"Thou shalt not take the Lord's name in vain"?

[Vash the Stampede]

No, this commandment does NOT just mean "don't cuss". It seems to me that most of the theocrats and evangelists break the third commandment several times each day. They will use and abuse the name of the Lord for their own self-serving political and financial profit.

Then again, they pull the same bullshit with the American flag and 9/11 too, so it comes as little surprise.

 

[phreakwars]

I myself don't consider saying things like "GOD DAMMIT" as taking the lords name in vain.


I tend to side with the exact definition of vain:

vain: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=vain

adj 1: characteristic of false pride; having an exaggerated sense of self-importance; "a conceited fool"; "an attitude of self-conceited arrogance"; "an egotistical disregard of others"; "so swollen by victory that he was unfit for normal duty"; "growing ever more swollen-headed and arbitrary"; "vain about her clothes" [syn: conceited, egotistic, egotistical, self-conceited, swollen, swollen-headed] 2: unproductive of success; "a fruitless search"; "futile years after her artistic peak"; "a sleeveless errand"; "a vain attempt" [syn: bootless, fruitless, futile, sleeveless]

1. 
   [ ]Not yielding the desired outcome; fruitless: a vain attempt.
   [ ]Lacking substance or worth: vain talk.
   [ ]Excessively proud of one's appearance or accomplishments; conceited.
   [ ]Archaic. Foolish.

To me this means using the lords name as justification for a human action.

The phrase "ALLAH AK'BAR in itself is OK, but when used while committing an atrocity to humans is, in my opinion, A SIN !!


The phrase "GOD DAMMIT" only implies that it is your wish for the lord to "DAMN" the selected object/person. But does not imply justification or vanity to the lord.
.
.

 

[tizz]

Well I said it somewhere else but, I believe that the comandments are created by man to create order. Now here s little old moses, who is going to give him enough credit to do as he says? So.... he comes down and says these are the devine laws of gad and that man must follow them. He throws in the god law just to give it more credit. There are BTW many more commandments but they are truly written to keep order and health aming the poeple.... Don't eat meat on teh third day, leave some of your harvest for teh animals and teh poor, round your crop do not plant in a squared field blah blah blah... I would give more examples but I have no ideq where my bible is and I hate reading that much on my monitor (My eyes are bad enough)

 

[Mohammed_Rots_In_Hell]

I agree with both Vash and Phreak on this one! Well said.. both of you!

 

[Outlaw2747]

Goddamn (or gotdamn as some people say it) is just a statement. Nothing more and nothing less. People should put a bigger emphasis on what is really important and not some damn "forbidden" word.

 

[Vash the Stampede]

Modern Western religion was entirely created to seize control over people. The origins of religion can be traced back to caveman days, when people prayed to gods for a better harvest. As part of the natural evolution and job specialization movement, you soon saw people who became specialists in praying to the gods. Since there was such a heavy reliance on the gods for mere survival, these priests soon became the leaders of the tribe/town, whether formally or informally.

What was problematic about the original polytheistic system, however, was the fact that there were too many priests wielding too little power. The god of agriculture would certainly be followed by the farmers, but that god's word was not taken as law by, say, the fishermen or warriors. Some incredibly brilliant and shrewd person realized that if you place all the power in the hands of one god, you could then easily centralize power into one person - the high priest. There would be no more quibbling over who's god was right or wrong and the high priest would have absolute power over the tribe. And so, Judaism was born.

