I'm So Tired of Hearing Jesus' Name in Vain (Tiger Woods Should Apologize Again)

Wednesday, April 14, AD 2010

Be warned- the video above re-plays Tiger Woods unleashing his fury over his golf game with abusive, offensive language.

I’m not interested in getting into the whole sordid Tiger Woods’ womanizing issue- I am, however, ready to start challenging the whole phenomena of using the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, as some kind of throw-away profanity. It doesn’t really matter what the religious make-up of the blasphemer is, but it seems to me that when a Buddhist like Tiger Woods decides it is fair-game to throw out the use of Jesus’ name in a derogatory way on National TV- well this should be a teachable moment.

Continue reading...

16 Responses to I'm So Tired of Hearing Jesus' Name in Vain (Tiger Woods Should Apologize Again)

  • I agree completely. Think back on an otherwise very good movie like the Aviator. It really was ruined by the heavy use of “G.d.” Unbelievable – it’s almost like the cast and crew was just eager to poke their finger in the face of vast portions of their audience.

  • Honestly, I think people say crap like that because it makes them feel ‘more adult’ at first and then they just get into the habit of expressing their exasperation that way.

    I used to drop the G.D. a lot and went through a brief J.C. period. I do notice that on rare occasions when I’ve really just had it I drop that bomb. It’s terrible and inexcusable, really. J.C. was always the worse to me because it was so SPECIFIC.

    It is interesting that I’ve never heard Moses or Buddha or Mohammed ever converted into popular swear words. I suppose it could happen if you put some effort into it.

    I guess that now everyone knows what ‘kind of guy’ Tiger is, he’s not going to bother with the pretense of being a role model or feel obligated to act in a dignified manner when the world is watching?

  • Holy Moses!

    And I mean that in only the best way….

  • Tiger is a vulgar whore chaser. That’s all he ever was. The best advice he ever received came from Brit Hume. Tiger obviously ignored it.

  • It’s the responsibility of Christians to keep Christ’s name holy. Until we show some restraint ourselves — as a group — it seems a bit ridiculous to complain of it being offensive when non-Christians use the name.

  • I honestly think most people don’t even know they’re doing it it. It’s a holdover from when religious language was a natural part of our culture’s everyday language. Say you just heard that so-and-so died, you’d exclaim “Oh my God!” and really mean it as a pious ejaculation or say you’re making an impassioned plea with someone you might say “For Christ’s sake, do the right thing!” and really mean you want the person to do it for God’s glory even though they don’t want to.

    I think over time people began using phrases like these more casually which caused them to lose their meaning through over-use. A similar thing can be seen with saying “Bless you” when someone sneezes – how many people actually intend to pray for God to bless that person and how many people just say it as an almost Pavlovian reaction? Eventually we’ve come to today where these words are just meaningless exclamations – they don’t really mean anything to most people but something’s gonna come out of your mouth when you stub your toe or smash your thumb with a hammer and these are the words many people heard growing up.

    If anything, I think it’s a reflection of the “stickiness” of Christianity rather than of people’s hatred toward it. People don’t use other gods as expletives because they’re not a part of their cultural past. I’d be shocked if there are, for example, non-Christian cultures who use Christian terms as expletives.

  • Brian,
    Thank you for a very thoughtful post.

  • I’ve noticed that using God’s name in vain is acceptable, even on the networks. But it’s odd what they think is unacceptable.

    For example, one of my favorite movies of all time is “Blazing Saddles.” It just completely makes fun of racists, but it’s filled with racial epithets. When AMC or CMT plays the movie, though, they bleep out the racial slurs and leave in the G.D. or J.C. It absolutely and completely defeats the purpose of the movie, and it’s ridiculous that they find nothing wrong with using the Lord’s name in vain (or even risking offending those who see this as sinful or offensive), but they can’t leave in the racial slurs that are central to the movie’s “punch.”

    So, as a review:

    Racial Slurs are bad.

    Offending stupid Christians is good. Or at least okay. They’re probably not fun enough to want to watch Mel Brooks anyway.

  • Once upon a time, must of the worth profanity involved blaspheming God — now the “worst” profanity involves blaspheming sex. Interesting that…

    Personally, I would feel more guilty using one of God’s names in vain than dropping the “f-bomb” — which is probably why my co-workers have heard one but not the other. I don’t know if that’s virtue at all on my part, profanity is something for which I am aware I have a moral weakness, but I think one must at least have such basic standards.

  • Good feedback- thanks to all- I’m relieved to see that my thinking is shared by many out there- I wonder now if the sleeping giant of genuinely disgusted Christians can somehow get more mass media circulation on this issue to start getting the unconscious abusers of Jesus’ name to see that they are being hypocrites when they get all excited over a racial slur, but totally indulge in disrespecting the name of Jesus Christ. Anyone with contacts to a national columnist please pass on the idea of bringing this topic up and encouraging some discussion on the news/talk show front. God Bless- and I mean it!

