First of all, let us get some definitions.

WikiDiff gives the following explanation of these terms:

“As adverbs the difference between willingly and willfully is that willingly is of one’s own free will; freely and spontaneously while willfully is in a willful manner. It often means ‘purposely disobeying; purposely being contrary; purposely doing something wrong’.”

As we will see, this definition is close, but not close enough. Every day, true Christians wrestle against sin and the pulls of the flesh and Ephesians 6:12 also gives further information about our struggles: “For we do not wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.”

A spiritual giant in the New Testament, the apostle Paul, struggled as we do, as we read in Romans 7:19-20: “For the good that I will to do, I do not do; but the evil I will not to do, that I practice.  Now if I do what I will not to do, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells in me.”

One website makes these incorrect comments: “Because of the sin nature that dwells within us, there’s a very real sense in which we often sin against our own wills (Romans 7). But we shouldn’t take this idea too far. It’s equally true that every sin is a ‘willful sin.’ If it weren’t, we wouldn’t be responsible. And if we’re not responsible for our own actions, a sin can’t be a sin at all. As James says, ‘Each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death’ (James 1:14, 15).”

This can’t be a correct assertion “that every sin is a willful sin” because as we will see, a willful sin is one that is committed because of rebellion, spite and hatred for God’s Way of Life, and depending on one’s understanding, could lead to or constitute the unpardonable sin. Every sin needs to be repented of and a sin is a sin. But there is a difference between a willing sin and a willful sin – both are sins but have different meanings.

A sin which is committed through ignorance or neglect or a sin which is committed intentionally and willingly (because of weakness, temptation, lack of strength or will power or even because of neglect) is not a sin that is committed willfully—but as will be shown, it can become a willful sin.

As stated above, a sin that is committed because of rebellion and spite and hatred for God’s Way of Life is a willful sin and could well lead to committing the unpardonable sin. For example, in Hebrews 10:26 we read about the unpardonable sin: “For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins.” Note that Paul addresses the situation where someone has received the knowledge of the Truth through the gift of the Holy Spirit.

In our Q&A “Would You Please explain James 1:14-15,” we read the following:

“‘But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed. Then, when desire has conceived, it gives birth to sin; and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death.’ When and how does sin start? Does death only await us when sin is ‘full-grown’?

“Vincent’s Word Studies explains that the terms ‘drawn away’ and ‘enticed’ ‘are metaphors from hunting and fishing.’ It continues: ‘Drawn away, as beasts are enticed from a safe covert into a place beset with snares. Note the present participle, as indicating the progress of the temptation: “is being drawn away.” Enticed– As a fish with bait. Also the present participle.’

“‘Sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death. After sin is brought forth in actual commissions, the finishing of it… is its being strengthened by FREQUENT ACTS and SETTLED INTO A HABIT. And, when the iniquities of men are thus FILLED UP, death is brought forth… the wages of sin is eternal death…’

“We see, then, that a PROGRESSION is described and settled into a habit.”

A progression can be defined as “a continuous and connected series, a sequence.”  We all sin on a regular basis because we are not perfect but God sees the heart of each and every one of us. As previously mentioned, we can and do sin which can be committed unintentionally, intentionally and willingly (because of ignorance, weakness, lack of strength or will power, and neglect) but the heart is not set to sin in a way that is committed because of rebellion and spite and hatred for God’s Way of Life.

When we sin willingly, we can still realize that we have done wrong, repent of it and obtain forgiveness. We are truly sorry for what we did. When we sin willfully, we don’t feel any remorse over what we did. We don’t repent because we don’t want to repent. We have set our hearts on doing what is wrong, and we don’t care about it. We hate it when we are confronted with the need to repent. We absolutely refuse to repent. This describes the concept of sinning willfully. There is quite a difference and we should be aware of the differences.

On the E-sword website, the following observations are made:

“Sins of ignorance may be forgiven, Num[bers] 15:22-29. They are sins. Debts of shortcoming need pardon equally as do trespasses. But, as Paul teaches us, we may confidently count on forgiveness for evil things done unwittingly. See 1 Ti[mothy] 1:12-14; Heb[rews] 5:2. It is quite otherwise with sins of presumption, Num[bers] 15:30-36. If persisted in, these induce death. See 1 [John] 5:16.”