Of course, you have non-believers to deal with, and the more liberal your laws, the less people are apt to be robotic followers. You also wind up with too many people to rule, some of them being ambitious and savvy themselves. Thus, once you have enough dissatisfied, or underrepresented, people, you wind up with someone new trying to seize a chunk of power for himself. And thus, Christianity was born. Christianity learned some of the lessons of Judaism and made many more restrictive laws. They also instituted the heaven and hell to keep people in line. Of course, Christianity itself continued to factionalize itself into many different sect, each with a different set of leaders and adherents. You can see this best laid out in the United States colonies. The pilgrims came to the New World because the Church of England wasn't "pure" enough for them. Then you have the Calvinists and Roger Williams who broke off from that group to form their own version of the religion. It is no coincidence that this happened only once towns started prospering and a larger number of people were without power. This continued without fail until the Churches were so factionalized that none of them truly held much power because there were not enough people to go around. This lead to a greater secularization of society. However, there were still two groups of overwhelming power in the United States - political parties. No where else can you find a handful of people leading around 60 million adherents. Yet Christianity and Republicanism have never really gone hand in hand. Giving to your neighbor and treating the least of you as you would God himself are much closer to the tenets of the Democratic party (let's face it - those are socialistic doctrines). Some other power was at work there - the hatred of Catholics in particular. As soon as John F. Kennedy was nominated by the Democrats, it was a wake up call to millions of protestants, and the largely minority Republican party preyed upon that discontent. They started bathing themselves in the church, welcoming in many people who believed they had lost the power they once had. It was the same reason that drove factionalization, yet the conservatives found a way to make it run counter intuitively. Of course, the true conservatives never fancied themselves as religious folks, and they still don't today, which accounts for the burgeoning war for the soul of the Republican Party.

You also then have the next evolution of Judaism, which is Islam. The founders of Islam preyed on the fact that Arabs had no religion of their own and held a natural revulsion to European culture. These facts made it easy to form their own version of Judaism, and they made it the most restrictive of all (there is no coincidence that there are many Islamic regimes in the world).

Organized religion has always been about control and power. Nothing more.

 

[Jhony5]

Posted by Vash the Stampede: Modern western religion was entirely created to seize control over people.

I think the control aspect goes back a little farther then western applications. If anything it became less controling as x-tianity traveled west.

Organized religion has always been about control and power.

Thats more like it,fella.
About 10 years ago I was clocking out at work and I noticed that my hours were wrong so I said "gaddammit". This older guy says to me in a angry father way "Do not use the lords name in front of me again or well have a problem". So I said "are you a christian?". He says "I sure am, and you just offended me". So I said to him "then forgive god dammit".
Needless to say he got pissed and we almost came to blows and we both got repremanded by our boss. The point being I have seen this attitude from other x-tians and it seems trivial for them to impose their beliefs on strangers.

 

[tizz]

johnny

Well if someone politely asks you not to say certain things in front of them, would it really be so hard to hold your tounge? Simply socail manners I would think. I don't think it is an imposition to ask a person not to use certain language in their presence and if you do a simple apology is nice. I know as a smoker I don't smoke in the faces of those who don't, and as a parent I have politely asked people to refrain from using certain racial terms in front of my daughter in fear that she will repeat them without understanding them. You are beiginning to sound like a smart assed teenager. If that were the case I would not only tolerate but expect it. But I thought you were older than that.

 

[Jhony5]

johnny

Well if someone politely asks you not to say certain things in front of them, would it really be so hard to hold your tounge? Simply socail manners I would think. I don't think it is an imposition to ask a person not to use certain language in their presence and if you do a simple apology is nice. I know as a smoker I don't smoke in the faces of those who don't, and as a parent I have politely asked people to refrain from using certain racial terms in front of my daughter in fear that she will repeat them without understanding them. You are beiginning to sound like a smart assed teenager. If that were the case I would not only tolerate but expect it. But I thought you were older than that.

I was 22 when this run-in with the speech police occured. Polite is a key word. That guy used a condesending tone with me for saying goddammit. He repremanded me and even loosely threatened me. Did you not comprehend my post or what? If he were to have said "excuse me, i'm religious and I would appreciate it if you didn't say that in front of me" then I would have been cool with him. He told me we were going to have a problem. Say that to me and we have a problem, with the quickness. If we weren't at work he would have gotten swung on just for speaking to me in that manner.

Do you follow me?

