Exodus - Lesson 20

Dr. Carmen Imes 
Exodus 
OT605-20 
Second Commandment
Lesson Transcript

So if you adopt the numbering system that I suggested in our last session, then we've come to the second commandment, which is the command not to take the Lord's name in vain. Now, most Christians who grow up knowing about this command think of it as a prohibition of using God's name as a swear word. And so then Christians come up with all kinds of substitute swear words.

We say, Oh my gosh, instead of, Oh my God, or we say, um, G Willikers instead of Jesus or whatever, whatever substitute words that we use. Um, I'm here to tell you that no ancient Near Easterner was dumb enough to use God, a divine name as a swear word. They understood that there's power in a divine name and that it can't be used lightly.

It doesn't seem to me that God felt, would have felt the need to protect his name in that particular way, that that was what it was, was vulnerable of experiencing this kind of flippant use or use as a swear word. So how would I read it? Well, I actually wrote my dissertation on this commandment. I spent five years digging into it from every conceivable angle.

And so what I want to do today is to argue that we've been reading it wrong, that it's much broader and much more important than what we've given it credit for being. And that, that misunderstanding that we have of this command as something that prohibits using God's name as a swear word, or maybe using it in oath taking is based on a mistranslation of the command to begin with. And so I'm going to show you how I think we should translate it and why I think this fits in with the wider message of the book of Exodus.

And I hope that you'll agree by the end that this is such an inspiring commandment because it connects to some of the themes we've already been talking about. So if you read this command in Hebrew, it surprisingly doesn't say, you shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, it says lo tisa et shem Adonai Elohei halashav. So lo tisa doesn't mean you shall not take, it's you shall not lift up or carry.

To nasah something is to carry it with you. So most translators have come to this verse and they've said, well, that doesn't make sense, we don't carry names, so this must be an idiom for something else. So they, they try to see whether it's an idiom or figure of speech or whether something's dropped out and is being assumed.

And they propose all sorts of ways of making sense of this because they decide from the outset, it doesn't make sense to carry or lift up a name. Most of them decide that it's elliptical, that is that something dropped out of the sentence or is being assumed. So you shall not lift up the name of Yahweh in vain.

They, they would supply, some of them would supply the word hand, you shall not lift up your hand to the name, that is you shall not swear by the name Yahweh. Swearing an oath that either you don't intend to keep or swearing an oath, so swearing an oath to do something that you don't do or not to do something that you end up doing or swearing an oath that's inappropriate in some other way. The oath-taking interpretation of this command is by far the most common throughout the history of interpretation.

The problem is there's nothing, it never says hand in this passage. The word oath does not occur here and nowhere else do we have this expression, lift up the name of Yahweh, used to mean oath-taking in another passage. So it really is a stretch in my view to to read this as a command against taking oaths.

It also creates a very awkward double direct object in Hebrew because the name of Yahweh is clearly marked as the direct object of the sentence. So if you're going to insert hand then you have two direct objects, you shall not lift up your hand the name, which doesn't make sense grammatically. And it is true that sometimes figures of speech are grammatically unusual, but I don't think we need to resort to that argument here.

Another common interpretation or attempt to try to make this make sense is you shall not lift up the name of Yahweh on your lips in vain, that is you shouldn't say it in a way that's inappropriate. And so then interpreters suggest all sorts of ways that people might say the name inappropriately, that is to say it flippantly or to say it in the wrong location that is outside the temple or for the wrong person to say it, that is someone who's not a priest. Or I've even heard one interpreter who says you shall not lift up the name on your lips in vain means you shall not worship Yahweh empty-handedly.

To come with emptiness or in vain would be to approach Yahweh to worship but not bring a sacrifice. And so that's his interpretation. What I want to suggest we think about instead is what if the name command is not elliptical? What if nothing dropped out? What if it actually makes sense as it's written in Hebrew? You shall not lift up or carry the name of Yahweh in vain.

What would that mean? And is there any evidence from the historical context that would help us make sense of this? Is there any evidence from the literary context that would help us make sense of this? And what would be the theological takeaway? So we're hitting again all three legs of the three-legged stool that I introduced in the first session. We want to think about historical context, literary design, and theological themes. So first the historical context of the name command.

There are three primary venues in which we encounter divine names in the ancient Near East. First we can find them in official seals, and by seals I mean like a signet ring that's been engraved with the name of its bearer that's then used to stamp in wax or clay as an authorized signature. We have examples of official seals from ancient times with the divine name written on it saying belonging to such and such a god, belonging to Kos, belonging to Marduk, for example.