Let us review a few Scriptures which are revealing about willful sins, and let us begin with Numbers 15:30: “‘But the person who does anything presumptuously, whether he is native-born or a stranger, that one brings reproach on the LORD, and he shall be cut off from among his people.”

A presumptuous sin is committed defiantly, literally with a high hand. The Berean Study Bible says: “He shall certainly be cut off, because he has despised the word of the LORD and broken His commandment; his guilt remains on him.”  A high hand denotes going deliberately against God.

This Old Testament example is not to be understood as describing a person who committed the unpardonable sin, because one usually has to have God’s Holy Spirit to be able to commit the unpardonable sin, and in all likelihood, the person mentioned in the Old Testament had not received the Holy Spirit. Most people in ancient Israel were not offered the Holy Spirit at that time. Their opportunity for salvation will come later, in the Second Resurrection. He was to be cut off physically; that is, he was to either be disfellowshipped or killed. But it serves as a good example for those who do receive God’s Spirit. If they act presumptuously and willfully against God’s Way of Life, they are in danger of losing God’s Spirit, thereby committing the unpardonable sin.

The same can be said about Ezekiel 14:3-4, which reads: “Son of man, these men have set up their idols in their hearts, and put before them that which causes them to stumble into iniquity. Should I let Myself be inquired of at all by them? Therefore speak to them, and say to them, ‘Thus says the Lord GOD: “Everyone of the house of Israel who sets up his idols in his heart, and puts before him what causes him to stumble into iniquity, and then comes to the prophet, I the LORD will answer him who comes, according to the multitude of his idols.”’”

The Soncino commentary explains: “More lit. ‘have brought up their idols to their hearts,’ an idiom for ‘have set their mind upon their idols.’ The phrase does not imply that they were worshipping idols, but that their thoughts were influenced by pagan ideas, such as believing in magical spells and divination. This has been a stumbling block to them willfully placed by themselves in their way and leading them into iniquity.”

On the other hand, Hebrews 6:4-6 addresses clearly a Christian who has received God’s Holy Spirit and who has lost it because of willful sin: “For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted the heavenly gift, and have become partakers of the Holy Spirit, and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, if they fall away (some other translations add “or have fallen away”), to renew them again to repentance, since they crucify again for themselves the Son of God, and put Him to an open shame.”

2 Peter 2:20 is another Scripture that sheds light on true Christians who depart from God by sinning willfully:

“For if, after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and overcome, the latter end is worse for them than the beginning.”

One commentator wrote: “Therefore a believer cannot continue in sin. We no longer live in the realm of sin, under its reign and practical dominion. We have, to use Paul’s words, died to sin. We indeed do sin and even our best deeds are stained with sin, but our attitude toward it is essentially different from that of an unbeliever. We succumb to temptations, either from our own evil desires (James 1:13), or from the world or the Devil (Ephesians 2:1-3), but this is different from a settled disposition… our sin is a burden that afflicts us rather than a pleasure that delights us.”

When true Christians begin to depart from and hate God’s Way of Life and settle it in their minds that they want to do the wrong and reject the right, even though they had at one time fully understood, embraced and practiced the Truth, then they are in grave danger. They might develop an attitude of hatred towards God and ultimately refuse to repent and lose God’s Holy Spirit. Filled with hatred towards God and towards true Christians, they sin willfully—they become guilty of the unpardonable sin. They may have started with sinning unintentionally and even intentionally and willingly, because they were not diligent enough in their struggle to avoid and strive against sin, but they ended up sinning willfully and presumptuously. They reached the point in their life that they cannot repent anymore, because they don’t want to repent anymore.

Other Q&A’s which are worth reviewing in respect of the unpardonable sin are:

https://www.eternalgod.org/q-a-10342

https://www.eternalgod.org/qapdf/10163

https://www.eternalgod.org/qapdf/10136

Also, please read our free booklet, “Do We Have an Immortal Soul?” addressing the unpardonable sin on pages 29-32.

We must be very careful that we don’t fall into the trap of becoming lackadaisical about sin, as this can lead to sinning willfully.

Lead Writers: Brian Gale (United Kingdom) and Norbert Link

That is an interesting enquiry.

In a previous Q&A (in Update No. 281, dated 16th February 2007), we answered the question about whether or not to answer a fool and quoted Proverbs 26:4-5 which states: “Do not answer a fool according to his folly, Lest you also be like him. Answer a fool according to his folly, Lest he be wise in his own eyes.”

