The Scoffers Look to Rip Away Salvation

The Paradox of Human Guilt and Christ’s Willing Sacrifice

Let's pray. Lord Jesus Christ, giver and perfecter of our faith, we thank and we praise you for continuing among us the preaching of your gospel for our instruction and for our edification. Send your blessing upon the word which has been spoken to us and by your Holy Spirit increase our saving knowledge of you that day by day we may be strengthened in the divine truth and remain steadfast in your grace.

Give us strength to fight the good fight and by faith to overcome all the temptations of satan the flesh the world so that we may finally receive the salvation of our souls for you live and reign with the father and the holy spirit one god now and forever amen.

Okay as is our practice we open up the floor for questions. I don't have a cigarette and a.

Blindfold today but that's okay. Yes? Okay you explained in the sermon that we're all responsible for Christ's death. Correct. People are responsible for Christ's death and the gospels explain you know the accounts explain that humans did kill Jesus but you also have Jesus' words saying no one takes my life from me.

Yes. I lay it down in my own accord now. I know they're both true but how.

Do you reconcile. How are they compatible? So the idea then here is is that the cross wasn't our plan it was Jesus' plan that this is most certainly true and yet at the same time we are culpable in the death of Christ.

So you hold the two in paradox in this sense is and that is is that Christ came for this reason. This is the reason for which he this was always the plan. And so sinful humanity being what sinful humanity does when this sinless spotless lamb of God comes to earth we are by nature at war with God.

We are his enemies and and enemies do what enemies do they they they murdered Christ we murdered Christ. And so when I say this you know we we embrace it we embrace this idea then is is that Christ knowing that he would be murdered he came for that purpose he willingly laid down his life and through his death.

Then because he is sinless and spotless he then is the sacrifice for our sins and God vindicates and justifies him by raising him from the dead after he's been after he's been killed because you know his his death was the ultimate injustice.

And then God does this jujitsu move that I talk about he takes the ultimate injustice this violent act of murdering God and uses that then for our good. You can almost hear the words of Joseph speaking to his brothers he says what you meant for evil God has worked for good.

And so you'll note then that um all attempts to kill Jesus prior to the cross never worked really worked out. I mean you know there's Jesus in his hometown of Nazareth and uh you know he tells them he reads from the prophet Isaiah says this is fulfilled in your reading.

And they're going this is a messianic prophecy and you're we you're aren't you the son of Joseph. And so they become really indignant. And then Jesus then goes on and says things that makes him even more excited um in a negative way.

And so they they drive him out to the cliff in Nazareth. They're going to throw him off but he just walks right through the midst of them. All attempts to kill Jesus fail miserably until he willingly lays down his life.

If Jesus didn't want to die on the cross they wouldn't have been able to nail him to the cross. That's just how this works out. And then you'll notice that when Christ dies he's still in control father into your hands.

I commit my.

Spirit it's finished and he breathes his last. I've heard it kind of explained on a podcast that it's like if a father is wrestling his little son he lets the son pin him. The son really did win.

Yes of course also the father. That's not a bad analogy. I like that analogy. That's that's a that. So in that sense then yeah we really murdered Jesus but kind of like the father who let his son pin him in wrestling which is a mandatory thing for all fathers.

We all know this. Um yeah. The son really did win. We really did murder Christ. We really did. And he really did lay down his life willingly. No one took his life. He laid it down. That both are true.

And so you know then as as and this is one of the things I think is the strength of Lutheran theology is that we do not try to resolve the paradoxes. We embrace them and hold on to them and and say these are both true in scripture and we can describe them in such a way that we don't do violence to the paradox.

But I think that other theological traditions try to resolve these paradoxes and I think they do so in a way that causes them to go into error. So you know we sit there and you go is Jesus God. Is he man.

Yeah he's both. And then you think of like the Aryan heresy. No. No. No no. That's that can't be right. Or you think of you know you think of all the different christological heresies that try to resolve that conflict and they resolve the conflict by either denying his humanity or denying his deity.

And we know. And that's an example of you got to hold the paradox. You know Christ is both God and man. And same with same with the trinity. By the way how many gods do we worship. One. How many persons in the one.

God. Three. The three in one. I don't know what being. I don't know any beings like that that you can point to. And even Saint Patrick's attempt to explain it by pointing to a clover you know a shamrock is still it it it.

It will suffer in to one degree.

