Divine Ministry of the Church, as there are no prohibitions against it in Scripture, and the case has been argued that the presence of female deacons and apostles (St. Phoebe and St. Junia respectively) in Scripture does establish precedent of women serving in the ministry of Word and Sacrament.

Now, and this is important: Regardless of which side one comes down on on the matter of ordaining women, the Church has never forbade women from being preachers, lay-ministers, or filling many other important roles and sacred duties in the Church and thus sharing in the Church's ministry overall. By "preacher" I mean one who preaches, the history of the Church is filled with many women who preached, such as St. Thecla who tradition says was one of St. Paul's missionary companions, we have St. Junia as mentioned already, we also have St. Mary Magdalene who like the Apostles traveled and preached the Gospel; there's St. Felicity of Rome who suffered a martyr's death for preaching the Gospel, and many many more.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Sketcher]

Jesus says, "not at all", but Sketcher says what Jesus really meant was to avoid theatrics when swearing. It's okay to swear, so long as you believe the best about yourself when you're doing so; the opposite of what Jesus actually said.

That's not what I said.

Here's the context of what Jesus was saying not to swear by:

Matthew 5:34 - Commentary & Verse Meaning - Bible
Matthew 5:35 - Commentary & Verse Meaning - Bible
Matthew 5:36 - Commentary & Verse Meaning - Bible
Matthew 5:37 - Commentary & Verse Meaning - Bible

 

[Paulus59]

Something I copied & pasted from GotQuestions.

******************************************

What does the Bible say about keeping your vows / oaths?

Answer: There are about 30 biblical references to vows, most of which are from the Old Testament. The books of Leviticus and Numbers have several references to vows in relation to offerings and sacrifices. There were dire consequences for the Israelites who broke vows, especially vows to God.

The story of Jephthah illustrates the foolishness of making vows without understanding the consequences. Before leading the Israelites into battle against the Ammonites, Jephthah—described as a mighty man of valor—made a rash vow that he would give to the Lord whoever first came out of doors to meet him if he returned home as the victor. When the Lord granted him victory, the one who came out to meet him was his daughter. Jephthah remembered his vow and offered her to the Lord (Judges 11:29–40). Whether or not Jephthah should have kept this vow is dealt with in another article. What this account shows is the foolishness of rash vows.

Jesus taught concerning vows, “You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but keep the oaths you have made to the Lord.’ But I tell you, Do not swear at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King. And do not swear by your head, for you cannot make even one hair white or black. Simply let your ‘Yes’ be ‘Yes,’ and your ‘No ,’ ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one” (Matthew 5:33–37).

A little background information is helpful in understanding Jesus’ words here. The religious leaders of the day advocated keeping a vow if it was a public vow using God’s name; however, if the vow was made in the course of everyday conversation, referencing only “heaven” or “earth” or “Jerusalem,” it was not really binding. People had a loophole. They could lie or exaggerate in their conversations and lend themselves an air of credibility by saying, “I swear by heaven that this is true!” They could not be held to account because they did not specifically swear by God’s name and the vow was private. Jesus countered that idea. If you swear something, it had better be true, He says. In fact, all you need to say is “yes” or “no.” Your word should be good. There’s no need for overwrought expressions to bolster your case.

Psalm 15:4 describes a righteous person as one “who keeps an oath even when it hurts, and does not change their mind.” Jesus’ teaching in Matthew 5 supports this biblical principle. Oaths are binding, even when spoken frivolously or privately as part of everyday conversation. A promise is a promise, and there is no loophole in God’s eyes to allow a person to renege on an oath.

So, Jesus was not condemning all forms of promises, contracts, or agreements. Jesus was speaking of the kind of spontaneous vow made when a person says, “I cross my heart and hope to die” or “I swear on a stack of Bibles” or “I swear on my mother’s life.” Jesus warns against using those types of flippant oaths. His teaching in Matthew 5 is not meant to discourage careful, thought-out promises, such as wedding vows or a legal contract.

The principle here is clear for Christians: be careful about making vows, either to the Lord or to one another. The fact that we are prone to errors in judgment means that we may make vows foolishly or out of immaturity. Further, the informal vows we make (“I swear by all the angels in heaven!”) are completely unnecessary. Our word is our bond.

*****************************************

Hope this helps you in someway?