In that Q&A, we stated: “To answer the fool’s specific allegation or even accusation would end up in a meaningless discussion. In such a case, both parties would end up being foolish or behaving foolishly. Luke 20:1-8 gives us one example. When Christ was teaching the people in the temple and preaching the gospel, the Pharisees confronted Christ and asked Him: ‘Tell us, by what authority are You doing these things? Or who is he who gave You this authority?’ (compare verse 2). Christ understood the wrong motives and intentions of the Pharisees. He did not answer their question. Rather, He asked them a question that He knew was impossible for them to answer without condemning themselves (compare verses 3 and 4). As Christ expected, the Pharisees refused to answer the question. As a consequence, Christ stated that He would not answer their question either, and the discussion ended (compare verses 7 and 8).”

At times, Christ refused to answer a question at all, as He understood the wrong motives of the questioners (Matthew 27:12, 14; John 19:8-9). There were other times when the scribes and the Pharisees were trying to trap Jesus in one way or another. In Mark 12:13-17 we read the account where the Pharisees asked Jesus about paying taxes to Caesar. Jesus did answer the question, but most certainly not in a way which they had expected. There are many other examples where the religious class seemed to be intent on trying to get Him to answer in a way that, as they hoped, would expose Him as a fraud. We know that that simply didn’t happen, couldn’t happen and wouldn’t happen with the One sent to earth by God the Father to die for the sins of mankind. He was perfect and without sin, and He reacted to all that was thrown at Him in a perfect way.

However, we are not perfect today and we may not have always the ability to ascertain another person’s motives when asking a question. It can be even harder to discern when we don’t have personal contact with the enquirer, but when we just receive a written question.

We have had many questions over the years—some of which have been ridiculous and to answer such an enquiry would fall into the category of answering a fool.

Let us give an example of someone asking a question with an ulterior motive which we were initially unable to ascertain at the time. The question was asked about counting the 50 days from the Days of Unleavened Bread to determine the Day of Pentecost. Our understanding of the matter was sent to the enquirer to which he replied that we were in error and then proceeded to correct us in a haughty manner. He hoped that his explanation would help us to correct our “error”. Not only was “his understanding” at odds with the long held teaching of the true Church of God, his manner was not that of a humble Christian. This is just one example of many that we have received over the years. Had we known from the outset his attitude and motives, we would certainly not have answered him at all.

There have been occasions when someone sends us lengthy papers, asking us to review the accuracy contained therein and to correct anything which might be wrong. Sometimes, we can see right from the start that the writer does not want any correction, but just wants to teach us his unique point of view. Depending on the nature of the issues expressed in the paper, we either decide not to answer at all, or, we may refer the writer to our literature and sermons, briefly stating that they contain our teaching on the given matter, and we do not see any reason to change that. But when we do answer initially and correct the writer, and he responds by starting to argue about our correction, any further communication regarding the matter would be fruitless.

Some are determined to believe that nothing can be changed since Mr. Herbert Armstrong, who was the late human header of the Worldwide Church of God, died. We have explained our position on many occasions and when we receive memos setting forth a contrary viewpoint, depending on the way in which the issue is presented, we may either not answer at all, or refer the writer to our literature and sermons.

Recently, in response to a sermon on the worship of Mary, a writer responded by claiming that unless we believe in Mary being in heaven and intervening on our behalf, we cannot be saved. Any response would be futile, given the fact that this issue was thoroughly explained in the sermon. Other topics raising opposition would include Christmas, Easter, the Trinity or eternal hell. Again, based on the motivation of the writer, which in most cases can be readily determined, we might respond by briefly referring the writer to our literature or sermons, or we might choose not to respond at all.

We may not always be able to immediately discern a person’s motives for asking a question. However, any questions that are asked insincerely can be just an excuse to draw an answer that can then be dismissed and the “correct” answer put forth.

Another problem can arise because definitions can mean different things to different people. Sometimes it may be necessary to ask the questioner what he means by a certain statement or example so that we will be answering like for like. One example would be if we were asked if we were “homophobic.” You will find that this word has several meanings. This word can often be used to express the idea that a true Christian is homophobic purely because he quotes the biblical instruction on the matter. That conclusion would be completely wrong, of course, as we have explained in our literature over the years. When a writer appears to be sincere and really wants to know our position on that topic, we would first need to ascertain what is really meant by such a question and the understanding of the writer as to the meaning of the word, and not make assumptions. Our answer, or the lack of it, would depend on the writer’s response.

