For His Name's Sake

The opening line of Ezekiel 36:22 is one of the most startling statements in the Hebrew Bible. It is not a word of comfort. It is a correction:

לֹא לְמַעַנְכֶם אֲנִי עֹשֶׂה בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל כִּי אִם־לְשֵׁם־קָדְשִׁי

lo' lema'ankhem 'ani 'oseh beit Yisra'el ki 'im-leshem-qodshi

"Not for your sake am I acting, house of Israel, but for my holy name." — Ezekiel 36:22 (MT)

The Hebrew is emphatic. The negative particle lo' (לֹא) heads the clause. The prepositional phrase lema'ankhem (לְמַעַנְכֶם, "for your sake," H4616 + 2mp suffix) is immediately denied. The adversative ki 'im (כִּי אִם, "but rather") pivots to the true motive: leshem-qodshi (לְשֵׁם־קָדְשִׁי, "for my holy name" — H8034 shem, "name," + H6944 qodesh, "holiness," in construct with the 1cs suffix).

God is about to announce the most comprehensive restoration program in the Old Testament — regathering, cleansing, new heart, indwelling Spirit, permanent land-dwelling, Eden-like transformation. And before any of it, he strips the people of the idea that they deserve it.

This study traces the construction lema'an shemi (לְמַעַן שְׁמִי, "for the sake of my name") across the canon. A concordance search for the Hebrew preposition lema'an (H4616) co-occurring with shem (H8034) returns over 30 verses across a dozen Old Testament books; the related preposition ba'avur (H5668, 1 Samuel 12:22) and the bare suffix form lema'ani (Isaiah 43:25, 48:11) extend the pattern further, and the Greek dia to onoma (G1223+G3686) carries it into the New Testament. The construction appears in narrative, prayer, prophecy, psalm, and epistle. The pattern reveals something about the character of God that most readers pass over too quickly: his primary commitment in redemptive history is not to the comfort of his people but to the reputation of his name. The two are not opposed — when God acts for his name, his people benefit enormously — but the order matters.

The Construction

The Hebrew phrase at the center of this study uses the preposition lema'an (לְמַעַן, H4616), meaning "for the sake of" or "on account of," combined with shem (שֵׁם, H8034), "name." The construction takes several forms depending on whose name is in view and what grammatical suffix is attached:

• lema'an shemi (לְמַעַן שְׁמִי) — "for the sake of my name" (1cs suffix)
• lema'an shimkha (לְמַעַן שִׁמְךָ) — "for the sake of your name" (2ms suffix, used in prayer)
• lema'an shemo (לְמַעַן שְׁמוֹ) — "for the sake of his name" (3ms suffix, used in narrative/psalm)

A close variant uses ba'avur (בַּעֲבוּר, H5668) with the same meaning — "for the sake of" — as in 1 Samuel 12:22. Another uses the bare suffix lema'ani (לְמַעֲנִי, "for my own sake") without the noun shem, as in Isaiah 43:25 and 48:11. All belong to the same theological family: God acting on the basis of his own character rather than human merit.

The construction spans the entire canon, from the Exodus narrative to the Apocalypse. What follows traces it in canonical order.

The Paradigm: Exodus

The "for my name" pattern begins where Israel's story as a nation begins — at the Exodus. God tells Pharaoh through Moses:

"But for this purpose I have raised you up, to show you my power, so that my name may be proclaimed in all the earth." — Exodus 9:16 (MT)

The Hebrew here uses shem (H8034) with the verb saphar (סָפַר, H5608, Piel infinitive — "to recount, declare"). The Exodus is not primarily about liberating slaves. It is about making the divine name known among the nations. Pharaoh is a means to that end — raised up ('amad, H5975, Hiphil) so that the name reverberates.

The Psalter looks back on this and names the motive explicitly:

"He saved them for his name's sake (lema'an shemo, לְמַעַן שְׁמוֹ), to make known his mighty power (gevurato, גְּבוּרָתוֹ)." — Psalm 106:8 (MT)

The verb yasha' (H3467, Hiphil — "he saved") and the purpose clause lema'an shemo establish the Exodus paradigm: God delivers so that his name is known. The deliverance is real and physical — Israel crosses the sea, Pharaoh's army drowns. But the motive is not sympathy for the oppressed. It is jealousy for the name. Psalm 106:8 is a retrospective theological summary written centuries after the event, and it identifies the name as the operating principle of the entire Exodus.

This is the foundation on which everything in Ezekiel 36 rests.

The Prayers: Israel Learns the Vocabulary

If God acts for his name's sake, then the most potent thing Israel can do in prayer is appeal to the name. The Psalms and the prophets show a sustained tradition of doing exactly that.

Psalm 23:3 — "He leads me in paths of righteousness for his name's sake (lema'an shemo)." David's confidence rests not on his own worthiness but on the shepherd's reputation. The divine name is bound to the divine action: if God leads, it is because his name requires it.

