It comes from the concept of Shuva! Or a Jewish oath. Remember the framers originally wanted to make Hebrew the first language (attributed to Ben Franklyn-as reported at Harvard) In fact that is why Hebrew was a required language in most of the Ivy League Colleges for so many years! The original framers wanted to get away from the English at all cost. The Jewish requirement for an oath is very strict. This is why a religious Jew only affirms an oath, rather than swear it, because it is a serious matter , to invoke G-ds name and his wrath! Frank Hirsch
----- Original Message ----- From: Jean Dudley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Tuesday, July 19, 2005 1:21 pm Subject: Re: George Washington adding "under God" to the Presidential oath > Volokh, Eugene wrote: > > > I've heard various people mention that George Washington added > >"so help me God" to the constitutionally prescribed, which is "I do > >solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the > Office of > >President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, > >preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." > >Some use it as evidence for the propriety of religious references in > >government affairs; others stress that "so help me God" isn't > actually a > >part of the official oath, and the frequent inclusion of "so help me > >God" is the Presidents' own detour and frolic. > > > > Here's my question: In the late 1700s, did people who said > >oaths (as opposed to affirmations) routinely include "so help me > God" or > >some such, simply because that was seen as a natural part of > oaths? If > >so, then it might be that the Framers naturally expected that > those who > >see an oath as a religiously significant matter would include "so > help>me God." > > > > Eugene > >_______________________________________________ > >To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu > >To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw > > > >Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be > viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read > messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and > list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. > > > > > > > Speaking solely as someone who's studied (albeit informally) > Elizabethan > dialect, I can say that oaths invoking the name of G-d (for our > Jewish > friends) were extremely common, as well as the name of Mary and > various > saints. So common, in fact, that the so-called "Pilgrims" were > often > offended as they say it as taking the name of the Lord in vain. > > Swearing on the blood of Christ gave us the common English oath > "bloody". > > Read Shakespeare. "Marry" was a variation on Mary. This was > before the > standardization of spelling. > > While I am no expert, it makes sense that oaths given for public > office > were viewed as having religious significance by individuals. > Hence the > addition of "So help me God". > > I'd lean toward the explaination that such oaths were individual > peccadillos, and not something required by the office. > > Jean Dudley > Somewhere in the wilds of Yosemite Valley > _______________________________________________ > To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu > To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see > http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw > > Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed > as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages > that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list > members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others. > _______________________________________________ To post, send message to Religionlaw@lists.ucla.edu To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private. Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the messages to others.
