Whether you are a child or an adult, Truth is so scarce that nearly everyone is suspect. Business people, advertisers, commentators, clerks, salesmen, lawyers, doctors, tradesmen, teachers, writers, politicians, and even many, if not most, preachers are suspect. Our whole society is largely built on a network of fabrication, of manufactured “truth.” We shade the truth, we cheat, we exaggerate, we misrepresent income tax deductions, we make promises we have no intention of keeping, we make up excuses, and betray confidences-all as a matter of normal, everyday living.
Quote: Daniel Webster wrote, “There is nothing as powerful as truth and often nothing as strange.” (MacArthur, J. F. (1985). The MacArthur New Testament Commentary. The MacArthur New Testament Commentary (Mt 5:33). Winona Lake, IN: BMH Books.)
Yet even the most corrupt and deceptive societies have always realized that, in certain areas at least, the “real truth” is necessary. Courts of law require witnesses to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. Without truth, even a semblance of justice would be impossible. Because of the extreme importance of truthful testimony to justice, perjury itself is a crime that can bring severe penalties. Even gangs of criminals and conspirators, who use lying and cheating as their stock-in-trade, demand the truth among themselves, because it is necessary to their own survival.
Even the ancient Jewish rabbis, whose unbiblical traditions and flippancy with the truth Jesus challenges in the Sermon on the Mount, moralistically considered lying-along with scoffing, hypocrisy, and slander-to be one of the four great sins that would shut a person out of God’s presence.
In their consciences people know that truth is right and essential. That is one reason they go to such lengths to make what they say appear to be truthful. Our problem is in being truthful. Unfortunately, people are inclined to the truth only when it benefits them, yet collectively people have always known something of its importance and rightfulhess-even outside courts of law. The question for each of us is what is the pattern of our speech? Are we prone to say something and not follow through? Do we play word games and assure ourselves that “at least we didn’t lie”? If so, we do well to look at the teaching that Jesus has for us and learn from the Jews of Jesus’ day.
They revered the idea of truth in principle, but in practice it was buried under their system of tradition, which over the centuries had continually cut God’s law down to fit their own sinful perspectives and purposes. In Matthew 5:33-37 Jesus proceeds to expose the convenient distortion and contradiction of the divine revelation they claimed to love and teach. In these five verses Jesus sets forth:
1) The original Mosaic teaching, 2) The traditional perversion of that teaching, and 3) His own reemphasis of what God’s standard for truth has always been.
1) THE PRINCIPLE OF MOSAIC LAW Matthew 5:33
Matthew 5:33 [33]"Again you have heard that it was said to those of old, ’You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform to the Lord what you have sworn.’ (ESV)
The traditional teaching that Jesus quotes here was a composite of ideas based on Leviticus 19:12, Numbers 30:2, and Deuteronomy 23:21. The two vows mentioned here are from two different, but related, Greek terms. The first is from the verb epiorkeô, which means to perjure oneself, to swear falsely, to swear falsely/make false vows. The second is from the noun horkos, which literally means to enclose, as with a fence, or to bind together. The truth of an oath or vow is enclosed, bound, and therefore strengthened by that which is invoked on its behalf.
A clear description of an oath is given in the book of Hebrews:
Hebrews 6:16 [16]For people swear by something greater than themselves, and in all their disputes an oath is final for confirmation. (ESV)
The name of something or someone greater than the person making the oath is invoked to give greater credibility to what is said. Any oath calling on God invites Him to witness the truthfulness of what is said or to avenge if it is a lie. An oath was therefore generally taken to be the absolute truth, which made “an end of every dispute,” because it invited judgment on the one who violated his word. (Neh. 10:29).
God provided for making oaths by His name (Lev. 19:12). Even God The Father Himself made oaths on certain occasions. (Gen. 22:16-17). (Heb. 6:13-14, cf. v. 17). (Ps. 89:3, 49; 110:4; Jer. 11:5; and Luke 1:73.)