  • Great post. A priest at our parish told us about how he has made it a habit to always bow his head when he hears the Lord’s name. When spoken reverently, it reminds everyone of the holiness of the name. When it comes up as a profanity, he doesn’t say anything or scold anyone. But that simple, silent act often makes the profanity speaker feel guilty enough to stop, at least for that conversation. I think if Catholics and other Christians would return to that traditional gesture, then other people would at least feel it was impolite to use the Lord’s name so casually. I’ve tried to pick up the habit myself. Haven’t noticed anyone noticing me yet.

  • I’ll add that I had gotten into a really bad habit of saying dammit or G-ddammit all the time. Ironically, I was mimicking my grandfather who was a very holy man. I admired him and wanted to be like him and I thought it sounded cool and grown-up. Picked it up as a teenager (once I was old enough to get away with the occasional bad word with no serious consequences from mom…) I eventually realized how inappropriate that phrase is, and have tried to break the habit. I try not to make any sort of angry outburst, but if I am going to let one fly, I’ve settled on sh*t as my bad word of choice. Because, really, is sh*t such a bad word? It’s not nice, but it has no spiritual connotation. It’s not as vulgar as the f-bomb. It’s just, well, sh*t.

  • I need help because I have a serious question.

    I grew up in a “Christian” household, in which my parents (as did many), would fight constantly. Throughout these arguments my parents (mostly my father) used extremely profane language. And my mother would use acronyms to retaliate against him.
    Outside of that, I was sheltered from profanity until I was removed from my private Christian school and placed in a public schooling system (after moving). I was exposed to extreme amounts of profanity, as well as secular music, secular film, secular everything.

    I indulged in so much garbage, that by the time I was 14, I was using God’s name in vain in combination with dozens of swear words. I along with my newly made secular friends, used horribly profane language throughout our teen years (which were also plagued with my overall Spiritual downfall, leading to experimentation with various other sinful activities).

    My biggest question is, can using God/Jesus Christ’s name in vain lead to eternal guilt? I am questioning, because Exodus 20:7 makes it very clear that God will hold them guiltless. But when Jesus died, all of our sins were forgiven, no? So does that not mean that all sins (including using God’s name in vain), may be forgiven?

    I am now 20, and for the last half year I’ve realized my wrongs (after rebuilding my faith), and have ceased from using the Lord’s name in vain. Obviously I’ve slipped up a couple times, but I immediately pray afterward, and apologize for doing so.

  • Good Morning Moses,

    If taking God’s name in vain were a damning sin that could not be forgiven, then there would have to be limits on God’s being. This cannot be so and, therefore, there is no way that any sin you can do or think of cannot be forgiven. Despair is, perhaps an “unforgivable” sin, but only because the conclusion that one cannot be forgiven because God is not great enough creates a gulf between God’s unlimited offer of salvation and our willingness to accept it. (Think, perhaps, of Judas as he hanged himself.)

    One last thought… sin is serious but we are deeply flawed creatures. Don’t expect perfection or let the defects command your every thought. There is too much beauty in the world for a 20 year old to be so consumed.

Ahmadinejad Had a Jewish Past

Saturday, October 3, AD 2009

The disputed president of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, apparently converted to Islam at the age of four (4) from Judaism along with his parents.

No joke, the man wanting to “wipe Israel off the map” was born Jewish.

Earlier this morning the Daily Telegraph of London reported,

A photograph of the Iranian president holding up his identity card during elections in March 2008 clearly Ahmadenijad is Jewishshows his family has Jewish roots.

A close-up of the document reveals he was previously known as Sabourjian – a Jewish name meaning cloth weaver.

“By making anti-Israeli statements he is trying to shed any suspicions about his Jewish connections. He feels vulnerable in a radical Shia society.”

A London-based expert [Ali Nourizadeh] on Iranian Jewry said that “jian” ending to the name specifically showed the family had been practising Jews.

“He has changed his name for religious reasons, or at least his parents had,” said the Iranian-born Jew [Ali Nourizadeh] living in London. “Sabourjian is well known Jewish name in Iran.”

Now that is revealing.

For more on this article from Damien McElroy and Ahmad Vahdat of the Daily Telegraph of London click here.

Continue reading...

20 Responses to Ahmadinejad Had a Jewish Past

  • Maybe the Jews can take up a collection and send him some lox and bagels.

    I recall that decades ago, a leader of the American Nazi Party committed suicide when it was revealed he was half-Jewish.

    Man, bitter ex-Catholics have nothing on self- hating Jews. Former Catholics who hate the Church just want to destroy the Church, not a billion Catholics. Self-loathing Jews want to destroy the Jewish people.

  • Oh, man. Hitler comparisons in 5…4…3…2… 🙂

  • Anthony,

    I was thinking that, but I didn’t opine on it to let the story tell itself.

  • Donna V.,

    How right you are.

    To think that American Jews do their best to vilify Israel at every turn is incredible.