We are happy to answer questions; indeed, we have about 800 Q&As listed on our websites which shows that we are not averse to or afraid of answering questions and we will continue to do our best in this area. However, we answer questions that we deem to be genuine and sincere. On the other hand, we might choose to refuse answering “a fool according to his folly.” If we were to answer at all in such a situation, this would be tantamount to “casting pearls before swine” (compare Matthew 7:6) which can be construed as giving things of value to those who will not understand or appreciate them and who do not really want them, but who are instead desirous of expressing their own opinion. There are times, however, when we can and will answer “a fool according to his folly” to ensure that he is not wise in his own eyes (compare Proverbs 26:5).

When questions are asked which are or appear to be genuine (giving, at first, the benefit of the doubt), we will do our best, time allowing, to answer these promptly. We might want to add, however, that in most cases, genuine questions which a writer may have could be easily answered by the writer himself by searching for the answers on our websites.

Lead Writers: Brian Gale (United Kingdom) and Norbert Link

In July 2016 one website had this to say about political correctness:

“In a number of intimate and sensitive areas of life, cultural and moral norms have changed dramatically. Eight years ago, a democratic presidential candidate opposed the idea of same-sex marriage outright. In 2016, such opposition is regularly condemned as bigoted, even violent.

“Changes in public perception of transgender politics have occurred even faster. In just over a year and a half we have gone from one ordinance about the use of bathrooms by transgendered people in Houston, Texas (ultimately struck down), to a national directive from the president. Similar shifts in public conversations about race, class, and religion have brought with them new and ever-evolving rules about language.”

On the Wikipedia website, the definition of political correctness is as follows: “The term political correctness (adjectivally: politically correct; commonly abbreviated to PC or P.C.) is used to describe language, policies, or measures that are intended to avoid offense or disadvantage to members of particular groups in society. Since the late 1980s, the term has come to refer to avoiding language or behavior that can be seen as excluding, marginalizing, or insulting groups of people considered disadvantaged or discriminated against, especially groups defined by sex or race.”

Of course, it should not be our goal to purposefully insult others and to cause offense. But this does not mean that God’s Church can become timid and shy away from our duty to proclaim the Truth. Let us look at a few more examples where society seems to have taken leave of its senses.

On the website naturalnews, one example of how free speech is now a punishable offense was related. It read: “One prime recent example of the enforcement of politically-correct speech is the case of Rohini Sethi, a University of Houston student who posted a Twitter message saying: ‘Forget #BlackLivesMatter; more like #AllLivesMatter’ – a message that obviously was promoting inclusion, rather than exclusion. For having expressed what should be interpreted as a ‘fundamental, universal human truth’ (as Natural News founder/editor Mike Adams, put it), Sethi was instead suspended from the university for 50 days and forced to write a ‘reflection letter,’ along with having to attend a ‘diversity workshop’ to atone for her sins against the leftist-controlled establishment and their enforced narrative.”

In the nationalpost on March 7th 2018 was the following report:

“An Ontario child welfare agency placed promoting belief in the Easter Bunny above preventing possible trauma when it removed two girls from a foster home because the Christian couple refused to lie about the bunny’s existence, an Ontario judge ruled.

“In a stinging indictment of the actions of the Children’s Aid Society of Hamilton, a court judgment declared the CAS violated the foster parent’s right to freedom of religion and freedom of expression when the children were taken from their home and their fostering agreement terminated over the Easter Bunny dilemma.

“Derek and Frances Baars, who lived in Hamilton at the time but have since moved to Edmonton, sued the Children’s Aid Society last year, saying a CAS worker insisted they proactively tell two girls in their care, aged three and four, the Easter Bunny was genuine, despite the couple’s belief that all lying is wrong…

“Evidence was clear the Baars sincerely believe it is wrong to lie, including lying to promote belief in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny…”

There are so many other examples that we all may have seen. But how does this affect the way a Christian should behave and how the Church should react when dealing with such scenarios?

The Church has a duty to proclaim God’s Way of Life and His standards fully and boldly, even and especially if this conflicts with the norms of a society which is cut off from God and inspired and motivated by Satan and his demons.

