please forgive me, I didn't read this entire thread because I'm a little strapped for time. So if someone has already brought up this point forgive me.

AdventureBegins is right when he explained the meaning of the Hebrew word "shav." In Biblical times people made oaths by swearing in the name of their god. In Deuteronomy 6:13 (New Living Translation) it says, "You must fear the Lord your God and serve him. When you take an oath, you must use only his name." So, taking what that verse and what the 3rd commandment says, the Bible is telling us to use only YHWH's name when swearing/making an oath. However, when making such an oath do not use YHWH's name in that oath when you know that you are going to break that oath.

Also as was pointed out earlier that is just heaven God, it is not earth god or the gods. So be careful you get the correct one.

You mean the God of the Holy Bible YHWH for all other Gods and Goddesses are false, right? *rolls eyes* Good grief! And the merry-go-round goes round and round. *sighs*

Spider here points out that the bible has two diffrent Gods. Heaven god and Earth God.

Wether it's vain or falsely, the MAIN message is the same, IMO. Don't use the Lord YHWH falsely, meaninglessly, in vain, for reasons other than speaking to him or about him in truth. That's how I see it.

How truthful can you be if you don't know his name. Or better yet there names.

if there is only one then the name is utterly irrelevant

Spider shows here that the bible names two gods. So you cant be sure which to go with. So I think thats pretty big deal.

It also says later in the post by someone that in the Torah god is sometimes plural. Obviously referring to many Gods.

yes the monotheists were really trying to suggest a plurality of gods. of course, why did i not think of that!!?

Just one more in a string of inconsistencies, but they are clearly not monotheists according to spider. There is at least the God of heaven and God of Earth. He also points out that most Bibles even today will mark this difference by capitalizing one and not the other.

The word vain that was translated means to destroy,destruction,to bring to nothing. vain is not what the bible says. The Jews decided if they did not say it then they could not break it. So they when they see YHWH say Hashem meaning the name. You can say all you want about it does not matter. JC was never in a bible. It was invented maybe for the same reasons. Stephen was stoned for saying the name. If it was not important to Yahweh he would not of had it put in the OT 6900 times more than any name or word in the bible. Anywhere you see LORD the translators was putting it in capital letters to let you know that it is really YHWH. Alot of bibles you will find this in the preface... Blessings ..Miles

So what about the earth God he is not as important?

not to me

from the Wiki....

"The major source of monotheism in the modern Western World is the narrative of the Hebrew Bible, the source of Judaism, which was created from the 13th century BCE to the 4th century BCE. Judaism may have received influences from various non-biblical religions present in Egypt and Syria. This can be seen by the Torah's reference to Egyptian culture in Genesis and the story of Moses, as well as the mention of Hittite and Hurrian cultures of Syria in the Genesis story of Abraham.

In traditional Jewish thought, which provided the basis of the Christian and Islamic religions, monotheism was regarded as its most basic belief."

and if there is one and only one then the name is irrelevant

This is pretty much for the sake of discussion, it does at times say we in Genesis. Hmmmm, there is another thread with this same topic somewhere, probably more than one. Trolling........

Not what I said at all. YVWH is God. Adonai is an earthly lord. Not god of the earth. An earthly ruler.

well then using your words one is a heavenly ruler the other guy is the earthly ruler 2 rulers not monotheistic

Do you worship George Bush? He's the earthly ruler of the US and since you live in the US, you must worship him, right? That's what your logic is. It's silly. I can't believe that I'm replying to your rediculous post, but I am waiting on somebody so I have time to kill. Anymore silliness you want to post? Any other rediculous statements you would like to make?