Please turn to Matthew 26
Jesus many times used the phrase “Truly I say to you” (Matt. 5:18, 26; 6:2, 5 16; etc.), and the even more emphatic “Truly, truly, I say to you” (John 1:51; 3:3, 5; 5:19, 24; etc.), to call attention to a teaching of special importance. As with God’s oaths, the words Jesus introduces with “truly” are no more truthful than anything else He said, but emphasize the unique importance of certain of His teachings. It is important to note that Jesus Himself swore an oath before Caiaphas:
Matthew 26:63-64 [63]But Jesus remained silent. And the high priest said to him, "I adjure you by the living God (I charge you under oath), tell us if you are the Christ, the Son of God." [64]Jesus said to him, "You have said so. But I tell you, from now on you will see the Son of Man seated at the right hand of Power and coming on the clouds of heaven." (ESV)
We seek the righteous oath in Matthew 26:63-64 and the sin quickly following:
Matthew 26:69-74 [69]Now Peter was sitting outside in the courtyard. And a servant girl came up to him and said, "You also were with Jesus the Galilean." [70]But he denied it before them all, saying, "I do not know what you mean." [71]And when he went out to the entrance, another servant girl saw him, and she said to the bystanders, "This man was with Jesus of Nazareth." [72]And again he denied it with an oath: "I do not know the man." [73]After a little while the bystanders came up and said to Peter, "Certainly you too are one of them, for your accent betrays you." [74]Then he began to invoke a curse on himself and to swear, "I do not know the man." And immediately the rooster crowed. (ESV)
• That swearing was not profanity, but an oath given with special vehemence. Peter increased the strength of his oath, but that did not increase the truth of what he said. It was bad enough to have lied; it was even worse to call God as a witness to the lie. In addition to denying His Lord, Peter used God’s name in vain. It is small wonder that he “went out and wept bitterly” (v. 75).
Please turn to Psalm 15
God is very much concerned with truth and he established under Old Testament law, situations where oaths were to be made only in God’s name. “ (Deut. 6:13; cf. 10:20). (Isa. 65:16). (Jer. 12:16).
God provided for proper oath-giving in His name as an accommodation to sinful human nature, which is so prone to deceit and lying. Those who habitually follow this pattern, pattern their lives after Satan is the creator of falsehood (Gen. 3:1, 4; Job 1:9-11; Mt. 4:6,10,11).
• For people in general, the inclination to lie causes people to distrust each other,
• Nevertheless, in serious situations an oath is permissible to give greater motivation to tell the truth or to keep a pledge. To make the wedding vow, with God as a witness, to love and cherish our mates for as long as we both live is to recognize and make a firm commitment to honor the special sanctity that God places on marriage.
The psalmist, in describing the kind of person who may enter God’s holy presence, makes clear that one mandatory requirement:
Psalm 15:1-4 [15:1]O LORD, who shall sojourn in your tent? Who shall dwell on your holy hill? [2]He who walks blamelessly and does what is right and speaks truth in his heart; [3]who does not slander with his tongue and does no evil to his neighbor, nor takes up a reproach against his friend; [4]in whose eyes a vile person is despised, but who honors those who fear the LORD; who swears to his own hurt and does not change;
• This is a person whose word is more important than his welfare. Keeping oaths made to God is the mark of a true worshiper. To put it another way, true sons of the kingdom hate lies (Ps. 119:29, 163; 120:2).
Quote: Some time ago the Chaplain of the Kansas Senate made an interesting prayer on the element of discernment in this matter:
“Omniscient Father: Help us to know who is telling the truth. One side tells us one thing, and the other just the opposite. And if neither side is telling the truth, we would like to know that, too. And if each side is telling half the truth, give us the wisdom to put the right halves together. In Jesus’ name, Amen”. (Hughes, R. K. (2001). The sermon on the mount : The message of the kingdom. Preaching the Word (123). Wheaton, Ill.: Crossway Books.)
Quote: This cynicism regarding truth extends to the literature of our day as well. University of Chicago professor Mortimer Adler, editor of The Encyclopedia Britannica and the Great Books of the Western World series, says in his classic How to Read a Book: “The question, Is it true? can be asked of anything we read. It is applicable to every kind of writing.… No higher commendation can be given any work of the human mind than to praise it for the measure of truth it has achieved; by the same token, to criticize it adversely for its failure in this respect is to treat it with the seriousness that a serious work deserves. Yet, strangely enough, in recent years, for the first time in Western history, there is a dwindling concern with this criterion of excellence (this is postmodernism). Books win the plaudits of the critics and gain widespread popular attention almost to the extent that they flout the truth—the more outrageously they do so, the better”. (Mortimer Adler, How to Read a Book (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1972), p. 165.)
