INC faith, Is oath-taking allowed in the Bible?

TLG

http://theiglesianicristo.blogspot.com/2014/03/cem-30th-commencement-exercises.html

On Monday, 1 April 2014, these graduates will take their oath as regular church workers on a special worship service that the Executive Minister himself will officiate. After their oath-taking, they will be assigned in different districts throughout the world.

Nag oath-taking mga BEM nyo, since bible-based lang kayo, explain how oath-taking is allowed in the bible when Jesus and James said this

Mat 5:34
But I say to you, do not take oaths at all--not by heaven, because it is the throne of God,


James 5:12
But most of all, my brothers and sisters, never take an oath, by heaven or earth or anything else. Just say a simple yes or no, so that you will not sin and be condemned.

----

Let's see kung bible based nga kayo, kindly explain.....

zapebayota

TLG wrote: »

http://theiglesianicristo.blogspot.com/2014/03/cem-30th-commencement-exercises.html



Nag oath-taking mga BEM nyo, since bible-based lang kayo, explain how oath-taking is allowed in the bible when Jesus and James said this


----

Let's see kung bible based nga kayo, kindly explain.....

dapat iexplain mo ang mga talata tutal ikaw nagbigay :lol sana kinuha mo din yung context kung bakit sinabi yan

Kung yan ang gusto mong palabasin na mali ang mag oath then it will contradict the other verses

In Deuteronomy 6:13, for example, Scripture commands God's people "You shall fear only the Lord your God; and you shall worship Him, and swear by His name."

he who swears in the earth shall swear by the name of God" (Is. 65:16)

(Jer. 12:16)

Ex. 22:10-11

The Lord has sworn and will not change His mind, Thou art a priest forever..."(Ps. 110:4)

For when God made the promise to Abraham, since He could swear by no one greater, He swore by Himself" (Heb. 6:13)

TLG

Please connect the verses you gave with what Jesus and james said, zape.


Hindi uubra yang "Kung yan ang gusto mong palabasin na mali ang mag oath then it will contradict the other verses" kasi wala ka namang na-resolve! Pinagkontra mo lang ang mga verses sa old testament at new testament (db mas mangingibabaw ang new testament verses?)... kindly explain zape!

zapebayota

TLG wrote: »

Please connect the verses you gave with what Jesus and james said, zape.


Hindi uubra yang "Kung yan ang gusto mong palabasin na mali ang mag oath then it will contradict the other verses" kasi wala ka namang na-resolve! Pinagkontra mo lang ang mga verses sa old testament at new testament (db mas mangingibabaw ang new testament verses?)... kindly explain zape!

ikaw magexplain tutal ikaw nagpost diba, hindi ko pinagkontra ikaw ang kontra ang kokote,

“I adjure you by the living God, that you tell us whether you are the Christ, the son of God” (Mt. 26:63).
The word “adjure” translates the Greek exorkizo, which means “to extract an oath, to force an oath” (Thayer 1958, 224). Caiaphas put the Lord under oath, hoping that he would incriminate himself.

And Jesus honestly replied, “You have said” (su eipas), which, as language authorities note, “is a Greek affirmative reply” (Robertson 1930, 218). Mark’s parallel has it even plainer: “I am” (Mk. 14:62). This is the same expression used by Jesus when Judas asked the Lord, “Is it I?” (Mt. 26:25).


“but you shall perform unto the Lord your oaths” (Mt. 5:33

Matthew 5:33New International Version (NIV)

Oaths
33 “Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but fulfill to the Lord the vows you have made.’

wala daw sa bagong tipan na pag oath? lolz

kanino mo naman nakuha itong iPUPUNTOS mo sa INC? kay INKONG?

TLG

zapebayota wrote: »

ikaw magexplain tutal ikaw nagpost diba, hindi ko pinagkontra ikaw ang kontra ang kokote,

Kaya nga pinost ko kasi nagtaka ako, clarification nga hanap ko.

zapebayota wrote: »

Oaths
33 “Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but fulfill to the Lord the vows you have made.’

wala daw sa bagong tipan na pag oath? lolz

Pinutol mo eh,madaya ka talaga! Post natin buong verse

Matthew 5:33-37New International Version (NIV)
Oaths
33 “Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but fulfill to the Lord the vows you have made.’ 34 But I tell you, do not swear an oath at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; 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 even one hair white or black. 37 All you need to say is simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.

