Jest and Mockery
"Anything said in jest is a mockery regardless of how much "logic" is involved. If after being suddenly startled one says OMG is that person taking God's name in vain?
Moderator - Yes, because that is what is in their heart.
Join Our Christian Singles and Take The Sanctification Bible Quiz
---mima on 6/15/10
Helpful Blog Vote (6)
Any person who says the name Jesus, God, and they are not saved, is a blasphemous.
---catherine on 8/26/10|
When a person exclaims: "Oh my God!", they are actually seeking to convey that theirs is the final word on the subject, and so divinely endorse their summation. So it's the misuse and abuse of His Name and the taking of it in vain. James 5:12 is now being breached regardless of any aforethought! Many say that they are not believers when challenged over the use of 'OMG', they don't recognise that while they don't believe in Him they are quite willing to use His Name to back their boasting. And though one might say, "Well, I know I am right", so does the person that they are arguing with. So we are exposed to a rally of 'OMGs' with both swearing that they have God's nod of approval. No matter, they are both using it in pride!
---John_II on 8/26/10|
Many moons ago I used to say" JESUS CHRIST" real sharp when something unusual came to my attention. But my wife( I praise the Lord for giving me a good Wife) pointed out to me that I was taking the Lord's name in vain. I immediately stopped!
---mima on 7/28/10|
When the Masoretes introduced vowel points, they couldn't point the Holy Name YHWH, since it was always pronounced Adonai (which the KJV translates "LORD"), or in the case "Adonai YHVH", it became "Elohim" (translated "Lord GOD") - as "Lord LORD" would be silly.
The scribes put vowels appropriate to "Adonai"/"Elohim" under the consonants YHWH. Jews would know to make the substitutions, but non-Jews unfamailiar with with the custom of euphemising the Holy Name would erroneously read "Yehovah"/"Yehovi". Since the "Y" sound is written "J" in Latin (and in most other European languages), we thus get "Jehovah".
---StrongAxe on 6/29/10|
MarkV, you have control of this site & you will pay the penalty someday for your lying about hermeneutics being their own religion & for covering up your lie.
To everyone else, including moderators, etc. I have revealed the truth about MarkV's "religion". There comes a time when everyone must see the truth & the truth here is that this site is overrun by MarkV's religion which is full of unbelief. Even Jesus did not many mighty works in certain areas because of the unbelief. Mat 13:58 So, this is where I shake the dust from my feet as a testimony against your unbelief. Mat 10:14, Mrk 6:11, Lk 9:5.
---fay on 6/28/10|
**One thing you all should consider, because it is both factual and true, is that the King James Version of Holy Scripture was hastily constructed.**
Really? The Savoy Confrence, which called for it, was in 1604. The KJV was published 7 years later. That doesn't sound like haste to me.
++Many of you are probably not aware that King James wanted "his" translation done before Cardinal Jiminez completed his own. ++
And Cardinal Jimenez called his translation into Spanish WHAT?
||. Did you know that the word "Jehovah" never existed before the King James version of 1611. It's true||
No, it's not. "Jehovah" appears Christopher Marlowe's play DR. FAUSTUS, which predates the KJV.
---Cluny on 6/25/10|
satan is the one who always tries to discredit the Word by attacking it's origin. I studied a Hebrew/Greek translation for 2 years always comparing it with King James. I finally gave the Hebrew/Greek version away because the KJV said the same thing but was easier to read.
---fay on 6/20/10|
Higgins pt.2 of 3, This six volume polyglot Bible completed in 1514-1517 A.D. contained the corrupt Septuagint text, but it was not due to be published until 1522 A.D. This prompted translator Desiderius Erasmus to quickly publish the New Testament from the original Greek MSS before the polyglot was published. Thus from October 1515 to Fedruary 1516 A.D., after only five months the text was printed. Cardinal Francisco Ximenez de Cisneros had the Biblia Poliglota Complutense (the Polyglot Bible of Alcala), published in 1522 A.D.
---Eloy on 6/18/10|
Higgins pt.3, The name Jehovah was introduced in about 1270 A.D. by a Roman Catholic Spanish Monk, named Raymundus Martini, in his book Pugeo Fidei (Dagger of Faith). The ancient Hebrews had Yhwh for the sacred name of God, purposely written without vowels. Martini substituted the sacred term for God with the consonants Jhvh (possibly deriving this from the common latin term Jove), he then inserted the vowel points of Adonai or Elohim to contrive the first use of the term Jehovah.
---Eloy on 6/18/10|
1st cliff, that simply is not true: For in Exodus 6:3 the Hebrew literally has "Yhwh", and not Jehovah. Etymologically,the latinized or anglo name "Jesus" comes from the Greek "Iesous", which is from the Hebrew "Yeshuah", which is from the unvoweled Hebrew "Yhwh" as in Exodus 6:3. The name "Joshua" and "Jesus" are variants or variations, much like the two names "James" and "Jacob" are variants.
---Eloy on 6/18/10|
Agreed, Reba. We get what we say.
---fay on 6/17/10|
I've always felt that it's best to avoid using God's name except in a praise worthy fashion. Why hasn't Christians adopted the practice of using "buddha" or some other false god to use as slang. Why do we feel the need to follow the world & cheapen our Lord's Holy name as way to express our frustrations & anger. If we have to stoop to using slang at least choose something other than our Lord's name's & titles. And I'm not pointing a finger to anyone without pointing one at myself as well. I think we as children of God have really failed in this area of life. Extremely bad testimony on our part.