Or another. Sorry I've spoken like an American. Yeah no all of the Saint Patrick's bad analogies.

YouTube videos going through my head. Yeah there's a good video on that that Lutheran satire did on you know like bad analogies regarding the trinity. Every one of them always will fall short. So the idea then is that we we embrace then when God has revealed these things to be true and like the ultimate one will touch on what is called the crux they a legorum.

This is this is a this is a like the considered the the tough nut that nobody's been able to crack. People have tried and I think they've they've in so doing. They've they've erred greatly. The crux they a legorum has to do with salvation.

And it goes something like this scripture clearly states that everybody who is saved that they are elect they are chosen they are regenerated by God. This is most certainly true. Paradoxically then scripture also says that everybody who's damned who ends up in hell it's their fault not God's.

And some theological traditions try to resolve the conflict by basically limiting God's election to just a small group. And so the problem is is that scripture is clear that Christ bled and died for the sins of the world and that their salvation available for everyone.

And so in limiting those who are bled for down to just the elect they are they have to deny clear passages that say that Christ died for the sins of the world and also deny the whosoever's. You know that Christ says whosoever believes in me and so and so you sit there and go.

Well then you're you end up with this paradoxical conflict. You know and the and the Lutheran sits there and goes exactly we don't have the data to resolve the conflict. Both propositions are true because scripture says so clearly that both are true.

And it's and you and the guy who knows logic and syllogisms and things like this sits there and goes. But that creates what looks to be a contradiction. No it's a paradox. And you hold it in tension until God gives us more data and you're not going to get that data this side of Christ's return.

So there's just certain things that we have to hold on to same thing. Then you think about the sacraments themselves. You know what are you receiving when you have the Lord's Supper. Well Rome says you're only receiving the body and blood of Christ.

Well that looks like bread and tastes like really cheap wine to me. And they well it just just looks like that you know. And then on the other side the evangelicals no no it's just bread and wine. But it's scripture says that this is the body and blood of Christ.

So the Lutherans hang on and we say we're getting four things in the Lord's Supper. Because the scriptures say so clearly say that we're receiving bread wine body blood. And and you know to deny one half or the other half is to kind of like you know it always plunges you and puts you in conflict with clear passages.

And so the Lutheran says we're receiving all four. Yeah there's bread and wine there. This is most certainly true. Okay. And I know this for a fact because my wife's recipe for the bread you know that the first time we gave you the full thing you always sitting there going chewing on it you know and you know and you had to use the wine to wash it down.

Okay that was most certainly bread. I assure you it was but somehow connected to that. And this is why the Lutherans use these prepositions in with and under. You know you're receiving in your mouth the true body and blood of Christ.

This is what scripture says. And to take the Lord's Supper in an unworthy manner is to not recognize the body of Christ. This is that was the Corinthian Church. So you hold these things in tension and you sit there and go.

I'm not a rocket surgeon. I just believe the scriptures is bread there there's wine there there's the body and blood of Christ there and the most important words are given and shed for the forgiveness of my sins.

And so huh. Yeah rocket surgery. Yeah yeah. I don't know if I ever accepted it when my my it just I always found it to be a conversation stopper. Yeah yeah. Well I would I would physically obey at this point but I can't ever say that I was truly satisfied with the answer.

But as parents I mean I ended up resorting to that same thing because there you got the kid who's who's has like this endless string of why questions but why but why but why. You know it's like mm-hmm you know Lord God please why did you curse me with a child that's just like me.

And yeah anyway just went to God and started with your own list of but why. Yeah. Yeah exactly you know see that and that's the irony of the whole thing. Why did you do this to me. God. Yeah. And God's up there snickering.

Yeah you'll eventually get it but not yet. Oh well right. So so that so there's the idea we hold these things in tension and over and again I find it fascinating that those who are scoffers they look for these really wooden interpretations of Scripture to then pit Scripture against Scripture to say oh you can't trust it you can't believe it.

It's just not true. You know I'll give you an example you know it's it seems that scoffing seems to have embedded itself in liberal theology all right. So you you come to you come to the Isaiah text from next for next Sunday that there's a has right and Isaiah comes to him and a has this totally anxious anxiety ridden because the Syrians are there you know they're saber-rattling and threatening to invade and and and you know they've joined forces with some other country and a has is just losing his mind here because he doesn't know what to do.