Ang sabi ni jesus yung kasabihan daw nung una dapat baguhin, huwag na daw mag swear ng oath at all....so I need an explanation dude.

zapebayota wrote: »

kanino mo naman nakuha itong iPUPUNTOS mo sa INC? kay INKONG?

Hindi ah...noon ko pa tinatanong kay kandelabra to kaso umiiwas eh, so might as well make a thread.

KamenRaida

ang mamatay para sa mga Manalo

alchemistofophir

Hindi pala Sola Scriptura ang INC kung ganun. Pick and choose.

Moriadne

alchemistofophir wrote: »

Hindi pala Sola Scriptura ang INC kung ganun. Pick and choose.

The Matt and James verses were referring to vain and rash oaths. Only silly people like quakers can't see the context of those verses, especially in light of other verses which approve of solemn and well thought out oaths to the Lord.

TL;DR - never make promises you can't keep or make vain oaths unbecoming of the Lord's servants.

This doesn't in any way contradict sola scriptura.

Roborat9

idiotic....grasping straws na lang..alam ninyo ang ginagawa ni TLG tinatabunan niya yung mga thread na nasupalpal siya by creating numerous threads and starting another one. Mods please regulate TLG's posting flooding na ang ginagawa niyan. It can be discuss on a single thread naman kaso ito pag nabutata gagawa ng panibago para matabunan ang mga nauna.

TLG

Moriadne wrote: »

The Matt and James verses were referring to vain and rash oaths. Only silly people like quakers can't see the context of those verses, especially in light of other verses which approve of solemn and well thought out oaths to the Lord..

Verse please! Where in those verses we read this "The Matt and James verses were referring to vain and rash oaths", post the matt and james verse and read where we find that what Jesus and James said refers to rash and silly oaths

Roborat9 wrote: »

idiotic....grasping straws na lang..alam ninyo ang ginagawa ni TLG tinatabunan niya yung mga thread na nasupalpal siya by creating numerous threads and starting another one. Mods please regulate TLG's posting flooding na ang ginagawa niyan. It can be discuss on a single thread naman kaso ito pag nabutata gagawa ng panibago para matabunan ang mga nauna.

Am posting threads regarding doctrines, something you aren't capable of doing! Ayaw kong magpost ng mg balitang pawang paninira lang laban sa inyo, walang silbi yun.

TLG

Up ko lang...moriadne where is your biblical explanation of the verses mentioned by Jesus and james? Am waiting.......

jycayetano

Hindi ko naman maintindihan 'to si TLG kung bakit pati oath-taking sa INC kailangan pang puntiryahin. Pero grabe talaga 'yung ginawang pagputol ni Zape sa talata. Pandaraya talaga 'yon eh.

TLG

jycayetano wrote: »

Hindi ko naman maintindihan 'to si TLG kung bakit pati oath-taking sa INC kailangan pang puntiryahin.

Dahil sabi nga nila lahat ng turo daw nila nakasalig sa bibliya... so naghahanap ako ng paliwanag sa kanila galing sa bibliya na mas bibigat pa sa mga binitawang salita ni Jesus at ni james.

jycayetano

TLG wrote: »

Dahil sabi nga nila lahat ng turo daw nila nakasalig sa bibliya... so naghahanap ako ng paliwanag sa kanila galing sa bibliya na mas bibigat pa sa mga binitawang salita ni Jesus at ni james.

Tingin ko hindi naman kasi worth it na pagmulan pa ng matinding balitaktakan 'yung about sa oath-taking. Pero sige, it looks like you have achieved your goal naman. Besides, mas bothered talaga ako 'dun sa ginawa ni Zape.

zapebayota

TLG wrote: »

Kaya nga pinost ko kasi nagtaka ako, clarification nga hanap ko.



Pinutol mo eh,madaya ka talaga! Post natin buong verse

Matthew 5:33-37New International Version (NIV)
Oaths
33 “Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but fulfill to the Lord the vows you have made.’ 34 But I tell you, do not swear an oath at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; 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 even one hair white or black. 37 All you need to say is simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.

