Comments on: Oversensitive People: The New Outrage over AIM

By: Chris

Chris — Mon, 20 Feb 2006 23:04:50 +0000

I am (oops) not sure if it was a prank or not. I’m sure it
was only a misunderstanding. I have used God’s name in vain
a numerous amount of times. How could I ever blame another?
If one were to set a loving example, they could use this
misunderstanding to share what the true meaning of “I AM”
with others on the program.

By: Faustus

Faustus — Fri, 03 Feb 2006 02:33:20 +0000

Wow, so G-d only speaks English these days, huh? I have to say, that’s certainly news to me. Or are all forms of “I am” in all languages banned? I’d better get busy monitoring Japanese publications for blatant misuse of “Watashi wa.” And those Germans, man, they’re always throwing “Ich bin” around. Ah, well… they’ll be getting theirs.

Ahem. I think this would fall under the heading of “Common Sense.”

By: Scipio

Scipio — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 18:10:52 +0000

Anyone offended by this use of “I am” had better start referring to themselves in the third person.

By: Barbara H.

Barbara H. — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 13:18:59 +0000

I agree we shouldn’t use the Lord’s name lightly, but I don’t think the public at large knows that “I AM” is one of the ways God refers to Himself. I think it was meant as a play on “AIM”. I applaud the guy for being concerned about the honor of God’s name, but I wish he had made his complaints more along the lines of, “You may not know this, but “I AM” is one of the biblical names for God. I don’t think you meant it in that sense, nevertheless, that is what the phrase “I AM” is going to mean to most Christians and they would find it offensive to see God’s name used in this manner.”

By: Blog Jones

Blog Jones — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 11:11:15 +0000

But they’re not using “I am” as the name of God!

I am writing a comment on my blog.

Did I just use the Lord’s name in vain?

By: David Siglin

David Siglin — Thu, 02 Feb 2006 05:18:50 +0000

Actually God does command us to not take His name in vain and “I AM” is definitely one of the names of God. So, it is wrong for I AM to be used in a trite manner. Maybe the guy is a nut case overall, but on this account he is right in assuming God is offended.