And so Isaiah comes to him with a prophecy of the Lord basically the Lord saying listen I call on me trust me I'll rescue you you know and in fact to show you that I mean good towards you you you ask me for any sign you want it could be as deep as Shale as high as heaven.

Whatever sign you want it to be ask of me and I'll give it to you to prove to you that I intend good for you and not evil. And a has hardens his heart which is not a shock and goes oh I how dare I I would never put the Lord to the test you know.

And so Isaiah then gives this proleptic prophecy and if you just read it wouldn't. Lee you end up scoffing like the liberals and so fine the Lord himself is going to give you a sign the Alma will be with child and before he knows to choose the right or the wrong then Syria will be laid waste and be desolate.

God's going to give you a sign and you know the the Alma will be with child. So you know your Hebrew and you said they go well yeah I'm all the virgins. It doesn't always necessarily have to be a virgin mom can be a young maiden who may be married or not.

So and the liberals they just zoom in on this and they sit there and go ha ha ha ha this isn't a prophecy regarding the virgin birth. Yeah that's so self.

Condemning. Please explain this act. Because I want it on tape. When you all right. So God's G God has told us by our own words we will be condemned. Uh-huh. Back when I was doing youth work I can't tell you how many times I got the how far is too far question.

Yeah. If you have to if you have to ask the question. And I would always turn it back and go. What's your goal. Here you. You want to get as much sin as you can. What does that say about your heart. Don't you mean Savior.

Yeah. When the pseudo Christians rejoice because they found a lever to pry the hope of salvation and the reliance of God away from the hearts of their parishioners. What does that tell you. What more evidence do you need that they are the tools.

Tools not willing allies. Necessarily. Everyone. Yeah. You know. Moves. The pastor say deceived. And deceivers being deceived. Right. So. But the the joy of their heart is against the the trust in the Lord.

Yeah. Instead of I assume here is at least in the church visible we're seeking how we may trust the Lord. We're. We're pursuing trusting the Lord. They're pursuing rejecting. Yeah. And that's easy. He doesn't put much of a fight on that one.

It's like. Okay by the way you're gonna need us bus to Sunday's. But.

You know it's not good. Yeah yeah when people take delight in finding alleged contradictions in the scripture and say you can't trust the Bible and if and I mean I mean who of you eat lobster today don't you know that lobster is a unclean animal.

You're not allowed to participate in eating lobster. You know in the Old Testament. Therefore because because lobster that means we can ordain impenitent homosexuals and women. That's their argument. Okay now coming back to this to this text then so the Alma will be with child and you will call him Emmanuel.

That's what. That's what the text says in Hebrew. And so the Hebrew scholar will sit there and just zoom in on the word Alma and totally ignore the fact that wait a second there's something going on here.

That's way bigger. All right. And so what they're doing is is that they're not recognizing that this prophecy has a twin fulfillment and this there's a there these are there. There are particular prophecies in scripture.

This is one of the interesting features about prophecy. Oftentimes when a sign is given or a prophecy is given there is an immediate aspect to it that is fulfilled in the lifetime of the here and then there is it and then it just sits dormant.

You know it just sits dormant for centuries. And then all of a sudden it springs up and there's and there's a far fulfillment that always had everything to do with Christ. And so you'll note that in Isaiah's time the sign that was given to Ahaz was fulfilled in his time because immediately after this it says that Isaiah went into the.

Prophetess and she conceived. But there's no rule that they won't break in their pursuit against God. Right. Because the same scholars you know in when I was a pre-seminary student I was taught that the word sanctuary in the Song of Miriam in Exodus 15 proves that that the Song of Miriam was a post King Solomon invention.

What. Because it's had the word sanctuary and before before Solomon there was no sanctuary. So they can't even even when the double fulfillment is in the Old Testament record. Yeah they'll reject that they will.

They will reject it but Miriam's song is a prophetic song and they just got saved from the premier military power of the continent and a half that.

Can't have anything to do with the word shelter. Right. And that at all. Yeah so it's very it's very fascinating how they're always looking for these things. So coming back then so you'll note then a proper understanding of the prophecy that we're gonna hear in next Sunday's Old Testament reading is that there was an immediate fulfillment a sign that was given to Ahaz that was fulfilled in his time.

Nobody has a problem with that. But then note then I always like to point out to the liberal skeptic the scoffer God the Holy Spirit gives us the other shoe to that particular prophecy and it's found in next week's gospel text and if you would take a look with me I'll have it on the screen here.

