Perrydox.com is devoted to the pursuit of truth, whether plain or paradoxical, whether simple or sublime, or simply absurd yet absolute.
Exodus 20:7 – NASB vs. HCSB vs. ESV
Exodus 20:7 NASB “You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain, for the LORD will not leave him unpunished who takes His name in vain.
Exodus 20:7 HCSB Do not misuse the name of the LORD your God, because the LORD will punish anyone who misuses His name.
Exodus 20:7 HCSB (2010) Do not misuse the name of Yahweh your God, because Yahweh will not leave anyone unpunished who misuses His name.
Exodus 20:7 ESV “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.
In the original HCSB, for some inexplicable reason, the translators did not use the name of God which is Yahweh, although it is the perfect occasion to according to their own standards – “However, the Holman CSB uses Yahweh, the personal name of God in Hebrews, when a biblical text emphasizes Yahweh as a name…” (Introduction). In the updated version they made the correction.
As for the translation “misuse” instead of “take…in vain,” apparently (I am not a Hebrew scholar), they combined two Hebrew words into one. It makes sense definitionally, but here is the question all translators must answer. When a text is so familiar, and its wording so common, is it best to change? We can ask the same question with verse 8.
Hi, Perry! I’m REALLY behind on these posts, but I’ve thoroughly enjoyed going through them and seeing how the HCSB (my preferred translation) stacks up against the ESV and the NASB. It has been an enlightening journey; thanks for doing all the hard work! 🙂
You brought up a question that I think is quite cogent: “When a text is so familiar and it’s wording so common, is it best to change?” I’ve been thinking about it, and here’s what I’ve come up with so far. On one hand, I think changing SOME texts from familiar wording to more updated language can be costly; the example you provided about David being a “man after God’s own heart” is a good example of this. The HCSB’s translation “loyal to Him” is accurate, and conveys the meaning a bit clearer, but at the cost of “beauty and poetry” as you rightly argued. In other passages, though, I think certain wording can become SO familiar that we have a tendency simply to read over it, recognize it, and move on without being impacted by it. John 3:16 is a good example of this, and the HCSB’s translation of it (which I prefer) really grabbed me the first time I read it. I think “take…in vain” is an example of the latter; too many people think the phrase means, “don’t curse using God’s name.” Of course; but are there other ways in which we can misuse God’s name? For example, would attaching God’s name to a belief system/activity which is clearly in violation of Scripture be a misuse of it? How about invoking God’s name to bless something that isn’t in line with His character as revealed in the person of Jesus Christ and in Scripture?
If the point of the command is that the Israelites were to see God’s name as a revelation of Himself, then it should be treated as special, set apart, and holy. I think “take…in vain” has certain cultural connotations that might limit a reader’s understanding of it to using profanity, whereas “misuse” provides a wider net and includes other possible ways of abusing the revealed name of God.
For a REALLY different reading, check out the Common English Bible (a translation I do not personally endorse or use, but which occasionally offers an enlightening suggestion). Here’s how it reads:
“Do not use the LORD your God’s name as if it were of no significance; the LORD won’t forgive anyone who uses his name that way.”
What do you think? 🙂
Thanks again!!!
Chad, thanks for recognizing the value of what I said. You are correct though, in some verses the tried and true translation does not actually convey what is really meant. Then I believe altering the reading helps the reader.