Psalm 25:11 — "Pardon my iniquity ('avoni, עֲוֹנִי, H5771), for your name's sake (lema'an shimkha, לְמַעַן שִׁמְךָ) — for it is great." The prayer is striking. David does not minimize his sin. He does not plead extenuating circumstances. He pleads the name. The logic is: my guilt is heavy, but your name is greater, and forgiving me serves your name more than punishing me.

Psalm 79:9 — "Help us, O God of our salvation, for the glory of your name; deliver us, and atone for our sins — for your name's sake (lema'an shimekha)." This psalm, written in the aftermath of Jerusalem's destruction, doubles the appeal. The poet asks for both deliverance and atonement, and grounds both in the name.

Psalm 109:21 — "But you, O YHWH, my Lord, deal with me for your name's sake (lema'an shimekha); because your steadfast love (chesed, חֶסֶד, H2617) is good, deliver me." The name and chesed appear in the same breath — the name is the ground, chesed is the character it displays.

Psalm 143:11 — "For your name's sake (lema'an shimkha), O YHWH, revive me (techayyeni, from chayah, חָיָה, H2421)." The appeal links the name directly to life — revival, resurrection. The name is not abstract reputation; it is life-giving power.

1 Samuel 12:22 uses the variant preposition: "For YHWH will not abandon his people for the sake of his great name (ba'avur shemo haggadol, בַּעֲבוּר שְׁמוֹ הַגָּדוֹל, H5668 + H8034 + H1419)." Samuel says this at the transition from judges to monarchy. The logic is identical to the Exodus paradigm: God's commitment to Israel is grounded not in Israel's faithfulness but in what his name requires.

The prophets take up the same plea:

Jeremiah 14:7 — "Act, O YHWH, for your name's sake (lema'an shimkha)." This is spoken during a drought. Jeremiah does not argue that the people deserve rain. He argues that the name deserves vindication.

Jeremiah 14:21 — "Do not spurn us, for your name's sake; do not dishonor the throne of your glory (kisse' khevodekha, כִּסֵּא כְבוֹדֶךָ)." Now the name is connected to the throne — the place where God's rule is visible. To abandon Israel would be to dishonor the visible seat of divine authority.

Daniel 9:19 — "O Lord, hear; O Lord, forgive; O Lord, pay attention and act. Do not delay — for your own sake (lema'ankha, לְמַעַנְךָ), my God, because your name (shimkha) is called over your city and your people." Daniel prays from Babylon, and his appeal is the same as David's: the name is at stake, because Jerusalem bears it.

The pattern across these representative prayers is consistent. David, Asaph, Jeremiah, and Daniel do not appeal to Israel's worthiness. They appeal to the name.

The Problem: Profanation

To understand what Ezekiel 36 is solving, you have to understand what "profane the name" means. The Hebrew verb is chalal (חָלַל, H2490, Piel — "to profane, defile, pollute"). Its opposite is qadash (קָדַשׁ, H6942, "to sanctify, set apart as holy"). The name is either hallowed or profaned — there is no neutral ground.

The Torah defines profanation concretely:

"Any one of the people of Israel or of the strangers who sojourn in Israel who gives any of his children to Molech shall surely be put to death... because he has given one of his children to Molech, to profane my holy name (lema'an tamme' 'et-miqdashi ulechallel 'et-shem qodshi)." — Leviticus 20:3 (MT)

Child sacrifice profanes the name. The verb chalal (H2490, Piel) takes the direct object shem qodshi ("my holy name"). This is the most extreme form — worship directed to a false god using human life — but it establishes the principle: actions done in connection with YHWH's name that contradict his character make that name common, unholy, profaned.

Amos extends this to social injustice:

"A man and his father go in to the same girl, so that my holy name is profaned (lema'an challel 'et-shem qodshi)." — Amos 2:7 (MT)

The same construction — chalal (H2490, Piel) + shem qodshi. Sexual exploitation profanes the name just as surely as idolatry does. The name is not merely a theological concept. It is a reputation tied to the behavior of the people who bear it. When Israel acts unjustly, the nations conclude that YHWH either approves of injustice or cannot prevent it. Either way, the name is diminished.

The verbal links are precise — the same construction (chalal + shem qodshi) appears in all three passages. Read canonically, they form a progression: the Torah establishes the prohibition, the prophets document the violation, and Ezekiel announces the divine remedy. This is a canonical pattern, not a single author's argument — but the shared vocabulary makes it more than coincidence.

The Threefold History: Ezekiel 20

Before announcing the future restoration in chapter 36, Ezekiel recounts a history of the name in chapter 20. Three times God was on the verge of judgment — and three times he relented, not because Israel repented, but because his name was at stake among the nations.

Egypt (Ezekiel 20:9) — "But I acted for my name's sake (lema'an shemi, לְמַעַן שְׁמִי), that it should not be profaned (hechel, from chalal, H2490) in the sight of the nations among whom they lived, in whose sight I made myself known to them, in bringing them out of the land of Egypt."

First wilderness generation (Ezekiel 20:14) — "But I acted for my name's sake, that it should not be profaned in the sight of the nations, in whose sight I had brought them out."