Next week's gospel text says that now the birth of Jesus Christ took place in this way. When his mother Mary had been betrothed to Joseph before they came together she was found to be with child from the Holy Spirit and her husband Joseph being a just man and unwilling to put her to shame resolved to divorce her quietly.

But as he considered these things behold an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream saying Joseph son of David. Do not fear to take Mary as your wife for that which is conceived in her is from the Holy Spirit.

She will bear a son and you shall call his name Jesus for he will save his people from their sins. Which by the way I spent some time with my catechumens this week really demonstrating here that that the angel Gabriel we know from our cross references the one who said this to Joseph that that in saying that his name will be Jesus Jesus by the way that's our transliteration of yeasu from the Greek which is a transliteration of the Hebrew Yeshua.

Right. So yesu doesn't mean anything. Jesus doesn't mean anything but Yeshua means something Yahweh saves all. Right. So just the fact that his name is given by the angel as Yeshua and then it says he will be called this because he will save his people from his sins from their sins.

This shows that the angel Gabriel has really good Christology right. Really good that he knows that this child to be born is none other than Yahweh in human flesh it's all over the Bible. You mean Yeshua.

This this this is a tradition that this goes way back it's best way I can put it. No no not at all I said his name the name Jesus. It actually doesn't technically happen but it is. It doesn't. It's in your English translation.

What. When you come to the Greek word yeasu it gets transliterated because you speak English to Jesus. But when Jesus was out in Nazareth he was playing with his friends and his mother was finished cooking dinner and she went outside and said Jesus's name.

It's time to come to dinner. She didn't say Jesus. She didn't say yeasu. She would say Yeshua. Yeshua. It's time for dinner. That's the name that he was called in the first century. That was his name.

Does that make sense. Yeshua Ben Yosef. Maybe it's kind of like if you.

Were born in France but we still call you David. Yeah we wouldn't call you. Yeah but for instance.

When I was taking Spanish okay my wife will attest to this. All right. Because we took Spanish together first year. All right. I was told by my Spanish teacher nobody's gonna call you Chris in in Mexico.

No one's gonna call you that if you if you were down there they would call you Cristobal. What. That's what Cristobal. What's that. That's your name in Spanish. Right. All right. So the idea here is is that the target language that our Bibles have striven to give us is English.

We're reading our Bibles in English. The original scriptures were written in Hebrew. Parts of them you can argue were probably written in Aramaic and then the entire New Testament is written not in Greek.

Koine Greek. Okay which is which is a variant of Greek altogether. And so what happens is is that those people who were hearing the gospel around the Mediterranean world Koine Greek was the what they call that the lingua franca.

All right. Let me give you an example. What that means today. If you were to become a pilot you decided that you were going to go to UND get a degree in and aviation and you graduated. And wouldn't you know it.

You know Emirates Air decides they're gonna hire you as a pilot. All right. When you say they're going I don't know any Aramaic. I don't. I don't I don't know I don't know how to speak. You know like you know the the language of the the United Arab Emirates.

How am I gonna be a pilot for Emirates Airlines. Could you still be a pilot for Emirates Air if you don't know a word of Arabic. Why. Because the lingua franca of the aviation industry is what English.

It doesn't matter if it's a Chinese airline a Singaporean airline an Arab airline a Hebrew airline or a French airline. Everybody speaks English. So in the same way Koine Greek was like that. And so the idea then is is if you wanted to get the gospel out so that everybody would understand it.

You didn't do it in Latin. You did it in Koine Greek. Because everybody's up so we don't do it in Latin. We're doing it in English. What are you talking about. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So so so the idea here is.

Yeah. No no it's not. No no you have to understand. It's a great question. It really is a fantastic question. It is one that I'm laughing. No no. He was laughing at the King James. I didn't laugh at you.

I didn't pick the confusion. I am a recipient of it who has the job of explaining it. Okay. Okay so is the best way I could put it. Because the ESV was translated without my involvement whatsoever. The King James Bible was translated without any involvement on my part whatsoever.

Well your pastor your pastor is required to learn Greek and Hebrew. And they should be they should be required to do. Well not only that so they can explain even things like this. If you have a pastor who hasn't studied Greek or Hebrew then you have a pastor.

Who is. It would be like saying I have a doctor but he's never really actually finished medical school. Okay. But I know he can practice medicine. Really. Well his office is in the back alley because he can't get a license.