And these seals would have been owned and used by temple officials to mark official documents, temple documents, or they would have been brought and dedicated as a votive offering to a deity. But this is a seal that carries or bears a divine name. Another place we see divine names is in stone inscriptions, especially related to buildings.

So if you're going to build a temple and you're going to dedicate it to, say, Baal, then you would first create a tablet, etch into a tablet belonging to Baal, and you would bury the tablet under the foundation of the temple to dedicate it to Baal. So the bearing of the name then implies a dedication to that god's service, and it implies that the temple belongs to Baal, therefore he is going to take care of it. He won't let anything bad happen to it because he's the god who authorized its building in the first place.

The third place that we see divine names is in human branding. This is a bit outside of our experience because although tattoos are pretty common, brands for humans are not so common in our generation. So branding happened particularly with slaves.

If you were a slave to someone, your owner might brand you with their name either on your hand or on your face or even on your forehead. But we see this with divine names in the case of temple servants. So someone who's dedicated to the service of a deity for the duration of their life would then be branded or tattooed with that god's name or symbol.

It's hard to find a lot of evidence for this in the ancient world because most decayed bodies don't show still the evidence of brands or tattoos, although in some cases they do. But we have textual evidence that, for example, the servants or priestesses of Ishtar, the goddess Ishtar, would have been branded with her symbol on their hand or on their face to show that they belonged to her and they were dedicated to her service. So they literally bore her name and they carried that with them.

So if something, whether it's a seal or stone inscription or a human brand, if something carries a god's name, it implies ownership. It implies that the deity owns this person or this entity. It implies sovereignty over that entity and an obligation to protect whatever was inscribed.

So, for example, we have one text of a letter to an Egyptian ruler who had laid claim to Jerusalem. This is part of the Amarna letters. So the letter's in Aramaic and the letter was, your name is on Jerusalem so come protect it.

I'm paraphrasing here. But the idea is that because the king had claimed Jerusalem as his own, it was his responsibility to make sure that it wasn't vulnerable to outside attack. It bore his name and therefore he had an obligation to protect it.

And the other side of this is that the god's reputation was then bound up with the fate of what he or she owned. So if Baal's temple goes into disrepair, it sure looks like Baal's not a very powerful god because Baal isn't taking very good care of the property he owns. If Ishtar's servants start to waste away and get sick, then Ishtar isn't taking care of those who are dedicated to her service.

And if Jerusalem is in ruins, then the king who's laid claim to it is not a very good king. So this historical context is very interesting to consider in light of a command that says you shall not carry the name of Yahweh your God in vain. If the people of God are in fact bearing or carrying his name, that is, if he's claimed them that they belong to him, then their fate is a reflection on his power.

The wider literary context of the name command lends itself to reading it in this way. We've already talked about Exodus 19 verses 4 through 6 where God calls the Israelites his segala, his treasured possession, that he's appointed them to represent him through loyal service. We could even say he's placed his name on them to claim them as his own.

If I wanted you to know that this was my Bible and not yours, I could put, I could have my name engraved right here. And if I was an ancient Israelite, the way I would do that is I would write the letter Lamed plus my name. I would write La Carmen because Lamed is the way that you claim that something belongs to you.

We've already mentioned the seals or signet rings that were in use in the ancient world. Most of the ones that have an inscription of a word on it, it's a name with the Lamed in front of it saying belonging to. So if I had a signet ring here instead of my wedding band, it would say La Carmen and I could stamp it in things to let everyone know this belongs to me.

I've authorized it. And what is so fascinating to me is that in just a few chapters, we'll encounter the instructions for building the tabernacle, which is where the presence of God will come to dwell among the Israelites. And among those instructions are extensive plans for how to make the garments that the high priest will wear.

And the high priest, we're told, will carry the names of the Israelites on his body. So if you turn to Exodus chapter 28, we have very lengthy instructions on how to make these clothing, these pieces of clothing. So there's an ephod, which is a special apron with attached to the shoulder pieces of the high priest robe.

And on the front of the ephod is a pocket that carries the Urim and Thummim in it for decision making. And on the outside of this pouch are going to be 12 gemstones. And it says here in Exodus 28 verse 9, take two onyx stones and engrave on them the names of the sons of Israel in the order of their birth, six names on one stone and the remaining six on the other.

Engrave the names of the sons of Israel on the two stones the way a gem cutter engraves a seal. In other words, Lamed plus the name. Then mount the stones in gold filigree settings and fasten them on the shoulder pieces of the ephod as memorial stones for the sons of Israel.

And then it says Aaron is to bear the names on his shoulders as a memorial before Yahweh. That is the same phrase that we have in the name command. Aaron is to bear the names on his body and Israel is not to bear the name of Yahweh in vain.