In one of our Q&A’s on Romans 13:1-7, we state the following:

“As soon as the law of the land contradicts God’s command, we are to disobey the law of the land and obey God’s law. However, even in that instance, we are to accept the government’s authority over us. This is demonstrated by the fact that Peter and John did not protest being flogged, but instead rejoiced that they suffered for obeying God (Acts 5:40-42).”

We live in a society that is different, in so many ways, to that which older people today may have experienced decades ago, and that which was experienced by their forefathers.

It is interesting that the UK, the USA, Canada and other countries pride themselves on freedom of expression which is not enjoyed in many other nations around the world.

However, political correctness can have the opposite effect of allowing freedom of speech; for example, anyone quoting the Bible and God’s teaching on a number of issues could be seen as engaging in “hate speech”. Such is the level of antipathy now afforded the Word of God.

In our booklet, God’s Teachings on Sexual Relationships, the following is written on page 95 which is chapter 15 on homosexuality:

“Before covering the controversial issue of homosexuality, we feel it is necessary to state our position, as anyone who opposes this behavior is commonly thought to be a homophobe or homophobic. This term is casually used against anyone who has the audacity to question the morality of such behavior, especially when asserting it to be sin, which homosexual lobbyists often refer to as hate speech.

“This argument is invalid, as people on both sides of the argument must be allowed to agree or disagree about homosexuality in a free and fair society. To assert that homosexual behavior is a sin is simply stating a biblical fact, and Christians who live by the Word of God are simply stating what God’s Word clearly reveals. There should be no hate for the individual concerned, just sadness at their way of life.”

This booklet is a classic example of the Church setting forth what the Bible has to say about different behaviours and relationships which are often at odds with many societies in different countries in the world today. It could be categorised as non PC because it does not fall in line with the current prevailing ethos in society. It makes clear what God says in His written Word about many things that society now embraces as acceptable and good.

Think about how society today is at odds with biblical teachings:

Society today approves of a behaviour that the Bible calls an abomination – homosexuality – but don’t you dare speak out against it or you will be vilified.

Abortion is allowed today in so many countries around the world but the killing of innocent, unborn children is called “choice” by its proponents, but the bottom line is that abortion is murder. Therefore, by extension, society today approves of murder in this instance.

Certain mind-altering drugs which are highly addictive and dangerous are decriminalised which can wreak terrible havoc on the users and their families. The anguish that bereaved parents and other family members may suffer is appalling.

Society today is consumed by equal rights irrespective of Godly instruction and the rightness of things.

We must never give the impression of condoning wrongdoing or wrong principles just for the sake of peace. We have to say and do, and be seen to say and do, the right things and not condone evil. Isaiah 5:20 tells us: “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; Who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!” We do live in a perverse society which, in general, rejects God and makes up its own laws and rules and the fruit of this is plain for all to see.

The Church of God has a duty of responsibility to teach the ways of God. In Isaiah 58:1 we read: “Cry aloud, spare not; Lift up your voice like a trumpet; Tell My people their transgression, And the house of Jacob their sins.” We do that through our sermons, booklets and all of the material on our website. Micah 3:8 is talking about wicked rulers and prophets: “But truly I am full of power by the Spirit of the Lord, And of justice and might, To declare to Jacob his transgression And to Israel his sin.”

There is the warning message in Ezekiel 33:6 which reads as follows: “But if the watchman sees the sword coming and does not blow the trumpet, and the people are not warned, and the sword comes and takes any person from among them, he is taken away in his iniquity; but his blood I will require at the watchman’s hand.”

We have the responsibility to warn of the terrible times to come because of our sinful and godless societies, and we must fulfil that responsibility. Unfortunately, the Church of God has much to warn the world about as sins increase and multiply at a frightening pace. This will, inevitably, put the Church at odds with society which condones so much that is wrong but that does not mean that we should be cowed into silence. Political correctness fosters and encourages much that is wrong in society today and many of these problems are discussed in our booklet which has been mentioned above. Neither the Church nor God’s people should be pressed or bullied into silence. Far too many are afraid to speak out, collectively or individually, when the opportunity arises, but we must be bold as a lion. John the Baptist did not hold back to tell Herod that he was living in sin. Peter did not cease from preaching the Truth even when he was ordered by the government not to do so. Both John the Baptist and Peter landed in jail as a consequence. Jesus Christ told the Pharisees and Sadducees very clearly how they violated God’s law. He was met with hatred and ill will and a desire to murder Him as a consequence.