 

[tizz]

Well seeing as the guy was older, and slightly condescending and fatherly tone might be expected. Just has I said I might expect a rash tone from a younger person, I was once that younger person (though I had grown out of it by 22). Can you blame a guy for looking at a younger kid after a day of work (you did say clocking out) and perhaps being fed up with the attitudes of a younger generation. Besides you speak now as if you would behave the same way, so I am assuming you have the same attitudes.

Like it or not there are differences between teh generations, and realizing that makes it a lot easier to deal with those differences and to take the high road when confronted.

 

[Jhony5]

Well seeing as the guy was older, and slightly condescending and fatherly tone might be expected. Just has I said I might expect a rash tone from a younger person, I was once that younger person (though I had grown out of it by 22). Can you blame a guy for looking at a younger kid after a day of work (you did say clocking out) and perhaps being fed up with the attitudes of a younger generation. Besides you speak now as if you would behave the same way, so I am assuming you have the same attitudes.

Like it or not there are differences between teh generations, and realizing that makes it a lot easier to deal with those differences and to take the high road when confronted.

I understand what your saying, however. Before people open their mouth to openly critisize a stranger they might want to stop and think first. In the workplace you never know who your dealing with or what kind of enviroment they grew up in. Me, I grew up in very rough neighborhoods on the westside of Tucsan Arizona and Mars Hill Indiana. In these hoods I developed a thick skin and a penchant for defending my words with violence. You may call it imature but I call it being a man. If a guy that I don't ****ing know tells me that we are going to have a problem if I don't obey his wishes then he just put himself in a comprimising position. He put himself between his mouth and my fists, KAPEESH. Normaly i'm a very kind and respectful guy. Tread on me though, and we go to the next level.

 

[Gentilhomme]

So you were (or are) the type that likes to get in a scruffle about shite? I'm not one to support unecessary violence, especially over something so trivial as a "Listen here BOY" comment. I was brought up into Martial Arts, benn at it since i was eight and under the instruction of one of the best humans-beings i've ever met, and we were always told to be the bigger man when it came to **** like that (and if things did get rough then end it as quickly as possible whaile causeing as little harm as possible), this is where i'm coming form. I simply refuse to humour idiots and jerks with my attention, infact i'm most polite to people i dislike, i don't bother talking to them in any but simple "G'days" and "thank yous" but this is off topic now

Thou shall not take the lords name in vain? Well yah i agree with Tizz that if somebody is really offended and makes that case clear then you may as well just hold your tounge a bit, i'm not saying let people rule you but you can take into consideration their beliefs. Kinda like the "Always be prepared to yield" rule when your driving (although i somehow doubt we all follow that motto) But this is also a religious rule pretaining only to its follwers and folks shouldn't be restricted by it just because somebody else is. I think tolerence must go both ways, when somebody else says it or somebody else NOT saying it to be polite.

 

[Jhony5]

I think tolerence goes both ways.

Exactly. In this instance he did not extend tolerence to me, rather hostility over a trivial statement not directed at any individual. Thus tolerence was not extended to him, rather hostility. I saw this as an invasion of my personal space. My statement to him, "then forgive me god dammit", was a direct challenge to detect his level of tolerence. How can you two justify a christian being disiplinary and challenging over something as trivial as "god dammit"? Please explain.

 

[tizz]

Well challenging someone's tolerance just always works, not mentions shows such maturity. Again, I would expect that out of a 22 year old but you still sound like you would do the same thing all over. I have to ask, are you a fight fire with fire, two wrongs eventually come out right kind of person?

 

[Jhony5]

Well challenging someone's tolerance just always works, not mentions shows such maturity. Again, I would expect that out of a 22 year old but you still sound like you would do the same thing all over. I have to ask, are you a fight fire with fire, two wrongs eventually come out right kind of person?

Yep!

Talk **** to me and its on. Sounds like i'm talking **** but if you knew me and where i've been and what i've done, you'd understand. I would do the same thing over again. Passive resistence will get you nowhere. People in our society respect power, and power is asserted through force. I walk the talk, baby. Nice guys finish last. Me, i'd knock your slow ass over to escape a burning building. I might even steal your wallet/purse in all the confusion. While your burning to a crisp, i'm alive and a few dollars richer.