So it seems to me that we should be paying attention to this use of the same phrase in the same book at the same location, Sinai, the same context to help us understand what it means. Apparently names can be carried. The high priest does so.

We also see if we flip to the end of the chapter that Aaron has a special headdress on his head. And on the front of his headdress it says you shall make a medallion of pure gold and engrave on it again like the engraving of a signet wholly belonging to Yahweh. You shall fasten it on the turban with a blue cord and it shall be on the front of the turban.

Now this the phrase bearing the name doesn't occur in relation to the this medallion on Aaron's forehead, but it specifically uses exactly what we would expect to find on a signet ring, Kadosh L'Yahweh. So it's the divine name Yahweh with the Lamed. Here's the phrase in Hebrew, Kadosh L'Yahweh, and you can see there's the divine name Yahweh in the circle.

In that Lamed, the letter L in Hebrew is attached to the front of it and it means belonging to Yahweh. So he's set apart in his role as high priest. He represents Yahweh to the people.

He's set apart for Yahweh's service and he belongs to Yahweh. And it says so right on his forehead. Now does it make any sense to take what we know of the high priest and what he's wearing and to apply it more broadly to the nation as a whole? Is this a legitimate way of thinking about it? Well if we fast forward to Deuteronomy 26, we can see that this is precisely what Moses does.

He says to the people, again this is the next generation just before they enter the promised land, he says Yahweh has had you declare yourselves this day to be his Segillah, his treasured people, just as he said to you. So you shall keep his commands and he shall set you high over all the nations that he has made for praise, for fame, and for honor, and to be a people wholly belonging to Yahweh your God, just as he said. And here we have the exact same phrase that it that's written on the high priest's medallion, but now it's a people wholly belonging to Yahweh.

That is, God thinks about Israel the way he thinks about the high priest. Just as the high priest is set apart for God's service, so the nation of Israel is set apart for God's service. And we already encountered that in chapter 19 when God told them that they were his Segillah to represent him among the nations.

Remember what he also said in that moment, he said you will be for me a kingdom of priests. So in my mind it's not a stretch for us to look at the priestly garments and what God says about Aaron and then see how is this relevant for the people. After all they're a kingdom of priests, so to use priestly language and priestly ideas to think about the vocation of the nation as a whole to me is fully appropriate.

What this means is that Aaron becomes a visual model of what's true of every Israelite. We can see this clearly in Numbers chapter 6 verses 24 to 27. This is a very familiar part of the book of Numbers that's tucked in a book that's less familiar to most of us.

It's the priestly blessing. So this is what the high priest pronounces to people after he's performed sacrifices in the temple or in the tabernacle. He comes and brings this blessing to the nation and we've heard it probably in church so many times.

Yahweh says to Moses, tell Aaron and his sons this is how you are to bless the Israelites. Say to them, and notice it's using the divine name three times, may Yahweh bless you and keep you. May Yahweh make his face shine on you and be gracious to you.

May Yahweh turn his face toward you and give you peace. That's where we usually stop but the very next verse, verse 27 reads, so they will put my name on the Israelites and I will bless them. That is to say in the moment of the priestly blessing Aaron, the one who literally bears God's name on his forehead saying that he belongs to Yahweh, is verbally placing God's name on the entire nation.

Yahweh, Yahweh, Yahweh, and it by doing so he is putting Yahweh's name on the Israelites. Is it any wonder then that God tells his people not to carry his name in vain, not to lift up, not to bear his name in vain? After all the context has made clear they are a people who belong to Yahweh. They bear his name.

What would it mean to bear God's name in vain? Well if they claim to be the people who belong to Yahweh and yet they go out and they live no differently than the Canaanites and the Perizzites and the Hittites and the Jebusites, if they worship the gods of those nations, if they engage in adultery and murdering and stealing and bearing false witness, if they treat the Sabbath just like any other day, if they bow down to these other gods and make images of them, these are things that are not supposed to be true of the Israelite society. Because they belong to Yahweh, they're to live differently. They're to only worship Yahweh.

They're to bear his name well. They're to honor the Sabbath. They're to honor their parents and they're to not murder.

They're to protect the life and property and marriage and reputation of their neighbor. And so to belong to Yahweh implies a different kind of life. And so to bear God's name in vain would be to not take that vocation seriously.

I don't know if you've ever wondered why this command appears so high on the list of the Ten Commandments. If you take the command not to take the Lord's name in vain as a prohibition against using God's name as a swear word or taking a false oath, then doesn't it belong further down on the list? Along with not bearing false witness or not coveting, it seems like the way we've traditionally interpreted this command would make it belong lower on the list. But instead what we have is second in line.

