The objective of this lesson: to emphasize that the use of "religious acts" to create a means for deceiving people is hypocrisy.
Years ago a Christian lady often remarked to fellow Christians, "I would never say that in a church building!" The "that" was rarely something evil. To her, it was just an inappropriate statement [or action] for "inside a church building." She had a strict spiritual protocol for what was appropriate and inappropriate in church buildings. Some things always were inappropriate to be said or done "inside a church building." While those things were never "evil" things, they were inappropriate "inside a church building." For example, business was never to be mentioned [let alone discussed] "inside a church building."
It has been common for generations for individuals to determine faithfulness by what does or does not occur in "church buildings." Unfortunately, often one's theology is more focused on "acts in church buildings" than it is on one's behavior in his/her daily lifestyle. The letters to Christians in the New Testament stress the importance of sanctified or holy behavior in one's lifestyle.
In each age people hold strong opinions about what is and is not appropriate in God's immediate presence. Sometimes those distinctions primarily involve people's concept of worship. Sometimes those distinctions primarily involve a separation between what is regarded secular and what is regarded spiritual. Sometimes those distinctions primarily involve people's concepts of being in God's immediate presence.
Christians of most ages make distinctions based on what they consider appropriate or inappropriate. Many, if not most, of those distinctions are based on their consciences. The way a Christian honors his/her conscience is extremely important (see Romans 14). However, it is equally important for one Christian not to determine another Christian's faithfulness by using one's conscience as the measuring stick.
The above distinctions commonly focus on matters of conscience rather than God's nature or God's directives. Such concerns often have more to do with the person's views or their community's views than God's concerns.
It is quite important for each Christian to mature in distinguishing between acts of conscience and directives from God. To regard a matter of conscience as a directive from God is to open the door of the temptation to pass eternal judgment on another Christian. Christian discernment often depends on the ability to distinguish between conscience and God's command.
However, there is at least one more distinction. It primarily involves the person's greed. It has little concern for respecting God [though it camouflages greed with a covering of personal piety]. It is basically concerned with obtaining an advantage through deception. It is not about honoring the supremacy of the sovereign God. This is the distinction Jesus targeted in today's reading. The problem was produced by making nonexistent distinctions to deceive people.
Through the ages some Christians [and some Israelites] attempted to use "spiritual acts/motives" to achieve the goals and ambitions produced by personal greed. These people camouflaged their real motives with the appearance of personal piety. However, the objective never was closeness to God. The objective was achieving greed's goals. The need was to mask greed [which has an ugly appearance] with spiritual expressions [which on shallow examination appear noble]. A common means for camouflaging greed with the surface appearance of spiritual concern is through making artificial distinctions. "Hey, I did not do anything wrong! Sorry it worked out that way!" [Sure, but not sorry enough to repent!]
Today we would label this practice as a discussion of business ethics. Israel made no distinction between behavior in daily life and honoring God. To deceive "in or out" of the "church building" [synagogue or temple] dishonored God--all technicalities aside! It was as evil to deceive "outside" as it was "inside." Where the deception occurred was beside the point! Dishonesty never honors the God of truth!
Too often American business regards deceit through deceptive claims as "good business" or "effective advertising." Ethics focuses on concepts of right and wrong. Christian ethics focus on what God considers good and evil. Right and wrong are not determined by a building, but by our God who is devoted to good. Our God of truth is honored by a people devoted to honesty.
In ages of limited education and educational opportunities, vows were extremely important. On any occasion when it was necessary to affirm the trustworthiness of one's statement, it was customary to use a vow. Vow taking was not intended to be a means of deceiving. Vow taking was not intended to legalize deception. Vows were intended to be a powerful way to affirm truth.
In the American age of national education, we use guarantees and contracts in the way the ancient world used vows.
Jesus rejected vow taking only if one used vow taking as a means of deceiving. Jesus endorsed honesty!. He endorsed a person being so honest, so truthful all the time in everything that a lifestyle of truthfulness made his vow unnecessary. Jesus' position was simple: the God of truth does not sanction deception. God does not sanction people deceiving people.
The objective for the person who belongs to God is to be such a person of integrity that he/she is trusted for who he/she is, not just what he/she declares.