    Self-hating is accurate.

  • Why Hitler comparisons, Anthony? Like Hitler, Amadinejad hates Jews, but I’ve never read anything to suggest Hitler was Jewish himself.

  • Hitlers mother or father was Jewish I think, that or one branch of his grandparents were Jewish, hence the comparison of both men who exhibit their self-hate towards their Jewish past.

  • Oh, and of course, there’s the case of Bobby Fischer, fully Jewish by blood, who fervertly denied it and made blatantly anti-Semitic comments. When you consider how many chess grandmasters are Jewish (including many who taught and helped Fischer), it’s a bit mind-blogging. But then, Fischer was mad.

  • Tito, I’ve never heard that and I’ve read a far amount about the Third Reich.

  • Donna V.,

    Let me take back those comments about Hitler being part-Jewish.

    It has been alleged that he was Jewish but never proven.

  • To be fair to Hitler, IIRC he was born Catholic and quite hated the Catholic Church by his teens.

  • Folks, this type of thing produced by a British tabloid should be taken with a boulder of salt. I would love the irony if it were true, but, alas, as in the case of Hitler’s alleged Jewish ancestry, a myth that has been exploded time and again, I suspect that this is all hype and no substance.

  • Interesting. An adviser of Ahmadinejad claimed that Hitler was Jewish:

    http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=53611

    Nothing new here however. Attempts to link Jews to the Nazis are a staple of anti-Israeli propaganada throughout the Middle East.

    In regard to the Ahmadinejad story, I’ll do some research and report back when I have something solid. I suspect that this is merely a charge thrown out be political adversaries and that it would not be possible for Ahmadinejad to get so far in Iranian politics if it were true, but I’ll reserve judgment till I have more information.

  • A prescient humor piece on the topic on July 14 by the Naked Loon:

    http://nakedloon.com/news/us-world/2008/07/14/ahmadinejad-discovers-embraces-jewish-ancestry/

  • I’m torn. On one hand, I want to adhere to principle, take the high road, and say that the fact that Immadinnerjacket was once Jewish is of no political consequence. It’s something for the psychologists to mull over, but otherwise a footnote in the life of this mad man. On the other hand, I’m tempted to play into the idea of a mass Jewish conspiracy and try to convince the Iranian hardliners that he’s actually a Jewish sleeper agent, and should be dealt with post haste.

  • I am sure Gina that half of Iran is laughing about this and the other half is going, in Farsi of course, “Hmmm, you know, I always sort of thought he looked Jewish!”

  • Thank you Henry K. for that piece of information.

    Though President Ahmedinejad has repeated himself twice after that incident, there’s no question that he did say he wants to erase Israel off the map through words and deeds.

  • I am not certain if Ahmedinejad is of Jewish origin or not. But the Daily Telegraph is the only paper in England that I have any reasonable amount of respect for.

    I agree with Donald that most of the British press is sensationalistic, but there are a few gems and the Daily Telegraph is one of them.

    If more information comes out to verify or to nullify this claim, I will post it.

  • I saw this posted at Hot Air:

    “Professor David Yeroshalmi, author of The Jews of Iran in the 19th century and an expert on Iranian Jewish communities, disputes the validity of this argument. “There is no such meaning for the word ’sabour’ in any of the Persian Jewish dialects, nor does it mean Jewish prayer shawl in Persian. Also, the name Sabourjian is not a well-known Jewish name,” he stated in a recent interview. In fact, Iranian Jews use the Hebrew word “tzitzit” to describe the Jewish prayer shawl. Yeroshalmi, a scholar at Tel Aviv University’s Center for Iranian Studies, also went on to dispute the article’s findings that the “-jian” ending to the name specifically showed the family had been practising Jews. “This ending is in no way sufficient to judge whether someone has a Jewish background. Many Muslim surnames have the same ending,” he stated…
    According to both Naji and Tait, Ahmadinejad’s father Ahmad was in fact a religious Shia, who taught the Quran before and after Ahmadinejad’s birth and their move to Tehran. So religious was Ahmad Sabourjian that he bought a house near a Hosseinieh, a religious club that he frequented during the holy month of Moharram to mourn the martyrdom of Imam Hossein.
    Moreover, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s mother is a Seyyede. This is a title given to women whose family are believed to be direct bloodline descendants of Prophet Muhammad…
    The reason that Ahmadinejad’s father changed his surname has more to do with the class struggle in Iran. When it became mandatory to adopt surnames, many people from rural areas chose names that represented their professions or that of their ancestors. This made them easily identifiable as townfolk. In many cases they changed their surnames upon moving to Tehran, in order to avoid snobbery and discrimination from residents of the capital.”
    http://hotair.com/archives/2009/10/05/aw-ahmadinejad-doesnt-have-jewish-roots-after-all/

  • No matter if he is Jewish, Muslim or a left-handed cross-dressing lesbian there is still one serious concern about him:

    He’s dangerous.