Ang sabi ni jesus yung kasabihan daw nung una dapat baguhin, huwag na daw mag swear ng oath at all....so I need an explanation dude.



Hindi ah...noon ko pa tinatanong kay kandelabra to kaso umiiwas eh, so might as well make a thread.

DI ko pinutol yan, kita mo v33 lang ang quinote ko para suportahan ang mga OT testaments that they are taking an oath, kahit sa bagong tipan

SO ano ang stand mo Huwag mag take OATH at ALL?

YES or NO?

“I adjure you by the living God, that you tell us whether you are the Christ, the son of God” (Mt. 26:63).
The word “adjure” translates the Greek exorkizo, which means “to extract an oath, to force an oath” (Thayer 1958, 224). Caiaphas put the Lord under oath, hoping that he would incriminate himself.

And Jesus honestly replied, “You have said” (su eipas), which, as language authorities note, “is a Greek affirmative reply” (Robertson 1930, 218). Mark’s parallel has it even plainer: “I am” (Mk. 14:62). This is the same expression used by Jesus when Judas asked the Lord, “Is it I?” (Mt. 26:25).

Matthew 23:18-22 ESV

And you say, ‘If anyone swears by the altar, it is nothing, but if anyone swears by the gift that is on the altar, he is bound by his oath.’ You blind men! For which is greater, the gift or the altar that makes the gift sacred? So whoever swears by the altar swears by it and by everything on it. And whoever swears by the temple swears by it and by him who dwells in it. And whoever swears by heaven swears by the throne of God and by him who sits upon it.

Revelation 10:6 ESV

And swore by him who lives forever and ever, who created heaven and what is in it, the earth and what is in it, and the sea and what is in it, that there would be no more delay,

oh sige tutal ikaw gumawa ng thread ikaw magexplain

oh tutol ba ang katoliko sa Oath? basahin natin sa newadvent

Improper use is often made of oaths, and the habit of swearing may easily lead to abuses and even to perjury. In counselling men "not to swear at all" (Matthew 5:34) Christ meant, as the Fathers and ecclesiastical writers explain, to be so truthful that men could believe them without need of oath to confirm what they say. He did not forbid the use of oaths under proper conditions, when necessary to satisfy others of our truthfulness. These conditions are (Jeremiah 4:2): (1) Judgment, or careful and reverent consideration of the necessity or utility of the oath; for it would be showing a want of the respect due to God, to invoke Him as witness in trivial matters; on the other hand, it would be wrong to require a grave or extreme necessity

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11176a.htm

oh ano masasabi mo?

alchemistofophir

Matthew 5:33-37New International Version (NIV)
Oaths
33 “Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but fulfill to the Lord the vows you have made.’ 34 But I tell you, do not swear an oath at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; 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 even one hair white or black. 37 All you need to say is simply ‘Yes’ or ‘No’; anything beyond this comes from the evil one.

Comparison yan, sabi, ginagawa daw ng tao ang pagooath dati...

33 “Again, you have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not break your oath, but fulfill to the Lord the vows you have made.’

Pero sabi ni Jesus, huwag daw mag oath

34 But I tell you, do not swear an oath at all: either by heaven, for it is God’s throne; 35 or by the earth, for it is his footstool; or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the Great King.

TLG

zapebayota wrote: »

DI ko pinutol yan, kita mo v33 lang ang quinote ko para suportahan ang mga OT testaments that they are taking an oath, kahit sa bagong tipan

SO ano ang stand mo Huwag mag take OATH at ALL?

YES or NO?

“I adjure you by the living God, that you tell us whether you are the Christ, the son of God” (Mt. 26:63).
The word “adjure” translates the Greek exorkizo, which means “to extract an oath, to force an oath” (Thayer 1958, 224). Caiaphas put the Lord under oath, hoping that he would incriminate himself.

And Jesus honestly replied, “You have said” (su eipas), which, as language authorities note, “is a Greek affirmative reply” (Robertson 1930, 218). Mark’s parallel has it even plainer: “I am” (Mk. 14:62). This is the same expression used by Jesus when Judas asked the Lord, “Is it I?” (Mt. 26:25).