 

[tizz]

power is gained and maintained only through respect. Acting like a punked up teen will never gain you the respect f your peers past high school. There are better ways to manipulate situations and gain respect. And being the only one to survive the fire and with a few extra bucks will get you nowhere in the real world or the long run. Regardless of ones experience, we are all still ultimately responsible for our own choices.

 

[Jhony5]

And you suppose to know my peers? My peers are a tight knit group of guys i've been friends with for 20 or more years. We don't go around picking fights like teenagers. Just because someone will stand up for themselves does not make them immature. Maybe in your world, but not in mine. This ain't tough talk, its my reality. I get along with most people great. I've had people that I don't know ask me to not smoke around them and I gladly complied. It was their tone that decided my response. I did have one lady walk up to me when I was on a payphone and bitch at me for smoking so close to an entrance to a store. She said " put that filthy cigarette out now or i'm going to tell the manager of the store". So what did I do? I blew smoke in her face and told her to "suck my dick you dirty ****". Now before you pop a gasket keep in mind I chose the harshest words I could because she was ****ing practicaly begging me to give it to her. Again, its the tone and respect offered. You keep making mention of respect but in these instances i've mentioned, both times, I was from the start treated with disrespect. So why was my disrespectful retort inappropriate?

 

[tizz]

So if someone is rude to you, you don't have the strength and self worth to rise above their rudeness and respond in teh respectful way they were unable to? It seems to me that best way to both point out someone's fault as well as guide them in toward better behaviour is to lead by example. Put it this way, wouldn't she have felt like a fool had you responded ina polite and respectful way? Disrespect and insulting behaviour is just wrong and has no justification. Again we are back to two wrongs making a right. It is so simple. If this impresses your peers I am glad I don't know them. I feel sorry for you that your reality is filled with such negativity by your own choosing. Take the high road and consider it a personal moral victory over the ignorance of others

 

[Jhony5]

So if someone is rude to you, you don't have the strength and self worth to rise above their rudeness and respond in teh respectful way they were unable to? It seems to me that best way to both point out someone's fault as well as guide them in toward better behaviour is to lead by example. Put it this way, wouldn't she have felt like a fool had you responded ina polite and respectful way? Disrespect and insulting behaviour is just wrong and has no justification. Again we are back to two wrongs making a right. It is so simple. If this impresses your peers I am glad I don't know them. I feel sorry for you that your reality is filled with such negativity by your own choosing. Take the high road and consider it a personal moral victory over the ignorance of others

Wouldn't she have felt like a fool had you responded in a polite and respectful way?

Are you kidding. Lady, we live in a very selfish and conceited society. If I had treated her with respect for being disrespectful then she would most definitly have felt empowered. She would have, in the same way as a child learns, learned that this is how you deal with smokers. You step to them and tell them how it is with anger and disrespect.

I am not saying that we should all be selfish and conceited because most people are that way. I'm saying when assholes step to you with an attitude you will do little but feed their ego by being obedient to their pushy attitude.

I'm sorry, however for making that statement about the burning building. That was uncool and I really wouldn't do that. In reality I would be the first guy to pull over in a snow storm and help you push your car out if it was stuck. What i'm trying to convey is that when I have an issue with someones behavior I approach them respectfully, therefor I expect the same in return.

For instance there was a couple of teenagers in front of me in line at the store and I had my 5 year old daughter with me. These kids were cursing like drunk sailors and I could tell it made my little girl uncomfortable. I asked them calmly to please not do that in front of my kid. They acknowledeged and stoped cursing. Had I told them off and got tough with them they likely would have told me to go **** myself.

 

[fullauto]

I tend to think that 'don't take my name in vain' as meaning

1. Don't claim credit for something I have done or
2. Don't attribute things to me that I have not done....

I don't think it has anything to do with cussing...