1689 23.2
1689 London Baptist Confession
23.2. Of Lawful Oaths and Vows
The Name of God only is that by which men ought to swear; and therein it is to be used, with all Holy Fear and reverence, therefore to swear vainly or rashly by that glorious, and dreadful name; or to swear at all by any other thing, is sinful and to be abhorred; yet as in matter of weight and moment for confirmation of truth, and ending all strife, an Oath is warranted by the Word of God; so a lawful Oath being imposed, by lawful Authority, in such matters, ought to be taken.
Proof texts
- 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, [37] Let what you say be simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything more than this comes from evil.
- 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.
- Hebrews 6:16 — [16] For people swear by something greater than themselves, and in all their disputes an oath is final for confirmation.
- 2 Corinthians 1:23 — [23] But I call God to witness against me — it was to spare you that I refrained from coming again to Corinth.
- Nehemiah 13:25 — [25] And I confronted them and cursed them and beat some of them and pulled out their hair. And I made them take an oath in the name of God, saying, “You shall not give your daughters to their sons, or take their daughters for your sons or for yourselves.
For discussion
- The Assembly cited Matthew 5:34, 37 in support of this answer. Read it in context — how does it bear on what is claimed here?
- 5 passages are cited here. Which does the most work, and is anything claimed that the proofs do not obviously carry?
- WCF 22.1 treats the same ground. What does it add, and why might it put things differently?
- BC 9.1 treats the same ground. What does it add, and why might it put things differently?