one of the 10 Commandments says, "Do not use the Lord's name in vain."
If a Jewish person hits their fingers with a hammer and yells out "J---- C-----!!!", are they breaking that commandment?
Posted by Jim-Me (Member # 6426) on :
It depends on whether or not Jesus really *is* God, doesn't it?
I mean, if the Jewish person is right about him not being, then no.
If the Christian is right, then yes.
Posted by Farmgirl (Member # 5567) on :
That's just a really weird question to be asking, Dan....
Posted by Amka (Member # 690) on :
I think G*d (if we are talking about this, why not actually follow the conventions?) would have a little more understanding about it. On the one hand, I don't think a Jewish person would be held as accountable for taking J C name in vain than a Christian would. But there would still be something there to having disrespect for something someone else holds sacred.
Kind of like if Christians started swearing in the name of B*dd*h. I mean, if those same Christians really hold to that commandment, it is fairly rude of them to treat another religion with such disrespect and even vulgarity. And I think G*d would hold them to that particular sin, rather than taking G*d's name in vain.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
Yeah. Leaving aside the question of whether "Jesus Christ" could be considered the Lord's name in this situation -- which it can't -- the whole "taking in vain" doesn't actually refer to that kind of usage.
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
It's a wierd question to ask, and I'm a weird person to be answering it, but:
My impression of the commandment is that "taking the lords name" has to do with the purpose behind using the word. Just saying the word for no purpose isn't taking it in vain.
It seems to me that this is why we use the term "swear" words. At one time they were also called "oaths." It means the same thing. Swearing an oath is making a promise using God's name for validation. If someone says, "I swear to God, [something] happened," it better be true, or God's going to be really pissed. I would be too if someone used my name as an authority in order to tell a lie.
It also doesn't matter what words you use, but the intent behind it. When someone hits his thumb with a hammer and says "God Damn It!", it may not make a lot of rational sense, but it makes perfect emotional sense. You're in pain, you're pissed, and you are requesting that God punish the hammer appropriately. Even if the only word that comes out of your mouth is "YAAAUUUUUUHHH," God would know what you meant.
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
And no, it didn't occur to me that that was an alternative spelling of Yahweh.
Posted by sarcasticmuppet (Member # 5035) on :
In that context, could taking the lord's name in vain refer to oathbreaking?
Posted by Jim-Me (Member # 6426) on :
That's actually how I view it, SM, along with, perhaps, doing something for yourself in the name of God (say a crooked televangelist merley using the concept of God for money).
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
I would say it is not so much oath-breaking as swearing an oath that is false or that you intend to break. Thus the taking of the Name itself is in vain.
But yes, breaking it after the fact would retroactively be a problem. This is why traditional Jews will avoid swearing oaths, and affirm instead.
Posted by mothertree (Member # 4999) on :
I know he's not exactly the model of an observant Jew, but Woody Allen's characters exclaim that in anger quite a bit (going back to the original post).
Posted by Papa Moose (Member # 1992) on :
While certainly outnumbered by those who do not, there are a decent number of Jewish people who do believe that Jesus is God. Of course, arguing whether or not the definition of "Jewish" precludes believing Jesus to be God is probably about as fruitful as arguing whether or not the definition of "Christian" precludes being LDS, and we all know how useful that conversation has been thus far....
Posted by Papa Moose (Member # 1992) on :
Yes, well, some people disagree with you. Ain't sayin' I'm one of 'em. Just sayin'.
Posted by Papa Moose (Member # 1992) on :
While they may theoretically (and horrendously and possibly offensively generalizationally*) be famous for being very good at arguing, Jews aren't the only ones who argue about it.
--Pop
*I don't care if it's not a word, and deal with the parenthetical structure as you choose, you silly Grammarians. *smile*
Posted by Mike (Member # 55) on :
quote:Actually, that's one of the few things Jews generally don't argue about.
Funny you should mention that. I have a friend who would be Jewish under that definition, but he unequivocally asserts that he is not. (Incidentally, his last name is a very Jewish name, which makes the whole situation that much more amusing.) So, do Jews argue about it? Depends on whether you think he's Jewish or not.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)