At the same time, Christ showed mercy and compassion for those who repented of their wrong lifestyle, but He always encouraged them not to sin anymore. We must do the same and have the same attitude. For example, we will always embrace someone in God’s Church who truly repents of his homosexual conduct and ceases from engaging in it, but we will not condone or justify the sin of homosexuality. Our message in this regard must be very clear, even if human laws threaten us with punishment for engaging in “hate speech.”

Of course, as individual Christians, it is not our responsibility and duty to go out in the streets or from door to door and preach “God’s Word” to anyone we might encounter. We are ready to give an ANSWER when we are ASKED, and that with “meekness and fear” (1 Peter 3:15). For example, when someone wishes us “merry Christmas,” it would not be the right approach to give a lengthy explanation as to why we don’t keep it, starting with Satan and Nimrod and its pagan origin and explaining how traditional Christianity embraced this pagan festival. When someone wants to know more, just refer him to our free booklet on Christmas. But it would be equally wrong to respond to someone wishing us “merry Christmas,” by saying: “And I wish you a merry Christmas too.” Rather, saying “thank you” would be an appropriate answer without causing unnecessary offense.

We can read of Jonah’s reluctance to go to Nineveh and cry out against it and he tried to avoid doing that which God had instructed him. We mustn’t fall into the same category.  Eventually, Jonah did take the message to Nineveh and the people repented, albeit only temporarily. As God’s Church, we must not stop doing what God has instructed us to do, and when we do that, we are very likely to be at odds with society which has fully embraced political correctness which is often in direct opposition to the Way of God.

Inevitably, the Church of God will be at odds with society. The Church teaches the Way of God; the world has no interest in this, thinking that they are capable of forging and maintaining a good and decent society without God being involved. We know that the world is deceived by Satan (see Revelation 12:9), and so no one should be in the least bit surprised. And, yes, political correctness can be a real problem for both true Christians and the Church today. However, God’s true Church will continue to stand up for God without compromising even one inch with what God has revealed to us about His Way.

Lead Writer: Brian Gale (United Kingdom)

In the weekly Update No. 146 on June 6th 2004, we printed an editorial, entitled “The Third Commandment”. Last week, we printed a Q&A, entitled “How do we need to apply the 3rd Commandment about not using the LORD’S name in vain?”. Also, on May 24, 2008, in a StandingWatch program, Evangelist Norbert Link presented a program titled, “Corrupt Communication–Why Not?” It is appropriate to emphasise this matter as it now seems that blasphemy is used by the youngest to the oldest in our nations, with virtually no consideration given at all to how serious a matter this is.

In Exodus 20:7 and Deuteronomy 5:11, we read “You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain, for the LORD will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain.”

It is best to define what “taking the name of the LORD your God in vain” (or blasphemy as it can also be defined) really means. We could look at many definitions, but the bottom line is that we simply should not, and must not, use the name of God in any irreverent way because that would be disrespectful. When we look at God’s creative power and the awesome size, beauty and majesty of His creation, it really is something wonderful to behold, and to denigrate the name of the Creator of it all is simply unacceptable.

Wikipedia gives this definition: “Blasphemy is the act of insulting or showing contempt or lack of reverence to a deity, or sacred things, or toward something considered sacred or inviolable.”

It is interesting to read the following in Leviticus 24:16: “And whoever blasphemes the name of the LORD shall surely be put to death. All the congregation shall certainly stone him, the stranger as well as him who is born in the land. When he blasphemes the name of the LORD, he shall be put to death.” It was certainly something to be taken very seriously in those times, unlike today.

But why would God, the greatest Being in the universe, be so concerned about His Name? Isn’t He, as some have observed, able to look after Himself? For anyone to make such an observation shows that they have no understanding at all about what is involved.

Some may think that they can hurt God by taking His Name in vain or rejecting Him. God can certainly be very disappointed when this happens but we have to remember that He is the Creator of all things, He sustains life, He has provided salvation for us through Jesus Christ. God is a Family, consisting of God the Father and Jesus Christ , the Son of God, and they are both God… the only true God Beings. Therefore, God deserves our worship and we are hurting ourselves when we go contrary to His way. It is not about ego and the feeling of importance but God knows that we lose out when we don’t honour His precious Name. By so dishonouring Him, we are also showing disrespect and that doesn’t have any rewards attached to it, quite the reverse. Revelation 4:10-11 is instructive in this regard: “… the twenty-four elders fall down before Him who sits on the throne and worship Him who lives forever and ever, and cast their crowns before the throne, saying: ‘You are worthy, O Lord, To receive glory and honor and power; For You created all things, And by Your will they exist and were created.’” Honouring God’s Name as per the third Commandment is truly one way of showing our love for the One who will always be the greatest Being of all.

