[af_vet_1981]

Furthermore, if you want to force that prohibition to cover all oaths, in violation of the context, then you must find Paul guilty if sinning while writing under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit:

Precisely, just like the use by the Apostle Paul of the spiritual father/son model ...

[Springfield Reformer]

Apples and oranges. Paul didn’t use the term as an ecclesiastical title, so the bit about being called father was not violated.

But if you want all swearing, even the kind that is nothing but a sincere promise, to be prohibited, you have to cite Paul with a violation in Galatians 1:20.

In both cases the operative question is not, “What is the technical rule,” but “What does the law really mean.” And that, BTW, is the proper role of the judge, to say what the law is. That’s what Jesus is doing. It is a reformation.

Peace,

SR