Did Jesus say do not swear oaths (Mt 5:33-37)?

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Michael BG
Posts: 665
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 8:02 am

Did Jesus say do not swear oaths (Mt 5:33-37)?

Post by Michael BG »

[33]"Again you have heard that it was said to the men of old, `You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform to the Lord what you have sworn.'
[34] But I say to you, Do not swear 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 swear 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.

I have made two basic assumptions Jesus lived and the early Christians were interesting in knowing about what he said and did and so wanted to pass this information on.

Matthew has this in a group of sayings (Mt 5:21-48) some of which are from Q and some from another source that neither Mark nor Luke has. The Killing-Anger-Insults-Debts, Adultery-Lust, Swearing, Retribution-Non-Resistance-doing-more, Hate-Love-Your-Enemy sayings are introduced by "You have heard that it was said” or "You have heard that it was said to the men of old”.

The section about forgiving debts is from Q (Lk 12:57-59) as are non-resistance and doing more (Lk 6:29-30) and loving your enemies (Lk 6:27-28, 32-36). The Q sections which we have start with “But I say to you …” (Lk 6:27, Mt 5:39) without the earlier premise which this is a counter to.

It is therefore possible that there was a premise such as “you have heard that it was said”, but this context could have been added before it reach Matthew and Luke. So for convenience it might be safer to assume that there is no context but Jesus just says:

“that every one who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” (Mt 5:28)
“Do not swear at all … Let what you say be simply `Yes' or `No'” (Mt 5:34,37).

Both are a requirements to do more than Jews would expect to do. This is similar to the go the extra mile saying. It has been suggested that the authorities could demand work from the population and this saying is that if you are required by the government to go one mile do more and go two. In these two sayings it could be said that instead of just not committing adultery a man should not look lustfully at a woman. Instead of only telling the truth when someone is under oath they should always tell the truth.

It seems Christians have always ignored the rule about not swearing oaths and always being truthful, Paul swears oaths and Christian writers do not pass what we would consider a test for truthfulness. It therefore seems likely that Jesus did say:
“Do not swear at all … Let what you say be simply `Yes' or `No'”.
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2817
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: Did Jesus say do not swear oaths (Mt 5:33-37)?

Post by andrewcriddle »

Note the parallel in James 5:12
But above all things, my brothers, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yes be yes; and your no, no; lest you fall into condemnation.
I'm not certain whether or not this strengthens the case for authenticity.

Andrew Criddle
Michael BG
Posts: 665
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 8:02 am

Re: Did Jesus say do not swear oaths (Mt 5:33-37)?

Post by Michael BG »

andrewcriddle wrote:Note the parallel in James 5:12
But above all things, my brothers, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yes be yes; and your no, no; lest you fall into condemnation.
I'm not certain whether or not this strengthens the case for authenticity.

Andrew Criddle
The Epistle of James has been dated to quite late. According to Edgar Goodspeed (http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/g ... /ch18.html) “James occasionally reminds us of Matthew, especially the Sermon on the Mount … It may be that James knew the Gospel of Matthew.” Therefore if the author of James knew the gospel of Matthew then this does nothing towards authenticity. However if you believe that the letter is early and I have seen an early 20th century date of before 50 CE then it would strengthen the case for authenticity. I have not studied the question, but would be included inclinded towards a later date, but trying to look earlier.
Last edited by Michael BG on Wed Oct 14, 2015 7:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2817
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: Did Jesus say do not swear oaths (Mt 5:33-37)?

Post by andrewcriddle »

Michael BG wrote:
andrewcriddle wrote:Note the parallel in James 5:12
But above all things, my brothers, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath: but let your yes be yes; and your no, no; lest you fall into condemnation.
I'm not certain whether or not this strengthens the case for authenticity.

Andrew Criddle
The Epistle of James has been dated to quite late. According to Edgar Goodspeed (http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/g ... /ch18.html) “James occasionally reminds us of Matthew, especially the Sermon on the Mount … It may be that James knew the Gospel of Matthew.” Therefore if the author of James knew the gospel of Matthew then this does nothing towards authenticity. However if you believe that the letter is early and I have seen an early 20th century date of before 50 CE then it would strengthen the case for authenticity. I have not studied the question, but would be included towards a later date, but trying to look earlier.
IMO the letter of Clement to the Corinthians (1 Clement) alludes to James (e.g. references to being double minded). If so it is 1st century, though maybe late 1st century, which makes use of Matthew improbable.

Andrew Criddle
Michael BG
Posts: 665
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 8:02 am

Re: Did Jesus say do not swear oaths (Mt 5:33-37)?

Post by Michael BG »

andrewcriddle wrote: IMO the letter of Clement to the Corinthians (1 Clement) alludes to James (e.g. references to being double minded). If so it is 1st century, though maybe late 1st century, which makes use of Matthew improbable.

Andrew Criddle
I think the traditional date for 1 Clement is c. 96 CE. It seems he knows Luke’s gospel:

I Clement 46:8

“Remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how He said, Woe to that man; it would have a good thing for him if he had never been born, instead of upsetting one of my chosen ones. It would be better for him to be pitched into the sea with a millstone hung round him, than to lead a single one of my chosen astray.”(Early Christian Writings trans. Maxwell Staniforth p 47).

Lk 17:1-2

[1] … woe to him by whom they come!
[2] It would be better for him if a millstone were hung round his neck and he were cast into the sea, than that he should cause one of these little ones to sin.

