No flash player!

Description

The New Daily Study Bible

New Testament
WILLIAM BARCLAY
LINDA FOSTER (EDITOR)
 

‘The only commentaries that I’ve used consistently are those written by William Barclay. They are absolutely fantastic and I wouldn’t give up my set for anything.’ Steve Chalke, Oasis Trust

‘William Barclay’s “magnum opus” is now able to delight and serve a new generation of Bible students and preachers.’ Ministry Today World-renowned for his thought-provoking Daily Study Bible series, William Barclay is one of the best-loved commentators on the Bible. His brilliant communication, down-to-earth approach and sheer enthusiasm inspire spirituality and faith among his readers. Over 7 million people worldwide have bought The Daily Study Bible series, in many languages.

New readers will find Barclay’s wide-ranging insight readily accessible in The New Daily Study Bible series. Barclay’s language has been sensitively updated, and out-of-date references have been removed. Readers familiar with his work will find it enhanced throughout with explanation of contexts, sources for quotations and other details. The revision involved William Barclay’s son Ronnie at all stages.

‘Paints pictures with words and draws you in’ – Steve Chalke

Millions of copies sold worldwide

EXTRACT

THE NEEDLESSNESS AND THE FOLLY OF OATHS
James 5:12

Above all things, my brothers, do not swear, neither by heaven nor by earth nor by any other oath. Let your yes be a simple yes and your no a simple no, lest you fall under judgment.

James is repeating the teaching of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5:33–7), teaching which was very necessary in the days of the early Church. James is thinking not of what we call bad language but of confirming a statement or a promise or an undertaking by an oath. In the ancient world, there were two evil practices.
(1) There was a distinction – especially in the Jewish world – between oaths which were binding and oaths which were not binding. Any oath in which the name of God was directly used was considered to be definitely binding, but any oath in which direct mention of the name of God was not made was held not to be binding. The idea was that, once God's name was definitely used, he became an active partner in the transaction, but he did not become a partner unless his name was introduced in this way. The result of this was that it became a matter of skill and sharp practice to find an oath which was not binding. This made a mockery of the whole practice of confirming anything by an oath.
(2) There was at this time an extraordinary amount of oath-taking. This in itself was quite wrong. For one thing, the value of an oath depends to a large extent on the fact of it being very seldom necessary to take one. When oaths became commonplace, they ceased to be respected as they ought to be. For another thing, the practice of taking frequent oaths was nothing other than a proof that lying and cheating was widespread. In an honest society, no oath is needed; it is only when people cannot be trusted to tell the truth that they have to be put on oath.
In this, the ancient writers on morals thoroughly agreed with Jesus. The Jewish writer Philo says: 'Frequent swearing is bound to beget perjury and impiety.' The Rabbis said: `Accustom not yourself to vows, for sooner or later you will swear false oaths.' The Jewish sect of the Essenes forbade all oaths. They held that if an oath was required to make someone tell the truth, that person was already branded as untrustworthy. The great Greeks held that the best guarantee of any statement was not an oath but the character of the person who made it, and that the ideal was to make ourselves so respected that no one would ever think of demanding an oath from us because there could be no doubt that we would always speak the truth.
The New Testament view is that every word is spoken in the presence of God and ought therefore to be true, and it would agree that Christians must be known to be men and women of such honour that it will be quite unnecessary ever to put them on oath. The New Testament would not entirely condemn oaths, but it would deplore the human tendency to lying, which on occasion makes oaths necessary.
© William Barclay

SUPPLY RESTRICTION IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR USA CUSTOMERS Due to international distribution agreements, we cannot supply this product to the USA.