While it’s somewhat old news (at least to many of the writers here), Ray Comfort has the dubious distinction, not only of speaking at an upcoming Health & Wealth Gospel conference, and not only of being a royal jerk in his actual witness (i.e. the way he treats the other street performers at Surf City’s Pier Plaza), but today one of his old bits of insanity received a dubious distinction:

It made the front-page of FARK, probably the only news-blog I read with any regularity (though I try to avoid many of the comments threads, which are long, nasty and brutish, to be nice). It was also FARK that picked up Ingrid’s attack on VeggieTales a couple years back that brought SoL briefly (and sadly) into the secular public eye.

Now it’s Ray Comfort and his banana act.

Which is pitiful.

It seems that an atheist site took hold of this and ran with it, and it’s been posted to FARK (which has also been demonstrated to be the #1 source for comedy writers of late-night TV and talk radio). So, don’t be surprised if this shows up in embarrassing places in the coming week or so. With some luck or providence, there will be better things out there to make fun of.

Here’s the running commentary on FARK on the article in question. To be clear, though, I don’t endorse anything that you’re likely to find there – it was already pretty bad 10 comments in – so proceed with caution.

—UPDATE 8:00 a.m. 7/3—

After sleeping, praying and reflecting on it, I should not have submitted this article in the shape that it’s in.  The key message I was trying to get across -

that when we purposely engage the public square, we should do so in ways that are not offensive (even though the message of the gospel may bring offense) or pathetic

- was completely muddled and ill-thought-out in its presentation.  A lot more thought and prayer should have been engaged before hitting ’submit’.  However, since we do not try to cover up mistakes here by deleting things and pretending they didn’t happen, please feel free to stop by and say “Chris, you should have been much more considerate and reflective before hitting ’submit’” because, if you were to say this, you would be correct.

The third commandment of the summary of Torah (the Ten Commandments):

You shall not misuse the name of the LORD your God, for the LORD will not hold anyone guiltless who misuses his name.

In the list of the Ten Commandments, this one, more than any other, seems a bit out of place – particularly in its most used context. However, when examined in the light of its full context in scripture and its originally understood context, I think there is a lesson for all of us to grasp.

Vows and Oaths and Empty Words

Probably the way this verse is most often interpreted is that we should not use God’s (or Jesus’) name as an expletive, or otherwise extraneous manner. This is very wise, and I am sure a part of what is covered by the command. However, if we stop there, we completely miss the heart of this command.

To ‘misuse’ God’s name, or to take in vain (i.e. to ‘make it nothing’) is to attach it to something that to which it does not belong. It is claiming that God has blessed or cursed something, someone or some activity based on your own purposes. Or, as Andy Stanley notes, “the original intent of this command was to prevent people from attaching God’s name to purposes that are not His.”

To take God’s name in vain – to make it nothing – basically is man’s way of pitting God against Himself.

Read the rest of this entry »