It seems Clement has a more developed saying than Luke's, which is a development of Mark’s (9:42), Luke has added the “Woe to him” and moved “the little ones” to the end of the saying, Clement has replaced “the little ones” with “my chosen”. He has also added the Marcan and Matthean saying:

Mk 14:21c (par. Mt 26:24c)

“It would have been better for that man if he had not been born”

It is assumed that a text needs to be only 10 years old for it to be used by a newer text – Mark c 70, Matthew and Luke c 80. Therefore it is likely that Clement knew at least Mark and Luke by the time it was written and could have known James if James was written c 90, who could have known Matthew. However 1 Clement has been dated as late as c 130 CE.
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2817
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: Did Jesus say do not swear oaths (Mt 5:33-37)?

Post by andrewcriddle »

FWIW I tend to think it more likely that Clement knew Q or oral tradition rather than written Matthew or Luke.

It is quite possible that James is 1st century and knows Matthew but it would be a rather early attestation of Matthew.

Andrew Criddle
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Did Jesus say do not swear oaths (Mt 5:33-37)?

Post by Ben C. Smith »

andrewcriddle wrote:FWIW I tend to think it more likely that Clement knew Q or oral tradition rather than written Matthew or Luke.
I tend to agree (with the possible substitution of "catechetical materials" for "Q"). This was the conclusion in The New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers of 1905, and the recent reevaluation of that book by Andrew Gregory and Christopher Tuckett concludes with respect to 1 Clement (page 157 of The Reception of the New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers):

Wider discussions notwithstanding, it seems certain on the basis of the internal evidence of his letter that the author of 1 Clement used 1 Corinthians, and very likely indeed that he used Romans and Hebrews. He appears also to have drawn on Jesus traditions, but not in the form preserved in the synoptic gospels. Thus there are no substantial amendments to be made to the conclusions presented by Carlyle and the other members of the Oxford Committee in 1905.

Ben.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Did Jesus say do not swear oaths (Mt 5:33-37)?

Post by John2 »

Michael BG wrote:

"33]"Again you have heard that it was said to the men of old, `You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform to the Lord what you have sworn.'
[34] But I say to you, Do not swear at all, either by heaven ..."

"It therefore seems likely that Jesus did say: “Do not swear at all …"

This saying is different in the (Shem Tov) Hebrew Matthew. Nehemia Gordon explains the significance of this difference better than I can in his book The Hebrew Yeshua vs. The Greek Jesus but I don't have it at the moment. Howard also notes the difference in his Hebrew Gospel of Matthew (pg. 213) and translates the passage this way:

"Again you have heard it said to those of long ago: You shall not swear by my name falsely, but you shall return to the Lord your oath. But I say to you not to swear in vain by anything, either by heaven ..."

And he says, "The difference between the Greek and the Hebrew is striking. In the Greek, Jesus appears to revoke the law: In the Hebrew ... he does not revoke it ... In the Greek, Jesus forbids all swearing. In the Hebrew, he forbids only vain swearing."
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
User avatar
Ben C. Smith
Posts: 8994
Joined: Wed Apr 08, 2015 2:18 pm
Location: USA
Contact:

Re: Did Jesus say do not swear oaths (Mt 5:33-37)?

Post by Ben C. Smith »

John2 wrote:Michael BG wrote:

"33]"Again you have heard that it was said to the men of old, `You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform to the Lord what you have sworn.'
[34] But I say to you, Do not swear at all, either by heaven ..."

"It therefore seems likely that Jesus did say: “Do not swear at all …"

This saying is different in the (Shem Tov) Hebrew Matthew. Nehemia Gordon explains the significance of this difference better than I can in his book The Hebrew Yeshua vs. The Greek Jesus but I don't have it at the moment. Howard also notes the difference in his Hebrew Gospel of Matthew (pg. 213) and translates the passage this way:

"Again you have heard it said to those of long ago: You shall not swear by my name falsely, but you shall return to the Lord your oath. But I say to you not to swear in vain by anything, either by heaven ..."

And he says, "The difference between the Greek and the Hebrew is striking. In the Greek, Jesus appears to revoke the law: In the Hebrew ... he does not revoke it ... In the Greek, Jesus forbids all swearing. In the Hebrew, he forbids only vain swearing."
Other commands enjoining very high standards from the Sermon on the Mount have been toned down, as well. Many versions of Matthew 5.22a (including D, W, Θ, ƒ1, ƒ13, the second corrector of Sinaiticus, and the Byzantine tradition) insert an εἰκῆ ("vainly"), apparently in order to tone down the absolute sense of that verse:

But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother vainly [εἰκῆ] shall be guilty before the court.

And Jerome comments on this word in his commentary on Matthew: quibusdam codicibus additur sine causa ("to certain codices it is added without cause").

Ben.
ΤΙ ΕΣΤΙΝ ΑΛΗΘΕΙΑ
John2
Posts: 4309
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 4:42 pm

Re: Did Jesus say do not swear oaths (Mt 5:33-37)?

Post by John2 »

That's interesting, Ben, thanks. It's also perhaps worth pointing out that the Essenes did not swear according to Josephus:

"... whatsoever they say also is firmer than an oath; but swearing is avoided by them, and they esteem it worse than perjury for they say that he who cannot be believed without [swearing by] God is already condemned" (War 2.8.6).
You know in spite of all you gained, you still have to stand out in the pouring rain.
Post Reply