• A prime example today is the whole “documentary” craze. “An Inconvenient Truth” by Al Gore has had so many factual scientific critiques for faulty science, yet it has such popularity for the aim of what it was trying to achieve. We live in dangerous times when truth takes a back seat to objective.
Sometimes oaths are made sincerely but foolishly, without considering their seriousness and possible consequences. Such rash oaths were made by Joshua (Josh. 9:15), Jephthah (Judg. 11:30-31), Saul (1 Sam. 14:24), and Herod (Matt. 14:7).
God established the seriousness of keeping an oath.
Leviticus 5:4-6 [4]or if anyone utters with his lips a rash oath to do evil or to do good, any sort of rash oath that people swear, and it is hidden from him, when he comes to know it, and he realizes his guilt in any of these; [5]when he realizes his guilt in any of these and confesses the sin he has committed, [6]he shall bring to the LORD as his compensation for the sin that he has committed, a female from the flock, a lamb or a goat, for a sin offering. And the priest shall make atonement for him for his sin. (ESV)
Joshua 9:20 punctuates how essential keeping an oath is:
Joshua 9:20 [20]This we will do to them: let them live, lest wrath be upon us, because of the oath that we swore to them." (ESV)
Illustration: Black Man Paid His Debt. Keeping an oath can be a powerful thing. Booker T. Washington described meeting an ex-slave from Virginia in his book UP FROM SLAVERY: “I found that this man had made a contract with his master, two or three years previous to The Emancipation Proclamation, to the effect that the slave was to be permitted to buy himself, by paying so much per year for his body; and while he was paying for himself, he was to be permitted to labor where and for whom he pleased. “Finding that he could secure better wages in Ohio, he went there. When freedom came, he was still in debt to his master some three hundred dollars. Notwithstanding that the Emancipation Proclamation freed him from any obligation to his master, this black man walked the greater portion of the distance back to where his old master lived in Virginia, and placed the last dollar, with interest, in his hands. In talking to me about this, the man told me that he knew that he did not have to pay his debt, but that he had given his word to his master, and his word he had never broken. He felt that he could not enjoy his freedom till he had fulfilled his promise.”(Douglas E. Moore in Galaxie Software. (2002; 2002). 10,000 Sermon Illustrations. Biblical Studies Press.)
We have seen 1) THE PRINCIPLE OF MOSAIC LAW Matthew 5:33 and now:
2) THE PERVERSION OF RABBINIC TRADITION
Matthew 5:33 [33]"Again you have heard that it was said to those of old, ’You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform to the Lord what you have sworn.’ (ESV)
The tradition Jesus mentions in verse 33 seemed to be biblical, but it had several flaws that made it fall short of what the Old Testament actually taught. First, it had a missing ingredient, and second, it had a misplaced emphasis.
A) The missing ingredient was a proper circumstance for making an oath. Virtually any kind of oath, used for almost any kind of purpose, was acceptable for the Jews-just as long as someone did not swear falsely and the person would perform to the Lord what (they would) have sworn. The missing ingredient of a serious circumstance led to frivolous, meaningless oath-making that completely violated the legitimate purpose of oaths.
• People would declare anything and promise anything with an oath, while having no qualms about providing means by which lying or breaking their word could still be done. Indiscriminate and insincere vows became so commonplace that no one took them seriously.
• Instead of being a mark of integrity they became a mark of deceit. Instead of prompting confidence they prompted skepticism.
B) Their misplaced emphasis was in limiting the honest oaths to vows to the Lord, to oaths made directly to Him or in His name. The keeping of those oaths to the Lord was rightly regarded as mandatory, whereas the keeping of oaths to others they falsely made optional.
The system of oaths between one person and another was like a giant game. People would swear by heaven, by the earth, by the Temple, by the hairs on their heads, and by any other thing they thought would impress those they wanted to take advantage of. That kind of routine oath-making was usually lie-making; and it was considered by those who practiced it to be perfectly acceptable as long as it was not in the name of the Lord.
