We run our website the way we wished the whole internet worked: we provide high quality original content with no ads. We are funded solely by your direct support. Please consider supporting this project.

oaths

Jesus Repudiates OT Commands on Oath-Taking: A Response to Paul Copan (#9)

In his critique of Crucifixion of the Warrior God (CWG), Paul Copan argues that “Boyd pushes too hard to make Jesus’ teaching appear more revolutionary than it really is” [italics original]. Whereas I argue that Jesus repudiates aspects of the Old Testament (OT), Copan argues that Jesus merely repudiates wrong applications of the OT, not the OT itself. This is an important point inasmuch as I cite these repudiations as evidence that Jesus placed his own authority above that of the OT as well as evidence that the revelation of God in the crucified Christ radically transforms the meaning that we should find in much of the OT.

Today I will discuss the first teaching of Jesus that I believe repudiates commands in the OT. It concerns Jesus’ prohibition on taking oaths. In his sermon on the mount, Jesus said,

Again, you have heard that it was said to those of ancient times, ‘You shall not swear falsely, but carry out the vows you have made to the Lord.’  But I say to you, Do not swear at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God, 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 one hair white or black. Let your word be ‘Yes, Yes’ or ‘No, No’; anything more than this comes from the evil one. (Matthew 5:33-37)

Copan argues that in this teaching “Jesus isn’t disavowing vowing…just casuistic oath-taking that was an escape hatch from truth-telling” [italics original]. In support of this interpretation Copan notes that Jesus was referencing Leviticus 19:12 which says, “And you shall not swear falsely by my name, profaning the name of your God: I am the Lord.”

Copan is correct when he notes that Jesus refers to Leviticus 19:12, and he’s correct that this verse rules out casuistic oaths. But what he seems to miss is that Jesus cites this passage only to contrast his teaching with it. Let’s look at it again. “You have heard that it was said to those of ancient times, ‘You shall not swear falsely, but carry out the vows you have made to the Lord”(Matt 5:33). They had indeed heard this said, for its right there in Leviticus 19:12. But then Jesus goes on to contrast his teaching with this OT passage when he adds: ”But I say to you, Do not swear at all…”

According to Jesus, are we not only supposed to avoid swearing falsely, as when people make casuistic oaths to avoid telling the truth. We are to avoid swearing at all, for anything more than a simple “Yes” and “No,” Jesus says, comes from the evil one” (Matt 5:37). Apparently, any kind of oath-taking, such as those that Leviticus 19:12 (and, we could add, Deuteronomy 23:21) allows, is from the devil.

Not only does Jesus’ teaching repudiate OT passages that allow oath-taking, it repudiates Deuteronomy 6:13 which commands it. “The Lord your God you shall fear; him you shall serve, and by his name alone you shall swear.” The children of Israel at this time were supposed to make oaths by the name of the Lord. Jesus’ teaching to “not swear at all” and to let our “Yes” be “Yes” and our “No” “No,” revokes the portrait of God giving this command and even associates it with a demonic influence.

So, I stand by my claim that aspects of Jesus’ teaching radically contrast with what we find in the OT. And this is why I contend that for all of us who know God as he’s revealed in Jesus’ cross-centered ministry, OT passages such as the ones we’ve just discussed should be understood to bear witness to how far God has always been willing to stoop to bear the sin of his people and to thereby take on an appearance that mirrors that sin, just as he does for the world on Calvary.

Photo by Secretary of Defense on VisualHunt.com

Related Reading

Part 3: Disarming Flood’s Inadequate Conception of Biblical Authority

Image by Ex-InTransit via Flickr In this third part of my review of Derek Flood’s Disarming Scripture I will offer a critique of his redefined conception of biblical inspiration and authority. I will begin by having us recall from Part I that Flood holds up “faithful questioning” over “unquestioning obedience” as the kind of faith that Jesus…

Podcast: Does the Cruciform Hermeneutic Sabotage Open Theism?

Greg plays Peek-a-Boo with God and considers whether those verses Open Theists use to support Open Theism might simply be times when God is accommodating for us. http://traffic.libsyn.com/askgregboyd/Episode_0236.mp3

How the Anabaptists Emphasized the Cross

Because the Anabaptists have generally emphasized faith that is evidenced by works and thus on Jesus’ life as an example to be followed, it may prima facia appear that the saving work of the cross was less central to the early Anabaptists than it was to the Reformers and to Evangelicals. In reality, I would argue,…

Podcast: Isn’t God Withdrawing the SAME as Him Personally Punishing and Causing Violence?

Greg discusses whether the passivity of withdrawal is distinguishable from active punishment. http://traffic.libsyn.com/askgregboyd/Episode_0186.mp3

Does the Lord “Devastate” the Earth?

There is this passage that has sometimes been labeled “Isaiah’s Little Apocalypse” that proclaims how the Lord will “lay waste,” “destroy,” and “ruin” the earth. (The following builds on this previous post which identifies a dual speech pattern of God). It begins with:            The LORD is going to lay waste the earth and devastate…

God’s Way of War

As Judah was facing impending doom, the Lord told Hosea that he would save them “not by bow, sword or battle, or by horses and horsemen, but by the LORD their God” (Hos 1:7). So too, through the Psalmist the Lord encourages his people by saying:                  …