But he's really good. Okay you have to. So pastors should be required to study the original languages so that they can be able to explain things like this. Does that make sense. So so the idea then is this.

And I know it sounds confusing. But the word itself Jesus is just an English transliteration of the Greek yesu. It's basically Jesus's name is his name in English. That's so the word Jesus. And there's at the time Jesus was a kid.

Nobody called him. That nobody would have called him Jesus. That's this is this is English. And this is a modern manifestation of this particular language. Have you ever read Beowulf. Yeah. That's a toughy you know.

And and and I was looking at my English teacher going that's English. Oh yeah. That's English. How is that English. I doesn't make a lick of sense to me. Right. Yeah. So you read it in the old in the old English.

And then you read the King James in the King James. I mean do we say that these and the thousand the things we've lost is that that you plural. You know. Yeah we don't have that in our language today.

So you'll note there's a big variation between King James English and our modern 21st century. And I'm going to be blunt here. Americanized dialect of English. You know I have the privilege of serving a group of people from around the world.

Part of them are in the United Kingdom and part of them are in Australia. And oh boy you know you sit down and have a conversation with the Aussies. They that's English. But it's like I have to tell him.

Could you slow down. Because I really do not understand what you're saying. Okay. And then you know you spend some time in the UK. You spend some time overseas in the UK. Sitting down it takes a little bit of getting used to not just not just their their accents but also the phrases they use are different.

The idioms that they say are very different than our idioms. And as a result of that there's there's some translation work and it you get exhausted having a conversation with a Brit as an American. And I'm sure it's exhausting for them to to be to have a conversation with us as well.

But we all speak the same language. But we see we see different variations of it. So King James is that as well. All of that being said when Jesus was being raised none of his friends none of the rabbis none of the people who wanted him murdered called him Jesus.

He would have he would have had that he would have been called Yeshua. Yeah. His God-given name is Yeshua. Okay. And the reason for that is because of all of the varieties. Jesus yesu or Yeshua. Only Yeshua actually has a meaning.

And it means Yahweh saves. And that's Hebrew. And that's Hebrew. Yeah. But the translation to English would be Joshua. Yeah that. And that's where there's an inconsistency. Yeah. And the reason why there's the inconsistency is this.

Is that when you go into the Old Testament Bible we have a book it's called Joshua. Right. So we're taking the Hebrew Yeshua and now we're anglicizing it and making it Joshua. But when you get to the New Testament you over and again you don't see Joshua.

You see yesu. So we anglicize that as Jesus. Part of it's the telephone game too. We're we're like the 10th translation in in the tradition of how to say the name. Yeah. It went from Hebrew and Aramaic out to coining.

Yeah. Then by the Roman Empire times they needed it translated to Latin the Vulgate. Then those Latin words needed to get modified as Latin broke down into the languages we now call French and Italian and Spanish.

And then those who got in contact with say England. But that was early modern England. That's Chaucer England and then. So it's in it a little more a little more to sound natural to these people. Turns it a little more to sound natural these people a little more sound.

And there's nothing wrong with that. And it's not dishonest. It's just the history of the church. So now and in translators will keep that tradition rather than confuse the heck out of everybody. Yeah.

You know we'll say Noah. Not. Ah. Yeah. No. Yeah. And why. Because if I say and then Yahweh said the door I'm gonna say you're gonna go over there. What though. Who did what. Yeah.

Because those are because we don't speak with those gutturals you know. Yeah. And then and we call them Isaiah rather than yes you are. You know there's all these different. You have to make these concessions to how the target language uses words and the way they use pronunciations.

And then I would note this is that the translators the King James over and again they would come to the name Yahweh and they would translate it as Jehovah. Which is was a bad idea to begin with. And so when you're reading the Old Testament in King James whenever the name of God comes up you're going to see Jehovah Jehovah Jehovah Jehovah Jehovah Jehovah.

All right. You read your ESV that same text will say Lord Lord Lord Lord Lord. All capital letters and say well which is it is Jehovah or is it Lord. The answer is neither. You know it's actually the name of God Yahweh.

This is where I wish I had a whiteboard because it'd be nice to kind of work this all out. But all of that being said these are not things to attack the Bible. This is this is recognizing that the scriptures that we have in front of us that this is an English translation and there's decisions that have been made regarding these things and so and these decisions have long traditions that we've inherited and at the same.