In a well-ordered, God-obeying family, the relationship that children have with their parents is the same relationship that a begotten son or daughter of God has with his or her heavenly Father. In the human family, there are rules, regulations and behaviour that children are expected to act upon and the same applies to God the Father who gives His begotten children commandments and standards that must be part of a true Christian’s way of life. We read in Colossians 3:8: “But now you yourselves are to put off all these: anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy language out of your mouth.”

We also have to make sure that by our actions, God’s Name is not disrespected outside the true Church of God, and Romans 2:21-24 is instructive in this regard: “You, therefore, who teach another, do you not teach yourself? You who preach that a man should not steal, do you steal?  You who say, ‘Do not commit adultery,’ do you commit adultery? You who abhor idols, do you rob temples? You who make your boast in the law, do you dishonor God through breaking the law?  For ‘the name of God is blasphemed among the Gentiles because of you, as it is written.’”

We are to set an example as expressed in Matthew 5:14-16: “You are the light of the world. A city that is set on a hill cannot be hidden. Nor do they light a lamp and put it under a basket, but on a lampstand, and it gives light to all who are in the house. Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works and glorify your Father in heaven.” If we blasphemed God’s great name, we wouldn’t be setting the example that we are commanded to so do.

It is interesting to note that, whilst God’s Name is taken in vain by so many people around the world, other “deities” don’t seem to suffer in the same way and we know how Muslims revere “the prophet Mohammed” who was just a human being anyway. None of these names are used as an expression of surprise, frustration or anger as the name of the true God so often is.  Satan is doing everything he can to upset true Christians as he knows that he has but a short time left.

An interesting and, it seems, not a very well-known fact, is that the blasphemy law in some parts of the UK was abolished a few years ago. Wikipedia notes that in the UK “on 5th March 2008, an amendment was passed to the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 which abolished the common law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel in England and Wales. The peers also voted for the laws to be abandoned during March. The Act received royal assent on 8 May 2008, and the relevant section came into force on 8 July 2008.”

On the Humanists UK website, they state the following: “Outdated and discriminatory blasphemy laws are still far too common all around the world. But the English and Welsh blasphemy laws were abolished in May 2008. The offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel were common law offences which were contrary to the principle of free speech and probably contrary to human rights laws adopted by the UK, which protect freedom of expression. The law fundamentally protected certain, Christian, beliefs and made it illegal to question them or deny them.”

In 2016, a Pew Research Center analysis found out that, as of 2014, about a quarter of the world’s countries and territories (26%) had anti-blasphemy laws or policies.

In August 2018 the BBC website had this very unusual story about an Italian footballer (soccer player):

“Former Juventus midfielder Rolando Mandragora has been suspended for one Serie A game after he was caught on television cameras shouting “Porca Madonna, Vaffanculo, Dio Cane”, an insult to the Virgin Mary, while also referring to God as a dog. The outburst from the Italy international came after Sampdoria goalkeeper Emil Eudero saved his shot in a game which Mandragora’s side, Udinese, won 1-0.

“‘After acquiring and examining the relevant television images, the player, while cursing without referring to anybody around him, was nevertheless clearly seen by the television images to make blasphemous remarks, visibly identifiable from reading his lips without any margin for reasonable doubt,’ a disciplinary report from the Lega Serie A said. There is a strict ban on taking God’s name in vain in Italy, and since 2010, the country’s football association has disciplined players and coaches heard doing so.”

“Taking the name of the LORD your God in vain” is all a part of the erosion of biblical standards that there are organisations which exist in their bid to remove, if it were possible, all traces of the way of God from society. Of course, we understand that Satan, the arch-deceiver is behind all of this and his time is now very limited but, in the meantime, much damage can be done to decent standards that served communities well for a very long period of time. It involved the historical position that Christianity has had within the establishment – the monarchy, Parliament and the law.

