Bearing the Name: An Examination of the Third Commandment – Part 5

F.  Israel’s Positive Responsibility

The third commandment can be understood best by examining Israel’s positive responsibilities towards God’s name and reputation.  Israel was to be a light to the nations.[1] Just prior to the Decalogue Israel was said to be a kingdom of priests and a people who were specially set apart.[2] Deuteronomy 28:9-10 states, “the Lord will establish you as a people holy to himself, as he has sworn to you, if you keep the commandments of the Lord your God and walk in his ways.  And all the peoples of the earth shall see that you are called by the name of the Lord, and they shall be afraid of you” (ESV).    Israel is called to be a unique people and represent God to the nations around them.  Israel is called by God’s name, so that the reputation of Yahweh is linked with the reputation of Israel.  Israel was thus primarily responsible to bring praise, glory and honor the character and reputation of God in the world.  They were to accomplish this by living according to the prescriptions He gave them at Sinai.  Bearing God’s name then is not limited to false oaths, or to syncretistic worship practices.  Rather the third command states that Israel is not to bear God’s name in a manner that falsely represents Him to the world.

This understanding of the third commandment is connected to other key theological themes in the Old Testament.  First, it is tied to image theology of Genesis 1-3 and Genesis 9.  Man is seen to be responsible to God as his vice-regent on earth.  Israel through their keeping of the commandments is to be the image of God par excellence in the world.  Second, it is tied to the call of Abraham to be the agent through whom blessing would come (Gen 12).  By entering into this covenant with Yahweh, Israel has assumed the responsibility of representing Yahweh to the world.  They are to be His agent of blessing and so must bear His name in accordance with His character.  Third, it is tied to the suzerain-vassal treaty made with Abraham (Gen 15).  Israel as God’s vassal has an obligation to represent well their suzerain.  Representing the divine name in such a way that it is viewed as worthless or false would bring dishonor and scorn to God.

F.  Divine Defense of the Name

What is at stake in the third commandment is then the maligning of the character and reputation of God through the misuse of His name and misrepresentation of His character.  The warning at the end of the command strengthens this understanding.  The command states, “for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes his name in vain” (ESV).  The essence of the warning in this command is that God will judge those who malign His name in any way.  The divine defense of the name is stated clearly as a warning against behaving in any way that might bring dishonor to the name of God and thus to the character and reputation of God.

Conclusion

The third commandment is fundamentally a prohibition of misrepresenting God.  This misrepresentation of God could come in any number of ways.  It could include flippant and irreverent speech about God, thus revealing a lack of respect for Him and giving the world a low view of a great God.  The command would also prohibit swearing falsely by God’s name, thus making God appear to be a liar.  The prohibition would also include syncretistic practices in worship for such practices indicate that God is not sufficient in what He can provide and offer to His people.  But the prohibition would also include any action or word that speaks falsely about the character of God.  Thus, Christians today could break the third commandment when they preach a gospel that is legalistic or moralistic.  Christians today could break the third commandment when they use Scripture to further their own agendas, making God out to be a leveraging device to gain political or social prestige.  The third commandment could be broken by those who preach a health, wealth and prosperity gospel, for they misrepresent the character of God to a world that is broken and lost.  But the third commandment can also be broken by believers who fail to indicate by their lifestyles that they are a people set apart to God.  When the church looks like the world it is misrepresenting God to the world and it is this misrepresentation that lies at the heart of the third commandment.

---

[1] Isa 42:6-7; 49:6.

[2] Ex 19:5-6.

Bearing the Name: An Examination of the Third Commandment – Part 4

D.  Bearing a Name: תִשָּׂא אֶת־שֵׁם־יהוה אֱלֹהֶיךָ

The above discussion has highlighted the prominence of names in the Ancient Near Eastern world and in the Bible.  The name of the Lord was seen to be connected however, to His reputation and character.  But now it must be examined what bearing a name means.

The word נָשָׂא means to bear or to lift.  Negatively it could refer to a person elevating themselves in pride. It could also refer to a person lifting up their voice for lament or for praise.  Many people assume that the lifting up of God’s name in Exodus 20:7 refers to the lifting up of His name in oaths and cross reference Exodus 20:7 with Leviticus 19:12.  However, if this were so one would expect the verbs in both cases to be the same.  Since the verbs are different it seems best not to limit the third commandment to being only an injunction against false oaths.