So I'm not saying the Bible is incorrect. What I am saying is is that what the angel Gabriel would have said to Joseph is his name will be called Yeshua. Because he will pave it save his people from their sins.

And how am I confident about that. Because I know a thing or two about how it how our our translations came to be in our hands and what's missing in that element. All right. So pointing that out is a pastor's job.

This is why we go to seminary. This is why we study the original languages. This is why we're required to understand how textual variants and things like this work and understand the way the Holy Spirit is using this language.

Yes to okay to Jesus his name. They would they would refer to him as Yeshua. They have no problem referring to him as Yeshua. And they would say Yeshua is not the Messiah. That's the way they talk. Oh it's a Messianic Jews will always say sorry miss.

I was thinking Orthodox. The Orthodox would say yeah and that in fact Messianic Jews it's all Yeshua. They would they don't even call him Jesus. Every time they see the word Jesus they substitute it with Yeshua.

Yeah yeah. That's right. Okay. So you. Well here's the thing. Okay so I have a son his name is Joshua. If I were living in Mexico my son's name would be Jesus. You see what I'm saying here. It's the same name.

Okay. It's the same name but notice I didn't name him Yeshua. His name is Joshua. Get it all right. So that's right. If you guys want to start calling Josh Jesus you know you get the idea. Yeah.

The commandment don't take the Lord's name in vain. You know somebody you think he took the Lord's name in vain. He says no. I'm just talking about my brother. Okay yeah. So this is. I love how.

Good I was so hopeful thinking we were gonna get to let me let me I'm gonna come back to your question. Let me finish the point on Matthew 1 real quick. And then we'll ask. We'll answer your question regarding what does it mean to take God's name in vain and and the different ways in which people worked around this.

The Virgin Birth, Isaiah 7, and Matthew 1

So coming back to our text then the prophecy regarding Jesus is now finding a twin fulfillment. And here the angel is speaking to Joseph in a dream. And and he so Mary will bear a son. You shall call his name.

And I know the English translation says Jesus the the Greek says ye a Seuss. But what the angel would have said to him is Yeshua because he will save his people from their sins. All of this took place to fulfill what the Lord had spoken by the Prophet.

And now we see our Old Testament text from next week. Behold the Virgin shall conceive and bear a son and they shall call his name Emmanuel. And now we see the twin fulfillment then of this prophecy. And God the Holy Spirit inspiring Matthew inspires him to use the Greek word Parthenos.

And so Alma in the Old Testament in a proletic prophecy has its immediate fulfillment in the time of Ahaz sits dormant for what 700 years. And then finds its second and ultimate fulfillment in the in the virgin conception of Jesus the one who will save his people from their sins.

And the Holy Spirit now takes the Greek the Hebrew word Alma. And in this translation translated translates it to Parthenos which can only mean a virgin. I say a 7. I want to say 11. But I'm doing that from memory and I don't trust my memory anymore.

Duplicate tab. Hang on a second. Here I want to see what it was in the Septuagint that that's a good question. I don't know. Off the top of my head. Yeah 14. The Lord Adonai himself will give you a sign.

Behold the Alma shall conceive and bear a son. I I'm not familiar with what the Septuagint says on this. Okay so 714 be interesting. So God the Holy Spirit then in the inspired text of Matthew chapter 1 takes Alma and gives us Parthenos Parthenos.

Is it Parthenos in the Septuagint. That's interesting. Oh yeah. That's interesting. Is it any wonder why they the Jews early late in the first century dumped the Septuagint. It was too effective as.

An evangelism tool. So he's he's. Our copies of the Septuagint are older than our copies of the Masoretic correct. Yep. So the oldest existing version of the Bible has part of it is Parthenos.

Which is not ambiguous. That's just plain virgin. Oh just straight-up virgin. Yeah good point good point out. I hadn't even looked at that in the Septuagint. All of that's nerdy stuff. Now coming back to your question Mike so let's talk about the commandment.

You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain. What does this mean. We should fear and love God so that we do not curse swear use witchcraft or you can say satanic arts liar deceived by his name but call upon in every trouble pray praise and give thanks.

Alright so there's your explanation for it. So when when people take a wooden approach to thou shalt not take the name of the Lord your God in vain the the Orthodox the further the Pharisees actually came up with a very clever way of dealing with this.

And when you have a conversation with the Karahites I'll mention them again here. The Karahites do not when the when God's name shows up in the Old Testament they do not replace it with Adonai. It's very fascinating they do not do that.