It would appear that freedom of speech trumps just about everything else and that penalties for blasphemy, however that is defined, would be in contravention to the right of free speech. Along the same lines is the fact that quoting the Bible about the sin of homosexuality can be viewed as hate speech and therefore punishable in law which means that the legal provisions and requirements of man trump the Word of God.

In short, the third of God’s Ten Commandments is seen as an anachronism in today’s “more enlightened” society!!

In a newspaper article in 2018, details about social media speech were given showing that there are 60 new abbreviations that are dominating the way young people communicate with one another and the second most common one is “OMG,” and we all know that this is an abbreviation for “Oh my God.” It is now a marketing tool as the advertising industry, it seems, will do anything they can to promote products or services at any cost. The fact that God’s name is used irreverently doesn’t seem to matter one iota to those who use such language.

We should realise that the names of God the Father and Jesus Christ are so important. We know that in the model prayer in Matthew 6:9 Jesus told His disciples to pray: “Our Father in heaven, Hallowed be Your name.” We also read in Philippians 2:10 “that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow…” No one should use the great name of God in a harsh and irreverent way today, but so many do. The name of Jesus Christ is so important: “Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:12), and this is another reason why the 3rd Commandment must be taken very seriously.

In our weekly Update, Number 77, on 23rd January 2003, we had a Question and Answer, entitled “Is it Wrong to Use Slang such as ‘gosh’ or ‘gee’?,” and this clearly showed that such euphemisms were also clearly wrong. You may wish to review this Q&A.

King David was a man after God’s own heart (Acts 13:22), and he had great respect for God’s name. In Psalm 145:1-2 we read: “I will extol You, my God, O King; And I will bless Your name forever and ever. Every day I will bless You, And I will praise Your name forever and ever.” We would do well to emulate this example.

One internet commentator made these observations:

“We are not to use God’s name as a curse word. We are not to use His name lightly. If we study who God is, we understand a bit more why this is such a grave sin. God is holy, sovereign, unchangeable, omnipotent, omniscient, faithful, patient, and merciful. This is just a short list of the adjectives that could be used to describe God, the One who made a way for us to be reconciled to Him through His Son, Jesus Christ. If He is so awesome and so wonderful (and He is!), then we can understand why it is so important for us not to use His name when we are angry or surprised.”

Another writer summed it up well and succinctly when he wrote:

“The name of the Lord is holy, as He is holy. The name of the Lord is a representation of His glory, His majesty, and His supreme deity. We are to esteem and honour His name as we revere and glorify God Himself. To do any less is to take His name in vain.”

It was interesting to read what a teaching assistant with no religious views wrote about the use of the phrase “Oh my God”:

“I work as a teaching assistant with kids aged 8-10 and so many of them say this whenever they are frustrated, stroppy or feeling argumentative. I’m not religious but I certainly consider it an inappropriate phrase for children to use. I had a chat with a couple of the girls today after one of them said it. Neither of them had any concept that this was anything other than normal, as it’s a phrase used by all the family. I suggested that they might like to think of other things to say that won’t sound so offensive or rude.”

A prominent American preacher was interviewed on British television during 2018. He was asked how he felt after receiving an invitation to a particular function in the UK and he said, slowly, deliberately and with feeling “Oh my God” three times consecutively in order to express his surprise. If those in mainstream Christianity don’t find it necessary to keep the 3rd Commandment, what example does that send out to those who are members of those churches? This example was appalling and showed a complete lack of understanding how important it is to revere God’s Holy Name.

We should only use God’s name in a reverential way, showing Him the respect that He deserves, and anything less is not acceptable to Him.

Let us remember that Jesus never took His Father’s name in vain. So many people today use God’s Name in vain when they have trials, difficulties and pain and we must remember that even when Jesus was crucified, in His final hours on the stake, suffering with agonising pain and distress, He never resorted to such an approach. His approach to the third Commandment was perfect, and we are to follow Him in every way and that includes honouring, not disrespecting His Father’s Name.

God’s Name should not be blasphemed today and the third Commandment makes this quite clear. But what about the future? We read in Ezekiel 39:7: “So I will make My holy name known in the midst of My people Israel, and I will not let them profane My holy name anymore. Then the nations shall know that I am the LORD, the Holy One in Israel.” During the Millennium, taking God’s Name in vain will not be tolerated, nor will it be tolerated for eternity after that time.

Yes, we really should take the third Commandment very seriously today!

Lead Writer: Brian Gale (United Kingdom)