Dec 31, 2005
But You Raised Your Right Hand!
In his blog today, my brother recounted a story of a woman who was surprised when she was asked if she swore to “to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth”.
There was no “so help you God” on the end of it…
I guess this is just one more separation of Church and State issues, huh?
People don’t realize that without the ultimate authority of an omniscient God there is no reason to tell the truth unless it works in your favor.
Washington, in his Farewell address said this:
Let it simply be asked, “where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation desert the oaths which are the instruments of investigation in courts of justice?
He then continued to say:
Whatever may be conceded to the influence of refined education on minds of peculiar structure, reason and experience both forbid us to expect that national morality can prevail in exclusion of religious principle.
If the original GW thought that we needed a sense of religious obligation in our courts, who am I to argue?
For those with stamina, read the full farewell address. It holds a lot of wisdom…
Then again there’s this…
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: But I say unto you, Swear not at all; neither by heaven; for it is God’s throne: Nor by the earth; for it is his footstool: neither by Jerusalem; for it is the city of the great King. Neither shalt thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white or black. But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil. — Matthew 5:33-37
So Christians shouldn’t be swearing in court anyway.
Hi Danny,
Thanks for stopping by… I hear your point, but I’m not certain that the two are completely related.
This link provides an interesting view of the topic.
My gut feeling is that this was more targeted to the Pharisees who were very “public” worshipers and prone to frivolous oath making for greater effect.
But, I could certainly be wrong… Hopefully I will never be faced with needing to partake in this kind of act anyway!
For me, bringing God into the statement is a way of honoring Him – I care more about obeying Him than anything else, and He would have me tell the truth regardless of the consequences to my person. By doing so, I honor Him above all else.
Anyway, just my .02… What do you think?
Thanks very much for stopping by!
God’s Best to you,
Andy
What are swearing and oaths? You hear people say “On my [insert important person or object]” which seems to imply they are invoking so retaliatory evil against the object they are swearing on in case they lie. But as Christians we know that we have no power to invoke evil on someone else, especially due to our own lack of truthfulness.
In a court of law the oath enters the person into a legal “zone” whereby they can be punished by the government for lying. That hardly requires God’s name. Just recently an atheist, on my blog, attempted the old red herring of trying to prove God doesn’t exist by demanding that God strike him dead. I informed him that the lack of response merely proved God’s wisdom in not allowing Himself to be ordered around by fools. Wouldn’t swearing by God’s name pretty much be the same thing? We have no power over God, and lots of people abuse God’s name in order to gain people’s trust. So what does it mean in that context?
As a Christian my word should be trusted on its own, because of my commitment to obedience to God and His respect for truthfulness. My yes’s should mean yes and my no’s should mean no, without the need of some meaningless invocation of power I don’t have.
I’ve never been sworn in in court, but if I ever have to be, I will insist that I not be forced to use God’s name in disobedience to scripture.
Hmm.. Some good points there – I wholeheartedly agree with:
“As a Christian my word should be trusted on its own, because of my commitment to obedience to God and His respect for truthfulness. My yes’s should mean yes and my no’s should mean no”
I do see your point about the oath not having any point, but I’m not sure that this is true…
You’ve given me a lot to think about!
Thanks very much,
Andy