The Sabbath-School

Seventh-day Adventist Missionary Society · Oakland, California · Jan 26, 1882

The Sabbath-School.

Lesson Comments.—February 4.

The Scribes and Pharisees were very zealous and assiduous in endeavoring to make proselytes to the Jewish religion, and to their own sect; not from a desire of promoting the glory of God, or the salvation of souls, but in order to strengthen their party, and to advance their reputation. When, therefore, with great pains, as if "compassing sea and land," they had brought any one under their tuition, they worked him up to such a degree of ignorant and furious bigotry, and enmity to Christ and his gospel, that he became fit for the most desperate services to which they could direct him. So that, instead of being benefited by his supposed conversion, he became a more devoted servant of Satan, and more deeply deserving of divine wrath, than before; and as he might be pushed on to such actions as they themselves declined, he became even "two-fold more a child of hell than themselves;" that is, more openly and outrageously mischievous and blasphemous, in opposing the cause of Christ and in persecuting believers.

Our Lord next exposed the ignorance of these teachers who had by sinister means obtained immense credit and influence, which enabled them to do the greatest mischief. They taught that men were not bound by an oath, when they "sware by the temple," or "by the altar;" yet were guilty of perjury, if they sware falsely by the gold in the sacred treasury, or by the oblations. This decision led the people to a stupid veneration for the latter, in preference to the former, and served the interests of the priests and scribes; but it exposed their folly and blindness in the most evident manner; for the gold and the sacrifices had no other sanctity than what they derived from the temple and the altar; which must therefore be greater and more honorable, than the oblations on which they conferred a relative sanctity. In fact, these oaths referred to whatever was connected with that which was sworn by; an oath "by the altar" included the gift upon it; and an oath "by the temple," the gold whose typical residence it was, as well as the gold that was there consecrated to him; even as when a man "sware by Heaven," he "sware by the throne of God and him that sat on it." Our Lord had before disallowed all such oaths; they are profane in common conversation, and not solemn enough on important occasions; but he here shows, that they imply an appeal to God for the truth of what is thus declared or promised.

If a person made a vow, he was bound to perform it, as if paying a debt; if an oath to a falsehood, he was guilty of perjury.—Clarke.

The following interesting remarks on oath-taking, are from Kitto's Cyclopedia of Biblical Literature:—

The oath-taker swore sometimes by his own head, or by some precious part of his body, as the eyes; sometimes, but only in the case of the later Jews, by the earth, the heaven, and the sun, and even by parts of the temple. They also swore by Jerusalem as the holy city. The Rabbinical writers indulge in much prolixity on the subject of oaths, entering into nice distinctions, and showing themselves exquisite casuists. Some oaths they declared invalid: "If any one swear by heaven, earth, the sun, and such things, although there may be in his mind while using these words a reference to Him who created them, yet this is not an oath; or if any one swear by one of the prophets, or by some book of Scripture, having reference to Him who sent the prophet and gave the book, nevertheless this is not an oath."

So the Mishna: "If any one adjures another by heaven or earth, he is not held bound by this." It is easy to see that oaths of this nature, with authoritative interpretations and glosses so lax, could hardly fail to loosen moral obligation, and to lead to such practical perjury and impiety. Minute casuistical distinctions undermine the moral sense. When a man may swear and yet not swear, by the same formula appear to bind himself and yet be free, contract with his associates an obligation from which he may be released by religious authorities, the basis of private virtue and the grounds of public confidence are at once endangered. Besides, the practice of unauthorized and spontaneous oath-taking, which seems even in the earlier periods of Jewish history to have been too common, became about the time of our Lord of great frequency, and must have tended to lower the religious, as well as weaken the moral character.