The verb נָשָׂא is used in conjunction with other words to refer to the lifting of one’s voice in lamentation (Jer 7:29, Ezek 27:2, 30).[1] Psalm 16:4 uses the verb נָשָׂא in the phrase, “take their names on my lips” (ESV).  The point is that while נָשָׂא is often used in reference to speech acts it is by no means limited to acts of speech.  This means that while the third commandment may prohibit taking false oaths in the Lord’s name, and may guard against the inappropriate use of God’s name in religious practices it need not be limited to those things.  This argument is strengthened by the lack of verbal parallels between the third commandment and the taking of oaths.  The difference in verbs is one which must be explained.  The appeal to Leviticus 19:12 is intriguing but in the holiness code it is the holiness of the name of God (i.e. His holy character) that is the basis for all of the ethical actions prescribed, not just those involving oaths.  There is also nothing implicit in the command that that demands it relate to cultic practice and pagan worship rituals.

Exodus 28 provides an illustration of bearing a name and uses the same verb נָשָׂא used in Exodus 20:7.   As prescriptions for right worship are given a special ephod is designed for Aaron (Ex 28:6-14).  On this ephod two stones are set, each stone engraved with the names of six of the tribes of Israel (vs. 9-10).  Then Aaron is directed to “bear their names before the Lord” (vs. 12, ESV).  The whole image plays out beautifully.  The stones engraved with the names of the tribes represent the people of Israel.  Then as Aaron enters the holy of holies he carries with him the names of the people.  The picture is one of representation.  Aaron is the representative of the twelve tribes and so he bears their names before God.  Aaron, as the representative presence of the entire nation, Aaron brings the people of Israel before God.

Israel was to bear God’s name before the world in the same way that Aaron was to bear their names before Yahweh.  Thus Israel’s bearing of the name of the Lord is not relegated to a speech act, it is the command to properly represent Yahweh before the nations of the world, in both word and speech.  This picture of Israel bearing God’s name then would not exclude the proper invocation of God’s name in oaths, nor would it exclude the prohibition against syncretistic worship.  Rather it would include both of those applications under the much larger command to not represent Yahweh in a manner that is false.

Throughout the Old Testament God is said to have set or placed His name in Jerusalem.[2] Through this God stakes His reputation to the people of Israel and identifies Himself with them.  Israel’s responsibility in turn is to live in accordance with the character of God.

E.  A Worthless Endeavor: תִשָּׂא אֶת־שֵׁם־יהוה אֱלֹהֶיךָ לַשָּׁוְא

Three concepts were identified at the outset of this study as being important for understanding the third commandment.  The first was the importance of the name in the Ancient Near East.  The second was the meaning of bearing a name.  The third and final concept that needs to be understood is the meaning of לַשָּׁוְא the word commonly translated as “vain.”

1. לַשָּׁוְא as Falsehood

Of its 59 uses in the Old Testament the idea of falsehood appears to be the most common for this word.  The word carries the idea of intentional deception as illustrated by the prophets who intentional teach falsehood to God’s people (Ezek 13:6-9).[3] Applied to our passage the idea of falsehood would almost have to imply the prohibition of the third commandment being to false oaths taken in the name of God.  However, as said earlier limiting the third commandment to a prohibition against taking false oaths seems too narrow a view.

2. לַשָּׁוְא as Worthless

Another possible way to interpret the word is as meaning “worthless.”  This meaning is derived from the larger category of falsehood but still distinct.  Idols are worthless in that they are ineffective.  Their position as worthless however, is tied to their being false.  Thus the idea of worthlessness is a nuanced meaning of falsehood.[4] Bearing God’s name in a manner that is worthless is presenting a false and maligned picture of the character of God.  The proposed interpretation of the third commandment is able to work well with the lexical analysis of this word.

---

[1] Hamilton, Victor “נָשָׂא” New International Dictionary of Old Testament Theology & Exegesis Vol. 3 Ed. William VanGemeren (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1997): 161.

[2] Deut 12:5, 11; 14:23; 16:2, 11; 26:2; 1 Kings 11:36; 14:21; 2 Kings 21:4, 7-8; Isa 18:7; Jer 7:10, 30.

[3] Shepherd, 54.

[4] Ibid., 54.

Bearing the Name: An Examination of the Third Commandment – Part 3

C.  The Significance of a Name: שֵׁם־יהוה אֱלֹהֶיךָ

Today names are predominantly perfunctory; they create a way to designate an individual, so that society has a method to identify which person is being referred to in speech.  While designation of an individual is one of the functions of a name it is not the only function in the Ancient Near Eastern Context.

1.  A Name in Ancient Near Eastern Context

In the Bible and in the cultures of the Ancient Near East a name had significant meaning for its owner.[1] A name could signify the identity of its owner.  This identity of the individual was connected to the function of the person.  The overarching identity of an individual is a part of the ontology of a culture.  Ontology, the study of being, of who or what a person is was primarily thought of in relational, functional and religious terms in the Ancient Near East.  An individual’s identity was determined largely by the community they belonged to and the role they played within that community.  Religion was a foundational element within the community that had ramifications for every area of life.  Religion was then tied to the community.  The god worshipped was connected to the people lived with, and the people lived with was connected to the land lived in.  God, human community and geography were thus all linked together in tight relationship.  The identity of an individual was determined by their relationship to these three things.

