bible belt language (Jackson, Pope: to rent, home, living)

[DeoGratias]

This is a violation of the second commandemnt - one should not use the Lord's name in vain. I would call your family admirable for trying to live up to the Christian ideal.

[poptones]

But the First Amendment outweighs the Second Commandment.

[jsherman9901]

After thinking on it for many years, I came to the conclusion that the common definition of "taking God's name in vain", i.e., saying "God" or "God d*mnit" is not necessarily a good definition. It all depends on what God's name really is, and the intent of the individual making the statement. If the intent of a statement is to curse or slander the Almighty, that would not be good. But, I believe that many other actions could be included in taking the Lord's name in vain. For example, for a televangelist or other preacher to say "if you give to my ministry, God will do thus-and-so for you" is IMO a form of taking the name of God in vain in an attempt to produce personal gain. I believe that ANYONE presuming to speak for God is taking His name in vain. JMO.

[joanie55]

Originally Posted by jsherman9901

After thinking on it for many years, I came to the conclusion that the common definition of "taking God's name in vain", i.e., saying "God" or "God d*mnit" is not necessarily a good definition. It all depends on what God's name really is, and the intent of the individual making the statement. If the intent of a statement is to curse or slander the Almighty, that would not be good. But, I believe that many other actions could be included in taking the Lord's name in vain. For example, for a televangelist or other preacher to say "if you give to my ministry, God will do thus-and-so for you" is IMO a form of taking the name of God in vain in an attempt to produce personal gain. I believe that ANYONE presuming to speak for God is taking His name in vain. JMO.

Your statement that it is all about the intent is entirely my point. A good friend of mine in Florida said to me today that she didn't think I said omg or dear lord that much, and she's never heard me say GD. I'm not really sure but I DO know I was trying to avoid saying "Oh f..." which I thought would be more offensive and which I am guilty of as well. My thought at this point is that sometimes I'm going to offend people no matter what I say, at least very religious people, that is. And my attitude right now is that God knows what I think and feel, so I'm going to look at it as their problem. I'm a very spiritual person and while I will try not to offend others with my language I'm not going to put a muzzle on myself either. I don't want to speak with a sense of trepidation all the time and I don't intend to. If people want to judge me, let them. They have no right. Only God has the right to do that, and that's according to anyone's religious faith.

[aiangel_writer]

Originally Posted by poptones

But the First Amendment outweighs the Second Commandment.

Not in the Deep South/Bible Belt.

Taking the Lord's name in vain is considered very bad. Many young people are doing it thinking it cool, yet they do not realize the implication of such utterances.

The Bible plainly states do not do this. And as we know him as God, Jesus, then using it as a swear word is not a wise thing to do.

[poptones]

No. Because your right to express those feelings is guaranteed by that amendment. People in nations without such freedoms are persecuted, imprisoned, and even put to death for expressing the very same thoughts and feelings you just expressed here.

One lord is not everyone's lord. That's the entire point.

[joanie55]

Originally Posted by aiangel_writer

Not in the Deep South/Bible Belt.

Taking the Lord's name in vain is considered very bad. Many young people are doing it thinking it cool, yet they do not realize the implication of such utterances.

The Bible plainly states do not do this. And as we know him as God, Jesus, then using it as a swear word is not a wise thing to do.

I think if they've been raised in the bible belt they very much know the implication but are using such language as a form of rebellion, which is normal for teenagers. And as far as the Bible plainly stating what not to do, it states a whole lot of things not to do that people do every day - that's why in traditional Christianity humans are considered sinners. That's why Catholics have confession. It's called being human.

[aiangel_writer]

True. Yet, as a Christian, I would feel very uneasy using the Lord's name in vain. I guess it is a form of respect to Him.

I have an aunt who uses it a lot, and it actually hurts my ears and makes me sad.

[joanie55]

Originally Posted by poptones

No. Because your right to express those feelings is guaranteed by that amendment. People in nations without such freedoms are persecuted, imprisoned, and even put to death for expressing the very same thoughts and feelings you just expressed here.

One lord is not everyone's lord. That's the entire point.

Amen.

[joanie55]

Originally Posted by aiangel_writer

True. Yet, as a Christian, I would feel very uneasy using the Lord's name in vain. I guess it is a form of respect to Him.

I have an aunt who uses it a lot, and it actually hurts my ears and makes me sad.

I understand your feelings, even though I don't feel the same way. Watching the nightly news personally makes me sad frequently. To constantly be bombarded with what I consider the atrocities that people commit on a daily basis sometimes depresses me to the point I don't even want to see the news. But that's life and I DO want to know what's going on in the world, even if I don't like it. I guess my point to you is that I consider using God's name in vain small potatoes in the grand scheme of what's going on in the world today. I just don't think it's worth people getting upset about or judging someone harshly over. But to each his own.