Synodical Conference Convention Proceedings St. Louis, Missouri — 1954, Page 73

Transcription machine transcription, uncorrected

⤓ Download .txt · copy text

Ev. Luth. Synodical Conference of North America, 1954. 738

to render a soundly Biblical verdict. Up until twenty-five years
ago there was general agreement within the Synodical Conference
that the Scout oath or promise was contrary to the Bible, as the
literature of that period indicates. But now those who advocate
Scouting maintain that the same oath or promise “ig not an oath
in the Biblical sense of the term,” saying, “God’s name is not
involved at all” (Another Fraternal Endeavor, -p. 85). By way of
reply a lengthy quotation from an article by Prof. J. P. Meyer is
offered, which clearly sets forth the Biblical principles involved.
Discussing the Scout oath, Prof. Meyer writes:

Although the three upraised fingers may not refer to the Trinity,
and although the pledge itself is not made with an express appeal to
God, yet it is a promise re-enforced with an appeal to one’s own honor.
Very definitely so: “On my honor I promise . . he

What Says Scripture?

We compare a few Scripture passages that speak of oaths. St. James
says: “Above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven,
neither by the earth, neither by any other oath; but let your yea be
yea, and your nay, nay, lest ye fall into condemnation” (chap. 5:12).
Does St. James say that because an oath does not contain a direct
reference to God, it loses its nature as an oath? — Jesus Himself warned
His disciples: “Let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay; for
whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil”. (Matt. 5:37).

Jesus also explained why an oath, though it contains no direct
reference to God, must still be regarded as an oath in the strict sense
of the word. “Again, ye have heard that it hath been said by them of
old time, Thou shalt not forswear thyself, but shalt perform unto the
Lord thine oaths. But I say unto you, Swear not at all: neither by
heaven, for it is God’s throne; nor by the earth, for it is His footstool;
neither by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. Neither shalt
thou swear by thy head, because thou canst not make one hair white
or black.” (Matt. 5:33-36.) ;

The Jews were trying to salve their consciences when in their daily
dealings they went beyond a simple yea or nay and re-enforced their
statements with an appeal to heaven, to the earth, or to their own head.
They considered such language as not being oaths in the proper sense.
They tried to draw some very fine distinctions, as we read in Matthew 23,
where Jesus rebukes the scribes and Pharisees:. “Woe unto you, ye blind
guides, which say, Whosoever shall swear by the Temple, it is nothing;
put whosoever shall swear by the gold of the Temple, he is a debtor! ...
And, Whosoever shall swear by the altar, it is nothing; but whosoever
sweareth by the gift that is upon it, he is guilty.” (Vv. 16, 18.)

Does Jesus explain that they really have no cause for worry, that
they are worrying about nothing; that, since they make no express
reference to God, they were not using an oath at all? He calls them
“fools,” but for a very different reason: “Ye fools and. blind! For
whether is greater, the gold or the Temple that sanctifieth the gold? ...
ive fools and blind! For whether is greater, the gift or the altar that
sanctifieth the gift?” (Vv. 17, 19.) ,

The Real Meaning

What is the real meaning of phrases that are thus introduced to
re-enforce a plain statement with an appeal to heaven, to the Temple,
to the altar, and the like? If they are not to be empty words, then they
contain an implied reference to God, as Jesus explains: “Whoso therefore
shall swear by the altar, sweareth by it and by all things thereon. And
whoso shall swear by the Temple sweareth by it and by Him that dwell-
eth therein. And he that shall swear by heaven sweareth by the throne
of. God and by Him that sitteth thereon.” (Vv. 20-22.)