First, we're worshiping only Yahweh, and second, we are told not to misrepresent him. This is huge. It's much bigger than what we say with our lips, although it includes that.

It encompasses everything we do. Israel bears Yahweh's name and thereby represents Yahweh among the nations. That's the theological theme that's beginning here, and once you see this, you won't be able to unsee it.

You'll find it throughout the rest of the canon. I sat down and read it through the entire Bible. Okay, it wasn't in one sitting, but I read through the entire Bible looking at this theme.

What are the passages that imply that Israel bears God's name and represents him? And I found it in almost every book of the Bible. So you might not have heard this command talked about like this before, but now that you've seen it, you'll find that this is a major theme through the rest of the Bible. It's a wonder that we've missed it.

The point of the second command is proper representation of Yahweh by his people. And as you're looking through the rest of the Bible, and you're going to see this in other places, let me give you just a couple of examples of where this comes up. Psalm 23 is a beloved psalm.

You've heard it many times. And in Psalm 23, it reads, He guides me along the right paths for his name's sake. And I don't know if you've ever stopped to ask yourself, what does his namesake have to do with anything? What does it mean that God leads me in paths of righteousness for his namesake? Well, if I am a person who belongs to the community that bears Yahweh's name, then my walking in paths of righteousness, that is me living according to God's righteous decrees and being a person of integrity and treating others well, that has an implication for God's reputation.

His name or his reputation is at stake by the way I live. And you don't have to flip through very many news channels or look at very many websites to see examples, to find examples of prominent Christians who have sinned egregiously, and therefore people are responding, Christians are a bunch of hypocrites. You can't listen to those people.

They don't do what they say they believe. They don't live consistently with their testimony. When a prominent pastor is found guilty of sexual abuse or embezzlement of funds or abuse, other abuses of power, people stand back and say, yeah, those Christians, you can't trust them.

And I don't know about this Christian God. This all seems like a bunch of bunk to me. So we've seen how this works its way out in the public square.

Our behavior as followers of Jesus has huge implications for the reputation of God and for the reputation of the church. Let me give you one more example that's pretty common. 2 Chronicles 7, verse 14.

This is in the dedication of the temple when Solomon's dedicating the temple. And he says, and God actually appears to him and says this, when I shut up the heavens so there's no rain or command locusts to devour the land or send a plague among my people, if my people who are called by my name will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven and I will forgive their sin and I will heal their land. We love this verse.

We love to call the people of God to a time of serious prayer, knowing that when we humble ourselves and pray, he'll hear us. But have you ever stopped to listen, to ask yourself, what does it mean to be called by his name? What does that even mean? And in Hebrew here, it's, if my people over whom my name has been proclaimed will humble themselves and pray, then I will hear from heaven and heal their land. That is to say, in the priestly blessing, the name of God has been declared over the people of God.

They belong to him. And because they belong to him, he listens to their prayers. They can pray and he will answer.

We talked in a previous session about the covenant formula. I will take you as my own people and I will be your God. We saw evidence of this in chapter six, verses six through eight, where God makes the seven, I will statements.

And he says, I will take you as my own people and I will be your God. We talked about how that mutual commitment and loyalty is known as the covenant formula. Well, if we count the commands the way I've suggested that we do, and if we understand this command in the way of representing God, then we have, as the first two commands of the Decalogue, a recap of the covenant formula.

Command number one is worship no other gods. In other words, I will be your God. I'm the only God for you.

And command number two is don't misrepresent Yahweh. That is, you are my people. You're my people.

You represent me and don't live like you don't belong to me. So I hope this has helped to reframe this command. It is way more important than just what comes out of our mouth or how we use the name of God.

Any questions? So the same question I asked in the previous, how would you say it succinctly? What is the word? Do not misrepresent me. That's what I would say. Do not misrepresent Yahweh.

Yeah. And this is really interesting to track on into the New Testament and to think about Jesus' relationship with this command. Because Jesus comes as one who is very conscious of the fact that he bears God's name and he wants to do it well.

So just to give one example, in the Lord's prayer when he's teaching his disciples how to pray, he says, our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name. And as a kid, I thought that was a little odd. Like, isn't God's name already holy? Why do we need to pray to make it holy? But Jesus understands that when the people of God live in violation of the covenant, it actually profanes God's name.

That's how the prophets put it. Ezekiel 36, the whole chapter is about the problem of God's name having been profaned because the people sinned and went into exile. And that negatively impinges on God's reputation.

And so for Jesus to pray, hallowed be your name, isn't just like, wow, God, your name is holy. He's praying that it would be made holy. And by doing that, he's committing himself to participating in the making of the re-sanctification of God's name.

He understands that we impact the way God's name is held by those around us.