---Reba on 6/16/10|
Higgins pt.1 of 3, It was not King James, but Erasmus who hurried to publish the Greek New Testament. The King James translators did not use Erasmus first hasty translation, but they used Robert Stephanus (Estienne) 1551 A.D. and Theodore de Beza 1565, 1611 A.D. editions of the Textus Receptus, and also William Tyndales 1534 A.D. New Testament translation.
---Eloy on 6/17/10|
Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ:
I know this is off-topic a little, but I think it is no less pertinent.
One thing you all should consider, because it is both factual and true, is that the King James Version of Holy Scripture was hastily constructed. Many of you are probably not aware that King James wanted "his" translation done before Cardinal Jiminez completed his own.
King James' translator finished just ahead of the Cardinal, but at the cost of over 100,000 errors. In this case, accuaracy was sacrificed in the name of expediency. Did you know that the word "Jehovah" never existed before the King James version of 1611. It's true...it was an on-the-spot invention of a hurried translator.
---Higgins on 6/16/10|
Eloy, KJV at Ex.6.3 translates it as Jeho"vaH" that's why I used the "v"
Jesus did not come from Hebrew but "Iesus" in Latin. There's no "J" sound in Hebrew!
In Hebrew it's Yahushua ,same as Joshua!
---1st_cliff on 6/16/10|
1st cliff, There is no "V" in the ancient hebrew alphabet. His name is Yeshuah (Jesus, in anglo or english), and without vowels it is Yhwh.
---Eloy on 6/16/10|
|Read These Insightful Articles About Education
The lord's name is not "God" anymore than your name is "man"!
God is "what" He is ,not "who" he is!
His name is "YHVH" Ex.6.3. !
---1st_cliff on 6/16/10|
Mockery is speaking to intentionally dis, disgrace, hurt, ridicule, belittle, malign or blaspheme someone: but "jesting" is saying something to intentionally "humor" someone or to cause them to laugh. Also, saying OMG is not saying God's name in vain, for saying God's name in vain means saying his name without respect, without signification, and is indeed mocking him. When someone shouts OMG it is usually because something was perceived as beyond the normal, which relates to God being in the realm of "beyond normal" or supernatural. Taking God's name in vain would be like as Donna said, blaspheming him or mocking him, as saying the holy is unholy, the saint is sinner, Christ is the devil, and the truth is lie.
---Eloy on 6/15/10|
Eph 5:3 "But fornication, and all uncleanness, or covetousness, let it not be once named among you, as becometh saints,
Eph 5:4 Neither filthiness, nor foolish talking, nor jesting, which are not convenient: but rather giving of thanks."
It becomes difficult to curb habits but nonetheless important. Jesting in a sarcastic way is definitely unbecoming of saints."Let it not once be named among you." Words are so important. We get what we say.
---fay on 6/15/10|
God's name in vain, Taking His name or title that is being applied to Him and rendering it useless, nothing.
The biggest vanity is a person calling himself a christian but not acting the title.
'The largest single cause of atheism is christians, who confess Jesus with their mouths and deny Him by their lifestyle. This is what an unbelieving world simply finds unbelievable.'--DC Talk
As evident by our atheist blogger here.
---micha9344 on 6/15/10|
Yes, and you hear good Lord, God, I notice, and I do not like it. For sure so many people are gonna wish that they knew Him, on Judgment Day.
---catherine on 6/15/10|
Taking the Lord's name in vain means using it in ANY irreverent, disrespectful, vain(insignificant) manner. So, yes, saying OMG is the same. Any mention of God's name done without reverence for tha Holy name is dangerous.
---tommy3007 on 6/15/10|
Cluny-- I believe the same could be said of the French, "Mon Dieu"! To me, that is still taking the Lords' name in vain, so I would not do it in any language.
It's more a reflection of culture, than anything else, I think (i.e. native speakers do not consider it "profane"). Thus I'm not as offended if a Frenchman exclaims "mon Dieu" as when an American says "my God!"
Joking and mutual mockery is fine if engaged between eqauls. It can be very entertaining, a sharpening of the wit, if neither party takes it to heart. But one must be careful that the banter does not become serious lest someone really be hurt.
---Donna on 6/15/10|
We do to ourselves what we do to other people. If we have the desire to get on other people's cases (AGGRESSION AGAINST your neighbor), we will be self-persecuting also. We've pretty much all grown up learning the habit of saying "Oh my God". Many people can't resist the opportunity to get on a person's case for saying that, so we'll also get on our own case for that (it's called POETIC JUSTICE, God built poetic justice into EVERYTHING).
You can imagine how God feels after 2000 years that those who claim to love Him still don't know His name. His name is JESUS (God in entirety). "GOD" is His TITLE.
Jesus is ALL OF GOD..
"For in him the whole fulness of deity dwells bodily".
---more_excellent_way on 6/15/10|
Taking God's name in vain means, well let's see what vain means.
VAIN-DEFINITION: Having no real value or significance, worthless, empty, hollow, without force or effect, fruitless, unprofitable.
So I would say that saying OMG is NOT taking God's name in vain. Using it as a cuss word is definitely taking the Lord's name in vain.
---Donna5535 on 6/15/10|
In my high school Spanish book EL CAMINO REAL, from almost the beginning, the expression "por Dios" was used, with the explanation that it is considerably less strong in Spanish than the English calch would be.
It's more the equivalent of "goodness gracious!"
As far as jokes, the Lord Jesus wasn't above cracking a few himself.
---Cluny on 6/15/10|