Taking the Name of the Lord in Vain

Anyone with a passing knowledge of the Bible knows that one of the "Big Ten" Commandments is this one:

"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" (Exo 20:7).

And we're pretty sure what it means, too. "Thou shalt not cuss." That's what it means. Of course, many today have surrendered that understanding. Mild expletives (and often more) are acceptable today. "I mean, look, it doesn't talk about cussing; it talks about a vain use of the name of the Lord." So we're clearer now. It's only when we use the word "God" as a cuss word that it's bad, right? Clearly all those TV shows and movies where characters say rude things like "God damn it" are using God's name in vain, right? Or is that right?

There are a few problems here. First, the Bible uses the idea if not the phrase. God, in fact, damns some. So the phrase itself can't be the problem. Second, as it turns out, "God" is not His name. Did you know that? The term "God" is a reference to His title, not His name. His name is YHWH. When was the last time you heard that name "used in vain"? In the case of Christ, His title is "Christ" and His name is Jesus. So "names" are an issue. Third, there is the whole problem of using God's name in vain in the sense of using it without meaning it. That would mean that every time you say "God bless you" to someone who sneezed and didn't actually mean a blessing from God, you were using God's name in vain. If it wasn't a prayer, it was "vain".

So what does it mean? If it isn't the use of the word "God" (or, of course, Jesus), then what? Well, our problem is we're moderns trying to understand an ancient concept. Beyond that, we're Americans trying to read back American independence into a different culture entirely. Worse still, we're modern Americans whose mantra is "Question authority" trying to understand the ancient concept of the authority of a name. Satan has certainly done his work here.

The concept of "the name" in biblical (and later) times was not a simple, woodenly literal use of a word that designates something or someone. I came across this concept in my reading of 1 Kings. Ahab wanted his neighbor's vineyard. His neighbor refused. Ahab's wife, Jezebel, told him she'd take care of it. "So she wrote letters in Ahab's name and sealed them with his seal, and she sent the letters to the elders and the leaders who lived with Naboth in his city" (1 Kings 21:8). That's the idea. In fact, this concept occurs all over Scripture.

"But the prophet who shall speak a word presumptuously in My name which I have not commanded him to speak, or which he shall speak in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die" (Deut 18:20).

So David sent ten young men, and David said to the young men, "Go up to Carmel, visit Nabal and greet him in my name" (1 Sam 25:5).

"For many will come in My name, saying, 'I am the Christ,' and will mislead many" (Matt 24:5).

"If you ask Me anything in My name, I will do it" (John 14:14).

"Repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ" (Acts 2:38).

"I do not possess silver and gold, but what I do have I give to you: In the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene--walk!" (Acts 3:6).

Paul was greatly annoyed, and turned and said to the spirit, "I command you in the name of Jesus Christ to come out of her!" (Acts 16:18).

Perhaps now you begin to get a sense of "the name" concept. It isn't a term. It is an authority. Surely you've seen it in those movies about the days of kings when a rider arrives declaring, "I come in the name of the king." What is the point there? He isn't coming on his own authority. He has the authority of the king. Even so, "in the name of" means "by the authority of". Using God's name in vain, then, would be falsely appealing to God's authority as your own. It would be the false representation that you are operating under the authority of God.

How does that work, then? I'm sure you know people who, while fastidious in their use of the term "God" as a casual word, are happy to tell you, "God told me that you should ..." Did He? Especially when the command is opposed to Scripture. One woman told me, "The Holy Spirit told me that it was okay to conduct a seance because that was an Old Testament prohibition and we're not under the Law." Really? That would be a vain use of the name of God. How else do we use His name in vain? Well, since we are His representatives -- ambassadors for Christ (2 Cor 5:20) -- our actions reflect on His name. In the most trivial example I can think of, how did you feel when that car that cut you off in traffic nearly causing an accident had a "Jesus" sticker on the back? That would be using the name of the Lord in vain. Claiming to be a follower of Christ while living as a worldling would be using the name of the Lord in vain.

"Oh, good," I'm hearing some say. "That means we can swear to our hearts content." Well, that would be problematic. Paul warned that we should "Let no unwholesome word proceed from your mouth, but only such a word as is good for edification according to the need of the moment, that it may give grace to those who hear" (Eph 4:29). James says, "No one can tame the tongue; it is a restless evil and full of deadly poison. With it we bless our Lord and Father; and with it we curse men, who have been made in the likeness of God; from the same mouth come both blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not to be" (James 3:8-10). We are to put aside "abusive speech" (Col 3:8) and, instead, "Let your speech always be with grace" (Col 4:6). "There must be no filthiness and silly talk, or coarse jesting, which are not fitting, but rather giving of thanks" (Eph 5:4). While I have tried to dissuade you from thinking that the Third Commandment is a ban on cussing, I don't want you to think there is no such concern. But our higher concern must be the proper use of the authority of God and the best possible representation of Christ in the world. That is the bigger problem. That ought to be our primary focus.
________
Follow Up Question: If part of "using the name of the Lord in vain" includes claiming to speak for God when He didn't actually say it, would it also be considered "using the name of the Lord in vain" when God actually says something and we deny it? Is it "using the name of the Lord in vain" when we ask "Did God say?" when God clearly said? Is it "using the name of the Lord in vain" if someone claims "We can't actually know what God said [about this]"?