In our time this custom is found in phrases such as: “I swear by God,” “cross my heart and hope to die,” “stick a needle in my eye” or “I sear on my mother’s grave or I’d swear on a stack of Bibles.”
Illustration: In the movie Mary Poppins, the two children, Jane and Michael Banks, jumped into bed after their incredible first day with the amazing Mary Poppins. Jane asked, “Mary Poppins, you won’t ever leave us, will you?” Michael, full of excitement, looked at his new nanny and added, “Will you stay if we promise to be good?” Mary looked at the two and as she tucked them in replied, “Look, that’s a pie-crust promise. Easily made, easily broken! (Green, M. P. (1989). Illustrations for Biblical Preaching : Over 1500 sermon illustrations arranged by topic and indexed exhaustively (Revised edition of: The expositor’s illustration file). Grand Rapids: Baker Book House.)
The command:
Leviticus 19:12 [12]You shall not swear by my name falsely, and so profane the name of your God: I am the LORD. (ESV)
• This was misrepresented and interpreted to mean that swearing falsely by any other name was allowed.
The command:
Numbers 30:2 [2]If a man vows a vow to the LORD, or swears an oath to bind himself by a pledge, he shall not break his word. He shall do according to all that proceeds out of his mouth. (ESV)
• This was misrepresented and interpreted as permitting the reneging on oaths made to anyone but God.
Thus, through rabbinic tradition, God’s standard of absolute truthfulness was contradicted and lowered to a level that accommodated the sinful, selfish capacities and purposes of the people. People wanted to lie, and they did not want to be hampered by God’s absolute standard of truth. Instead of calling on the Lord to help them live up to the divine standard, they reduced that standard to suit their own carnal abilities and interests.
• In any one of our topics on the Christians High Calling it is too easy to say that Jesus was just talking to the original audience, and in so doing, consider these topics as a biographical or historical story.
• Or we can too easily dismiss His calling for us and say that it is too hard, or He will forgive. If we presume upon His grace, we put ourselves in a dangerous position of Him having to get our attention as to the concern that he has for those bearing His name.
We have seen 1) THE PRINCIPLE OF MOSAIC LAW Matthew 5:33 2) THE PERVERSION OF RABBINIC TRADITION AND FINALLY:
3) THE PERSPECTIVE OF DIVINE TRUTH Matthew 5:34-37
Matthew 5:34-37 [34]But I say to you, Do not take an oath at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God, [35]or by the earth, for it is his footstool, or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. [36]And do not take an oath by your head, for you cannot make one hair white or black. [37]Let what you say be simply ’Yes’ or ’No’; anything more than this comes from evil. (ESV)
In contrast to those alterations of the divine will, Jesus simply reasserts the Old Testament standard that had been misconstrued and perverted by tradition: Do not take/make no oath at all. Oaths are to be used only on important occasions and are to be given only in the name of the Lord. Though the Greek construction here is an unconditional negative (mç ... holôs), that does not preclude all oaths.
Quote: Commentator William Hendriksen’s explanation is helpful: “What we have here in Matthew 5:33-37 (cf. James 5:12) is the condemnation of the flippant, profane, uncalled for, and often hypocritical oath, used in order to make an impression or to spice daily conversation. Over against that evil Jesus commends simple truthfulness in thought, word and deed” (Exposition of the Gospel According to Matthew [Grand Rapids: Baker, 1973], p. 309).
• From the context it is clear that Jesus’ objection is not to the use of promises in religion, but to the false distinctions made by Jewish teachers between different formulas used in taking vows. (Newman, B. M., & Stine, P. C. (1992). A handbook on the Gospel of Matthew. Originally published: A translator’s handbook on the Gospel of Matthew, c1988. UBS helps for translators; UBS handbook series (144). New York: United Bible Societies.)
In light of specific Old Testament teaching approving oaths, in light of Jesus’ use of such phrases as “truly, truly,” and in light of God Himself’s making oaths that correspond to men’s (Heb. 6:13-17; cf. Luke 1:73; Acts 2:30; etc.), it cannot be rationally interpreted that Jesus here forbids the making of any oath under any circumstance.
