Bad News: Many Christians Take the Lord's Name in Vain

[MineralMan]

https://stream.org/not-take-lords-name-vain/

By MARY DEMUTH Published on May 26, 2016

I never quite understood this verse: “You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not leave him unpunished who takes His name in vain.” (Exodus 20;7) I always equated “taking the Lord’s name in vain” with using God’s name as an oath or possibly as a swear word.

Now I have a deeper understanding.

In my life, I have encountered people who name Jesus as their Lord with their words, but in their actions act as if God doesn’t see. I have met people who used God’s name to legitimize themselves, to render themselves trustworthy to cover up an untrustworthy heart. I have heard people use Christian words, Christian platitudes, Christian phrases — even though their hearts and minds are far from Jesus.

Worse yet, I have met people who masquerade as Christians while they knowingly defraud others, using God’s incredible name to underwrite incredibly horrible deeds. This takes the sin of taking God’s name in vain to a deeper level. Perhaps the spirit of the commandment has to do with lying about God’s role in your life to others, about using God for your own gain, about hypocrisy.

You can read more of this thoughful essay at the link above.

It seems to me that we have many people in high places, and in much lower places, who make these mistakes. Are such persons really Christians? I know that Christians are not supposed to judge others, but I'm an atheist, so I don't have to follow that rule. I'm familiar with Christianity's rules of behavior. I have no problem calling out those who violate them while holding up a picture of Jesus. That's one of the benefits of atheism, I think.

[shraby]

1. I figured that out too.

[trotsky]

2. Bah, if there's anything most Christians make clear...

it's that whatever rule they might CLAIM to follow, they can ignore when it becomes inconvenient. Because Jesus forgives them, usually. Or because that mean old atheist on the Internet DESERVES it.

[MineralMan]

3. Change that to "many Christians," and I

can agree with you. As a "mean old atheist on the Internet," I try not to lump a majority of Christians or any other group together. I know too many who don't fit the mold, I guess.

[trotsky]

4. "Most" comes from my personal experience.

The attitude is best exemplified by this popular saying that can be found on bumper stickers, mugs, shirts, and so on:

[MineralMan]

6. Yeah. Maybe you have more acquaintances than I do.

[trotsky]

10. Could be the church and/or community I grew up in.

Could be the clear majority of Christian politicians (i.e., one entire political party and many members of another).

Could be a lot of things indeed. I can only speak from my experience, naturally.

[delisen]

5. Lord's Name in Vain--Speaking for God

Having the audacity to tell others what God thinks and will do or should or must do.

It is the vanity of making yourself God or placing yourself above God by telling God what to do to others.

It is primarily a sin of those who preach to or judge others.

It is the sin of a person who claims to know God not the sin of some hapless being who accidentally hits one's own thumb with a hammer and shouts "God damn it."

[Igel]

14. Why limit it?

Oh. To let the right people off the hook. "What they do is wrong, but if I do it, it's okay." We all like having our pokegahd at the ready, with his "morality attack" or "sympathy attack" or whatever.

The OT law is hard. It's onerous. The reasoning was that if you do it, you would "live in it" and not be subject to a kind of divine death penalty. But the reasoning crucially ends, "but you can't do it."

The NT makes it harder. Don't commit murder? Don't even look at a brother with hate or anger. Don't commit adultery? Don't even look at another with lust. And it included not swearing by God, or by anything else, but just letting your "yes" be yes.

That's okay. Most Xians are too busy saying "it's all about love and tolerance" to worry about ridiculous things like humility or righteousness or mercy or peacemaking.... They read the beatitudes and barely get through the first four words of the first one. For them it's not "the beatitudes" but "The Beatitude."

I don't judge. But neither do I justify. At best, my goal is to understand.

[JayhawkSD]

7. This is an important point.

which delisen spelled out very nicely.

How many "Christians" have I heard who will condemn you for saying "goddammit" when you hit your thumb with a hammer and tell you that you are going to hell for breaking one of the ten commandments, and then turn around and proclaim that "God's word" commands this and that. Thereby breaking the commandment which you were actually not breaking.

They usually describe themselves as "Old Testament Christians" so that they can use that part of the bible to cast gay people out of society and keep women barefoot and pregnant, not realizing that everything having to do with Christianity is, by definition, in the New Testament.

Sounding brass, filled with noise and fury, signifying nothing.

[MineralMan]

8. Well, I never say "goddammit" when

I hit my thumb with a hammer. I'm an atheist, so I say "fucking sonuvabitch!" instead. That way, I do not acknowledge the existence of deities, but still have an effective way to express my displeasure.

[JayhawkSD]

9. Good for you.

I don't either, actually for the most part. I do believe in and have respect for a power greater than myself, and use the term God for convenience, but Christians would mostly not recognize the way I see that power. That's a different discussion.

On the other hand, out of respect for my wife and whatever other females might be nearby, and despite six years in the Navy, I try not ever to voice the "f-word." That's also a different discussion.

Mostly, I try not ever to tell other people what they should or should not do.

[Sneederbunk]

11. The War on Christians continues.

[MineralMan]

12. How so?

Nobody's fighting Christians here. There are too many of them. We are sometimes talking to Christians, though, we non-Christians. Is that OK?

[Sneederbunk]

15. IMHO there are attempts on this blog to divide Atheist Democrats and

Theistic Democrats. For what purpose? To what end?

[MineralMan]

16. Divide in what way. Politics isn't the topic in this Group.

I assume we're all Democrats here. I assume we'll all be voting for Democrats. We discuss politics on other parts of this site.

This area is for the discussion of religious matters, not politics. Are your politics based on your religious beliefs? Do you think mine are based on my non-belief? That's just silly.

[Sneederbunk]

18. Divide, as to antagonize one group in the party against

another group, thus negatively affecting the morale of the party and totally unnecessary.

[trotsky]

19. You mean like politicians always saying "God bless America" even though millions of us...

don't believe in gods?

Or is that kind of antagonizing OK, because who gives a shit about non-believers?

[guillaumeb]

13. I am flattered that you appreciated my good news/bad news captioning.

It is good to be a role model, but there is responsibility also.

[MineralMan]

20. Don't flatter yourself, Guy.

By the way, putting words in God's mouth (on the assumption that your deity has such a facial orifice) is pretty much the very model of taking God's name in vain. Your signature line does exactly that. Perhaps you should reconsider using that. I dunno...I'd hate to see you smitten by the right hand of God. Of course, I don't believe any of that, so I'm not really worried. Perhaps you're not, either...

[Pope George Ringo II]

17. As Walter White would say,

"You're goddamn right."