We have spent months walking through Acts and the Gospels, tracing threads that many readers rush past because they seem like small details. Yet names, geography, ethnic backgrounds, and historical context often reveal something important about how God works in history and how He expects us to live today.
This study takes us from the Pharaoh who “did not know Joseph” to Jesus’ command in Matthew 5 that our yes should be yes and our no should be no. Along the way, we have considered misconceptions about Ethiopia, Sheba, Moses, and the history surrounding Israel. Getting the history right helps us understand the theology more clearly.
Clearing Up the History
Modern Ethiopia is not the Ethiopia referred to in the biblical account. Biblical Ethiopia is understood here as Abyssinia, while the modern country received the name Ethiopia later. Likewise, what we now call Yemen was historically known as Sheba. The Queen of Sheba, therefore, is presented in this study as a queen from Yemen rather than Ethiopia.
This geographical context helps us understand how people moved between these ancient regions and Jerusalem.
The same principle applies when we consider Moses. His name, Moshe, is presented as coming from a Semitic and Aramean root connected with being taken out of water. The Pharaoh who enslaved the Hebrews was not part of the Egyptian line that had known Joseph. He was a foreign ruler who had come into power, which explains the statement in Exodus that “there arose up a new king over Egypt, which knew not Joseph.”
He did not know Joseph because he did not belong to the ruling line that remembered Joseph and what he had done for Egypt. This helps explain how the Hebrews could move from being welcomed guests in Egypt to becoming an oppressed people.
It is also important to distinguish between Hebrews and Jews. Not every Hebrew was a Jew. The term Jew specifically became associated with Judah, one of the tribes of Israel. The other tribes were scattered following the Assyrian conquest of the northern kingdom. Understanding these distinctions helps us read the biblical story more accurately.
From Saul to David: When Strength Becomes Weakness
After the Exodus came the wilderness years, the period of the judges, and eventually Israel’s demand for a king. God gave them Saul, a man from Benjamin.
The Benjamites were known for their skill with the sling and the stone. Yet when Goliath stood before Israel, Saul was afraid. The irony is striking. The man came from the very tribe associated with the weapon that would eventually defeat Goliath, yet he could not use that strength when the moment came.
David, from Judah, stepped forward and used the sling to bring down the giant.
Sometimes the very thing we consider our greatest strength can become our greatest weakness when we stop depending on God. Whatever you think you do not need help with may be exactly where you are most vulnerable. Our strengths, just like our weaknesses, must be submitted to God.
Who We Are as a Church
As a congregation, we follow the order of Philadelphia. We are a local, non denominational, open brethren assembly, meaning that we welcome others to worship with us.
At the same time, we approach communion seriously. Breaking bread is not something we practice casually because Scripture teaches the importance of discerning the body of Christ. This is not about exclusion for its own sake. It is about understanding the seriousness of what we are participating in and protecting people from approaching it without understanding.
Swear Not at All
This brings us to the heart of the teaching: the words of Jesus in Matthew 5 concerning oaths.
James gives the same warning:
“Above all things, my brethren, swear not, neither by heaven, neither by the earth, neither by any other oath.”
Jesus says:
“Let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.”
The instruction is remarkably simple. Let your yes be yes, and let your no be no.
When people invoke heaven, earth, their own head, or some other thing to guarantee their words, they are attempting to give their speech an authority beyond their own integrity. But Christ teaches something different. A Christian should not need an oath to make his words trustworthy.
Your word should be enough.
If you say yes, then your yes should be reliable. If you say no, then your no should be reliable. Nothing additional is required.
This is part of what Christian character looks like. Our speech should be simple, truthful, and consistent. We should not need eloquence, emotional pressure, or an oath to convince people that we are telling the truth. Our lives should give weight to our words.
Whether someone chooses to believe us is ultimately beyond our control. What we can control is whether we are people whose yes means yes and whose no means no.
A Practical Word for the Courtroom
This principle also has practical implications. If you are ever asked in court what you swear by, whether the Bible, the Quran, or something else, the position presented in this teaching is that you should not swear by anything.
You can simply stand on your integrity as a Christian.
If people will not believe your word because of your character, an oath will not solve the problem. Our credibility should come from the consistency of our lives.
Integrity and Follow Through
This means that when we say we will do something, we should do it. When we say we will not do something, we should have the discipline and grace to maintain that boundary.
Trustworthy Christian character is not built through oaths. It is built through consistency between our words and our actions.
When people know that your yes means yes and your no means no, your life itself becomes a testimony.
A Final Look at Matthew 5
Jesus also teaches about cutting off the eye or hand if it causes us to sin. This is not presented as a command for physical self mutilation. It is a call to remove opportunities for sin.
If you know that a particular gathering, relationship, environment, or invitation will lead you toward compromise, you should be willing to walk away. It may offend someone to decline their invitation, but it is better to disappoint a person than to compromise your obedience to God.
The same principle applies to the discussion of Peter cutting off Malchus’s ear. Jesus’ statement about those who take up the sword receiving the sword is not presented here as a prediction that Peter himself would die by the sword. Peter was eventually crucified. The principle is about consequences: actions produce consequences, and violence creates the possibility of violence in return.
The teaching on divorce also points us back to the seriousness of marriage. Marriage creates a oneness between husband and wife, and that union should not be treated casually or broken simply because circumstances become difficult. The commitment of marriage must be approached with the understanding that it is a covenant and not merely a legal arrangement.
Closing Thought
The thread running through all of this is integrity.
History matters because it helps us understand God’s dealings with people. Our strengths matter because they must be surrendered to God. Our relationships matter because God often moves revelation through people connected to us. And our words matter because what comes out of our mouths reveals what is in our hearts.
Jesus does not tell us to make our words more impressive. He tells us to make them more trustworthy.
Let your yes be yes.
Let your no be no.
Let your character carry the weight of your words.
And may God give us the grace to live so consistently with what we say that we never need an oath to prove that we are telling the truth.