He had just said that He did not come to destroy the smallest part of the law (Matt. 5:17-18), a law that taught proper oath-making by both precept and example. Additionally, in the early days of the church, even the apostle Paul gave a type of oath in saying to the Romans, “I am telling the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience bearing me witness in the Holy Spirit” (Rom. 9:1). He called on Christ and the Holy Spirit as witnesses with his own conscience to the truthfulness of what he was about to say. That is swearing by God.
So, in accordance with the Old Testament standard, we are to swear by no other name but God’s-not [34](But I say to you, Do not take an oath at all, either) by heaven, for it is the throne of God, [35]or by the earth, for it is his footstool, or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King.
• Other such things were considered by most Jews to make their oaths less binding.
• Those were grand and great things, things that gave an aura of power, importance, and veracity to what was said or promised in their name. But because those things were far less than God, they made oaths given in their names far less binding by common practice than an oath made in His name.
An oath would be mistakenly considered least binding if made:
[36]And do not take an oath by your head, for you cannot make one hair white or black.
Still less binding would be an oath made merely by your head.
Please go forward to Matthew 23, a passage that we studied in some detail several weeks back.
The common attitude toward oaths is also seen in Jesus’ great series of woes in Matthew 23 against the hypocritical Jewish leaders.
Matthew 23:16-20 [16]"Woe to you, blind guides, who say, ’If anyone swears by the temple, it is nothing, but if anyone swears by the gold of the temple, he is bound by his oath.’ [17]You blind fools! For which is greater, the gold or the temple that has made the gold sacred? [18]And you say, ’If anyone swears by the altar, it is nothing, but if anyone swears by the gift that is on the altar, he is bound by his oath.’ [19]You blind men! For which is greater, the gift or the altar that makes the gift sacred? [20]So whoever swears by the altar swears by it and by everything on it. (ESV)
Keep your place in Matthew 23
• Exhibiting twisted logic, it makes no sense that something which is less valuable make an oath more binding.
But the greatest error in the system was not in its illogic but in its basic deceptiveness and dishonesty. As a matter of accepted policy, some oaths were used to undermine the very purpose they purportedly were meant to serve: the truth. In spite of the fact that an oath supposed to be given to reinforce and emphasize the truthfulness of a statement or the reliability of a promise, over the years an intricate system of duplicity had been devised that virtually promoted the use of oaths for deception.
Jesus therefore went on to condemn the system still further:
Matthew 23:21-22 [21]And whoever swears by the temple swears by it and by him who dwells in it. [22]And whoever swears by heaven swears by the throne of God and by him who sits upon it. (ESV)
• However and whenever the truth is profaned, God’s name is profaned.
Jesus’ point was that God is the Creator and Lord of everything and is the God of truth in everything. To carelessly and dishonestly call any part of His creation as witness to a false oath was to dishonor God Himself, whether or not His name was invoked.
To dishonor and compromise any truth is to dishonor and compromise His truth. Heaven is God’s, the earth is God’s, Jerusalem is God’s, and every person’s head is God’s. It is therefore wicked and sinful to use anything of God’s, whether His name or a part of His creation, as witness to anything that is dishonest, deceitful, insincere, or in the least way knowingly false.
• God has no separate categories of sacred and secular. Everything that pertains to Him is sacred, and all truth is His truth, just as all creation is His creation. Every lie is against God, and therefore every false oath dishonors His name.
Quote: Comments William Barclay, “Here is a great eternal truth. Life cannot be divided into compartments in some of which God is involved and in others of which he is not involved; there cannot be one kind of language in the Church and another kind of language in the shipyard or the factory or the office; there cannot be one kind of conduct in the Church and another kind of conduct in the business world. The fact is that God does not need to be invited into certain departments of life, and kept out of others. He is everywhere, all through life and in every activity of life. He hears not only the words which are spoken in his name; he hears all words; and there cannot be any such thing as a form of words which evades bringing God into any transaction. We will regard all promises as sacred if we remember that all promises are made in the presence of God” (The Gospel of Matthew, 2 vols. [rev. ed.; Philadelphia: Westminster, 1975], 1:160).