Matthew 23:18-22 ESV

And you say, ‘If anyone swears by the altar, it is nothing, but if anyone swears by the gift that is on the altar, he is bound by his oath.’ You blind men! For which is greater, the gift or the altar that makes the gift sacred? So whoever swears by the altar swears by it and by everything on it. And whoever swears by the temple swears by it and by him who dwells in it. And whoever swears by heaven swears by the throne of God and by him who sits upon it.

Revelation 10:6 ESV

And swore by him who lives forever and ever, who created heaven and what is in it, the earth and what is in it, and the sea and what is in it, that there would be no more delay,

oh sige tutal ikaw gumawa ng thread ikaw magexplain

oh tutol ba ang katoliko sa Oath? basahin natin sa newadvent

Improper use is often made of oaths, and the habit of swearing may easily lead to abuses and even to perjury. In counselling men "not to swear at all" (Matthew 5:34) Christ meant, as the Fathers and ecclesiastical writers explain, to be so truthful that men could believe them without need of oath to confirm what they say. He did not forbid the use of oaths under proper conditions, when necessary to satisfy others of our truthfulness. These conditions are (Jeremiah 4:2): (1) Judgment, or careful and reverent consideration of the necessity or utility of the oath; for it would be showing a want of the respect due to God, to invoke Him as witness in trivial matters; on the other hand, it would be wrong to require a grave or extreme necessity

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11176a.htm

oh ano masasabi mo?

I dont see any explanation coming from you zape.. bible based kayo db so prove your point using the bible. New advent wont help you coz that proves OUR point not yours. So please explain using the bible how oath taking is posible when jesus rebuked old testament verses when he said dont swear an oath at all.

Roborat9

TLG wrote: »

I dont see any explanation coming from you zape.. bible based kayo db so prove your point using the bible. New advent wont help you coz that proves OUR point not yours. So please explain using the bible how oath taking is posible when jesus rebuked old testament verses when he said dont swear an oath at all.

Look at the argument of this fool!!..oath taking really??

If I will follow your logic evey person that was married or make a commitment is now a sinner cauase everyone makes an oath in those ceremonies? Public officials and others who takes a stand in a judicial court is a sinner. An oath is an act of promise moron. Your argument holds no water. your nonsense argument and creation of another baseless issue just to get back at the numerous argument that you were clobbered.

Moriadne

Roborat9 wrote: »

Look at the argument of this fool!!..oath taking really??

If I will follow your logic evey person that was married or make a commitment is now a sinner cauase everyone makes an oath in those ceremonies? Public officials and others who takes a stand in a judicial court is a sinner. An oath is an act of promise moron. Your argument holds no water. your nonsense argument and creation of another baseless issue just to get back at the numerous argument that you were clobbered.

Save your energy Rob, your word falls on deaf ears on this one.

TLG

Roborat9 wrote: »

Look at the argument of this fool!!..oath taking really??

If I will follow your logic evey person that was married or make a commitment is now a sinner cauase everyone makes an oath in those ceremonies? Public officials and others who takes a stand in a judicial court is a sinner. An oath is an act of promise moron. Your argument holds no water. your nonsense argument and creation of another baseless issue just to get back at the numerous argument that you were clobbered.

Eh mas moron ka pala! Db bible-based lang kayo? Ulitin ko BIBLE-BASED lang kayo, so kung against si kristo sa oath, bakit kayo nag-ooath? Don't give me what everybody else is doing kasi am asking your faith idiot!
Talagang bobo ka sa turo ng INC kaya pag doktrina ang tinatanong ko sayo laging waley sagot mo! Nagbabasa ka ba ng bible?

Moriadne wrote: »

Save your energy Rob, your word falls on deaf ears on this one.

Duh...what about blind followers such as you? ang linaw ng sinabi ni kristo oh, did i see any refutal? Ay oo nga pala may sinabi ka nga palang refutal sa post#8 kaso sariling opinyon mo lang, walang basehan sa bible, db bible-based lang kayo?

Salvation is found exclusively in the bible daw, pero pag kumontra na sa turo ng bible, etsepwera na ang nakasulat sa bible. Linoloko nyo lang sarili nyo.