The connection between name and identity can be extended even further, however.  It has been observed that in the Enuma Elish existence and the possession of a name are equated.[2] This connection between existence and possessing a name is seen in the Bible when death is equated with an individual having his name cut off.[3]

2.  Names in the Bible

But does this understanding of the importance of names, mesh with the practice observed within the biblical text?  Moshe Garsiel states that “from the biblical standpoint a name is not merely a random and arbitrary label of identification, but rather that there is meaning behind a name giving; and sometimes the author fits it into the text as an integral part of the literary texture.[4]”  This quote from Garsiel points out the importance of recognizing the literary nature of the biblical text.  The names recorded in the Bible are not only part of a historical situation which was real but they also are part of a literary work that is has been carefully crafted by an author.  “There is a transparency of meaning in most biblical names.[5]”  And the meaning of those names seems to be important for understanding the message of the author.[6]

The naming of places within the biblical text can be associated with an event that either has occurred there, or an event that will occur there in the future.  A place name in Scripture indicates to the hearer the event which is associated with that place.  The name of the place is then tied to the function or importance of that place in the narration of the story of Israel.  Naming is tied to function even when it is places which are being named.[7]

The names of people are similar.  A name could refer to either past events or the future destiny of an individual.  Within the text itself a name could be revealed at the end of the story when it was given historically at the birth of the character.[8] A name could also be a reference to the reputation of a person.[9] The name of a person could “also signify the nature or attributes of the person named.[10]”

3.  The Importance of the Divine Name

The use of a divine name was thought to grant access to the power of the deity invoked.  This belief explains why the names of gods were invoked in blessings and cursing.[11] Part of the third command undoubtedly includes the idea of misusing the name of God within these types of blessings and cursing.

The name of God plays an important role throughout the book of Exodus.  Yahweh reveals His name to Moses in a burning bush (Ex 3).  He further reveals Himself as the patriarchal God connecting his call of Abraham with his call of Moses, and thus all of Israel (Ex 6:2-3).[12] God’s self-revelation at Sinai is a revelation of His name and attributes (Ex 34:5-7).  “In the name ‘Yahweh’ all of God’s attributes are to be found in combination.[13]”  The importance of the divine name is not found in the vowels or consonants of the name but in the person who stands behind it.  “The name of the Lord stands for God’s essential nature revealed to people as an active force in their lives.[14]”  It is the magnificent nature of the God behind the name that makes the name of God “the predominant force in the OT.  The name of the Lord is Yahweh, in all that fullness of divine power, holiness, wrath and grace that he revealed as his nature.[15]”  God’s name is tied mainly to His reputation and character.  Thus, ultimately use of God’s name cannot be tied simply to a matter of pronouncing, but rather it is tied to the person and character of the God who stands behind that name.  The epithet “your God” then ties Israel to God, to His character and reputation.

---

[1] Garsiel, Moshe Biblical Names: A Literary Study of Midrashic Derivations and Puns (Jerusalem: Bar-Ilan, 1991): 22.

[2] Ross.,147.

[3] Ibid., 147.

[4] Marsiel, 14.

[5] Gowan, Donald E. Theology in Exodus: Biblical Theology in the Form of a Commentary (Louisville: WJK, 1994): 77.

[6] Ibid., 77

[7] Ibid., 14-15.

[8] Ibid., 16-17.

[9] Ross, 148.

[10] Ibid., 148.

[11] Gowan, 78.

[12] Moyter, J. A. The Revelation of the Divine Name (London: Tyndale, 1959): 6.

[13] Currid, John D. A Study Commentary on Exodus Volume 2: Exodus 19-40 (Auburn, MA: Evangelical Press, 2001): 310.

[14] Ross, 150.

[15] Ross, 150.

Bearing the Name: An Examination of the Third Commandment – Part 2

B.  The Context of the Third Commandment

To adequately study a text of Scripture it is necessary to study the context surrounding it.  There are primarily three levels of context which must be examined.  First, there is the historical context.  This context places the passage within its appropriate cultural, historical and sociological setting.  The second level of context is the literary context.  This level of context broadly examines the passage within the canon of Scripture, then within the scope of the book and most intimately within the particular section which contains the passage itself.  The third level of context which ought to be examined is the theological context.  This context identifies the passage within the salvation-historical movement of the work of God and the revelation given up to that time.  Furthermore, this level of context examines the theological theme, or themes, being engaged by the passage.[1]

1.  The Historical Context

The Decalogue is given by God to Moses at Mount Sinai after the Exodus of the people from Egypt.  The giving of the Decalogue is just a part of the much larger event Sinai with is the making of a covenant between God and Israel and the giving of the Torah. The giving of the Torah at Mount Sinai is not a separate historical event from the Exodus but is the culmination of the Exodus.  The giving of Torah validates the past action of God on behalf of Israel and prescribes for Israel how to live in relationship with their God, Yahweh.