• This is why there is such a high calling to being a Christian: for we bear God’s name and every action or inaction is a reflection on God. The most damaging impact that a faulty testimony can have therefore:
Romans 2:24 [24]For, as it is written, "The name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you." (ESV)
• Our speech, action and inaction reflects upon God. When we publicly sin or fail to perform a duty, then it negatively reflects upon God: that either He doesn’t care or all he expects is some private good feeling called faith.
Truth has no degrees or shades. A half truth is a whole lie, and a white lie is really black. God has never had any standard lower than absolute truthfulness. Of every person He desires “truth in the innermost being” (Ps. 51:6). Among the things He especially hates is “a lying tongue” (Prov. 6:16-17), and “Lying lips are an abomination to the Lord” (12:22). And just as God hates lying, so do those who are faithful to Him (Ps. 119:163).
Lest you think that I am just nitpicking today, look at the destiny of those who habitually continue in lies:
Revelation 21:8 [8]But as for the cowardly, the faithless, the detestable, as for murderers, the sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and all liars, their portion will be in the lake that burns with fire and sulfur, which is the second death." (ESV)
God’s absolute, unchanging standard is truth and sincerity in everything. Not only should oaths be totally truthful and dependable, but even the most routine conversations should be truthful in every detail.
Matthew 5:37 [37]Let what you say be simply ’Yes’ or ’No’; anything more than this comes from evil. (ESV)
Illustration: Yes or No. In understanding what something means, we must understand what it doesn’t mean: Professional golfer Tommy Bolt was playing in Los Angeles and had a caddy with a reputation of constant chatter. Before they teed off, Bolt told him, “Don’t say a word to me. And if I ask you something, just answer yes or no.” During the round, Bolt found the ball next to a tree, where he had to hit under a branch, over a lake and onto the green. He got down on his knees and looked through the trees and sized up the shot. “What do you think?” he asked the caddy. “Five-iron?” “No, Mr. Bolt,” the caddy said. “What do you mean, not a five-iron?” Bolt snorted. “Watch this shot.” The caddy rolled his eyes. “No-o-o, Mr. Bolt.” But Bolt hit it and the ball stopped about two feet from the hole. He turned to his caddy, handed him the five-iron and said, “Now what do you think about that? You can talk now.” “Mr. Bolt,” the caddy said, “that wasn’t your ball.” (Crossroads, Issue No. 7, pp.15–16).
What Jesus was saying in Matthew 5:37 The phrase what you say/Statement is from logos, the basic meaning of which is simply “word.” Every normal word in the course of daily speech should be a truthful word, unadorned and unqualified in regard to its truthfulness. A person’s words, message, or speech (as logos is used in Acts 20:7; 1 Cor. 2:1; 4:19; and Titus 2:8) should be as good as his bond and as good as his oath or vow.
James 5:12 renders a similar description:
James 5:12 [12]But above all, my brothers, do not swear, either by heaven or by earth or by any other oath, but let your "yes" be yes and your "no" be no, so that you may not fall under condemnation. (ESV)
Ephesians 4:29 [29]Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear. (ESV)
God is a holy God, His kingdom is a holy kingdom, and the people of His kingdom are to be a holy people. His righteousness is to be their righteousness, and anything less than His righteousness, including anything less than absolute truth, is unacceptable to Him, because it comes from/is of evil. So our Lord shatters the fragile glass of their hypocritical oaths, which they used to cover lies.
We also need to remember that our Lord hears every word, not just the oaths, and that we will give account of all our words:
Matthew 12:36 [36]I tell you, on the day of judgment people will give account for every careless word they speak, (ESV)
Quote: There are many applications for our lives in this but one that Samuel Johnson wrote is a good reminder for all of us: “Accustom your children constantly to this [the telling of the truth]; if a thing happened at one window, and they, when relating it, say that it happened at another, do not let it pass, but instantly check them; you do not know where deviation from truth will end.… It is more from carelessness about truth than from intentional lying, that there is so much falsehood in the world”. (William Barclay, Ephesians (Philadelphia: Westminister, 1976), p. 183.)
(Format note: Outline and some notes from: MacArthur, J. F. (1985). The MacArthur New Testament Commentary. The MacArthur New Testament Commentary (Mt 5:33). Winona Lake, IN: BMH Books.