Note a distinction in this "woe." While the other "woes" are pronounced on the scribes and Pharisees, this "woe" is pronounced on "blind guides," "fools," and "blind men." The people addressed have not changed. Jesus still spoke to scribes and Pharisees. However, the artificial distinctions they made in vow taking were ridiculous, stupid, and indefensible. To anyone who "saw," the distinctions they acknowledged obviously did not exist. Only those blinded by foolish thinking would not see how ridiculous these artificial distinctions were.
These artificial distinctions could be made only if the distinction was made by someone blind to his/her motives and blind to his/her claim.
What were these artificial distinctions? Things that made a vow not "binding" included these: the temple and the altar. If a Jew swore by the temple or the altar, the oath was not "binding." He could deceive by using a "non-binding" oath. He was not obligated to keep promises because he swore by something they said did not obligate him to keep his promised. Therefore, he could use a "non-binding" oath to deceive and continue to be loyal to God!
The claim: if someone swore a vow by God's temple or the temple's altar, the vow was not binding. Thus one could not place confidence in a Jewish vow unless he was an expert in distinctions!
Things that made a vow "binding" included these: the gold used on or in the temple and the sacrifice [gift] that was on the altar [presented as an offering to God]. If a person swore by these things, he was obligated to speak truth, to keep the promise. He was obligated to what he declared in the vow. If he swore by these things, he could not escape his obligation and be loyal to God.
The claim: if someone swore a vow by the gold on (or in) God's temple or by the sacrifice on the altar, what he/she said was binding.
The horrible failure is declared in this realization: whether one swore by the temple or by it's gold, whether one swore by the altar or its sacrifice, he/she was using God to verify the promise or words were true. Both the temple and its gold existed to honor God. Both the altar and the sacrifice existed to honor God. In each situation, those things belonged to God!
In our concepts of today, vows could be used by people "who belonged to God" as a means of lying, of deliberately deceiving other people. Thus if my greed motivated me to exploit another person, I would affirm a promise or declare something was true by swearing a "non-binding" vow. I could lie without placing my relationship with God in jeopardy by swearing in a way that meant nothing to God! What a concept! "If you do it the proper way, you are not obligated to keep a promise or to tell the truth, and God does not care!" The God of truth does not care if His people deceive? Truthfulness is a matter of procedure, not a matter of integrity?
The concept that God sanctions deceit if one who belongs to God deceives through sanctioned procedural trickery is false! Primary in God's concern is how His people behave. Deceit is not part of a godly lifestyle. The person who belongs to the God of truth values honesty.
No wonder that Jesus classified religious teachers and leaders who taught this position as blind guides, fools, or blind men! It took little integrity to see that swearing by the temple or the gold of the temple was based on an artificial distinction, or swearing by the altar or the gift on the altar was based on an artificial distinction. To swear by heaven is to swear by all that is in heaven--and that includes the God of heaven Himself!
One could not take a vow and belong to God if the vow he/she took disregarded God's nature!
The God of truth Who is faithful in all He promises cherishes people of truth who are faithful in their promises! "Non-binding" vows misrepresent God! To misrepresent God is to engage in hypocrisy!
Christians completely depend on God's faithfulness, trustworthiness. God is the ultimate promise keeper! Others should be able to depend on a Christian's faithfulness, trustworthiness. Christians must be a people of their word!
Thought Questions/Requests:
The illustrations will be the product of the students' experiences. One such experience might be substituting slang words or expressions for curse words.
Most of those opinions are based in the individual's conscience or the community's conscience.
Such distinctions are artificial distinctions. An important distinction is declared where no distinction exists.
Vows were used as a powerful means to affirm truth. Israel [and others] used vows to affirm the trustworthiness of a promise, an agreement, or a declaration.
Jesus endorsed honesty. The person who follows God must be a person of integrity.
The scribes and Pharisees declared that if one swore a vow by the temple or its altar, one was not obligated to honor his/her word. However, if one swore a vow by the gold of the temple or by the sacrifice on the altar, he/she was obligated to honor his/her world.
This was an attempt to deliberately deceive another person while continuing to "belong to God."
God is a God of truth. Those who belong to and follow God must be people of integrity. To suggest that the God of truth sanctions deception if the procedure is correct is to deny God's nature.
Link to Student Guide
Lesson 6