The giving of the Decalogue at Mount Sinai was at that time the culmination of revelation from God.  It was the climax of all that had happened previously in history.  From creation and fall, through the flood, to the tower of Babel, on to the call of Abraham and God’s work in the lives of the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob all of history and God’s actions had lead to this point.  Historically speaking then there are three things which must be mentioned here.

First, Israel has become a genuine people group.  When Jacob entered Egypt with his sons and their families Israel was a clan.  However, after 400 years of living in Egypt, Israel has emerged as a distinct people group.  However, Israel is a people without a land, and a people without a land, is a people without a god and an identity.

Third, God has revealed His name to Israel through His servant Moses.  The name of God was revealed to Moses at the burning bush (Ex 3) and Moses was told by God to give His name to the people of Israel when they asked for Moses credentials.  The importance of these historical events is that God has already revealed in part His character to Israel.  The Torah, of which the Decalogue is a part, is then a prescription of conduct that is befitting a people who are living in relationship with Yahweh.

2.  The Literary Context

Because this paper holds to the historical reliability of the biblical text, the literary context and the historical context will overlap.  However, the literary context poses some new considerations.

First, it is best to think of the Decalogue as coming not solely within the book of Exodus but rather as being part the Torah.  The Torah, also known as the Pentateuch, or the books of Moses, comprise the first five books of the Old Testament.  The Torah presents a cohesive story of God’s work in electing and calling a people to Himself, His entering into covenant with them, and then His giving them instruction on how to live in relationship with Him.  The Torah is then not some strange and distant revelation that has no bearing for Christians today, rather it is a revelation of the character and work of the same God we serve.  Furthermore it is paradigmatic of our own salvation and relationship with God.

Within the Torah comes the story of the Exodus.  It is tempting to think of the Exodus as taking place in chapters 1-18 of the book and then chapters 19-40 being the giving of the law.  However, while this may be a helpful way to divide the literary genres contained within the book, or even a helpful way to divide the book geographically, it is not a helpful way to understand the broader literary flow of the book.  The book of Exodus is about God’s deliverance of Israel.  The people are taken out of Egypt in chapters 1-18, and so these chapters are written predominantly as historical narrative.  Chapters 19-40 then are the official entrance of God into covenant with Israel.  The final 21 chapters of the book are then prescriptions for right living and right worship in relationship with Yahweh.  However, all of Exodus is about God’s work on behalf of Israel to bring them from slavery to right relationship with Himself.  Understanding this broader literary structure will help keep us from viewing the Decalogue as merely legalistic codes.

The final level of literary context that needs to be noted is the immediate literary context.  Israel has gathered to the foot of the mountain but Moses alone has ascended to meet with God.  Notice that God’s first words to Moses are not a command, but a statement of his relationship to Israel and His actions on their behalf.  Indicatives precede imperatives, and the revelation of God and reminder of His salvation precedes commands.

3.  The Theological Context

Theologically the Torah forms the cornerstone of Old Testament revelation. It is the covenant document made at Sinai with Israel that forms the backbone of the remainder of the story of Israel.

Prior to the Israelite covenant there are three important interactions between God and man that ought to be mentioned.  First, there is the divine mandate given to Adam and Eve as they are sent out of the garden.  God makes it clear that Adam and Eve, though now fallen in sin, remain his vice-regents on earth, who are responsible to care for creation and for humanity and to live under God.  The second major event is the Noachian or Cosmic covenant given in Genesis 9.  This covenant is important because it affirms that humankind though fallen still bears the image of God.  The third and final event preceding the revelation at Sinai is the call of Abraham in Genesis 12 and the covenant made by God with him in Genesis 15.  These two events establish Abraham as the agent through whom God would bless the world.  Second, these events establish a suzerain-vassal relationship between God (the suzerain) and Abraham (the vassal).  The importance of this preceding theological context will become clear later in the paper.

The restatement of the third command (Deut 5:11) is identical to the one in Exodus and so will not be discussed in this paper.

---

[1] For a helpful discussion of backgrounds in exegesis see Douglas Stuart, Old Testament Exegesis: A Guide for Students and Pastors 3^rd Ed. (Louisville: WJK, 2001): 9-13, 22-25, 43-47, 58-62.