Second wilderness generation (Ezekiel 20:22) — "But I withheld my hand and acted for my name's sake, that it should not be profaned in the sight of the nations, in whose sight I had brought them out."

The repetition is deliberate. Three generations, three rebellions, three stays of judgment — and the same motive each time: lema'an shemi. The nations (goyim, גּוֹיִם, H1471) are watching. If YHWH destroys the people he publicly claimed, the nations will conclude that YHWH is either unfaithful or impotent. So he preserves them — not for their sake, but for the name.

Three past deliverances. One future promise. The same motive every time.

The Pivot: Ezekiel 20:44

Ezekiel 20:44 is the hinge between past pattern and future promise:

"And you will know that I am YHWH, when I deal with you for my name's sake (lema'an shemi), not according to your evil ways or your corrupt deeds, O house of Israel — declares the Lord YHWH." — Ezekiel 20:44 (MT)

The recognition formula — vidatem ki-'ani YHWH (וִידַעְתֶּם כִּי־אֲנִי יהוה, "and you will know that I am YHWH," H3045 + H3068) — appears 68 times in Ezekiel (counted by co-occurrence of H3045 and H3068 in the same verse). Its distribution across the book reveals a pattern:

In the first two sections, the nations recognize YHWH through judgment. In the third, they recognize him through Israel's restoration. Ezekiel 20:44 stands at the transition point. For the first time, the formula combines with lema'an shemi in a forward-looking context. Everything prior in chapter 20 was retrospective — God acted for his name in the past. Now he will act for his name in the future. And when he does, the result will be recognition: "you will know that I am YHWH."

This sets up chapter 36.

The Promises: Ezekiel 36:22-38

Ezekiel 36:22-38 is the most detailed restoration passage in the Hebrew Bible. It unfolds in a sequence of specific, concrete promises, each introduced by divine first-person speech. The motive statement in verse 22 governs everything that follows.

The Profanation Problem (36:20-23)

"But when they came to the nations, wherever they came, they profaned (vayechalelu, from chalal, H2490, Piel) my holy name (shem qodshi), in that people said of them, 'These are the people of YHWH, and yet they had to go out of his land.'" — Ezekiel 36:20 (MT)

The profanation is not something Israel did in exile. It is what their exile caused. The nations saw YHWH's people expelled from YHWH's land and drew the logical conclusion: this god could not protect his own. The name was profaned by the spectacle of failure — not by idolatry this time, but by exile itself.

This is what God responds to in verse 22. The "not for your sake" is a direct answer to the profanation problem. The restoration is not a reward for repentance (Israel has not repented). It is a divine initiative to undo the profanation. Verse 23 states the goal:

"And I will sanctify (veqiddashti, from qadash, H6942, Piel) my great name, which has been profaned among the nations, which you have profaned among them. And the nations will know (veyade'u, from yada', H3045) that I am YHWH — declares the Lord YHWH — when I show myself holy (behiqqodschi, בְּהִקָּדְשִׁי, H6942 Niphal) through you before their eyes." — Ezekiel 36:23 (MT)

The same verb pair — chalal (H2490, profane) and qadash (H6942, sanctify) — that defined the problem now defines the solution. The name was profaned; God will sanctify it. And the instrument of sanctification is the restoration of Israel "before their eyes" — the nations watching.

The Specific Promises (36:24-28)

What follows is a sequence of seven concrete actions, all in the divine first person:

1. Regathering (v. 24) — "I will take you from the nations (min-haggoyim) and gather you from all the lands (mikkol-ha'aratsot) and bring you into your own land." The scope is universal: not from one empire (as in the Babylonian return) but from all nations.

2. Cleansing (v. 25) — "I will sprinkle clean water (mayim tehorim, H4325 + H2889) on you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses and from all your idols." The language echoes the priestly purification ritual (Numbers 19:17-19), but the agent is God himself, not a priest. No human mediator is specified.

3. New heart (v. 26a) — "I will give you a new heart (lev chadash, H3820 + H2319) and put a new spirit (ruach chadashah) within you." The noun lev (H3820) in Hebrew denotes the seat of will, thought, and decision — not emotion. A new heart is a new decision-making center.

4. Heart transplant (v. 26b) — "I will remove the heart of stone (lev ha'even, H3820 + H68) from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh (lev basar, H3820 + H1320)." Stone cannot respond; flesh can. The metaphor is one of deadness replaced by sensitivity.

5. Indwelling Spirit (v. 27) — "I will put my Spirit (ruchi, H7307 + 1cs suffix) within you and cause you to walk in my statutes." The Spirit is the agent of obedience. The new heart receives; the Spirit empowers. The result — walking in statutes — is stated as a certainty, not a possibility.

6. Land-dwelling (v. 28a) — "You shall dwell in the land (ba'arets, H776) that I gave to your fathers." The land promise reappears, tied explicitly to the Abrahamic grant.

7. Covenant formula (v. 28b) — "And you shall be my people, and I will be your God." This is the covenant formula ('am and 'Elohim — H5971 + H430) that runs from Exodus 6:7 through Revelation 21:3.

The Eden Comparison (36:33-38)

The passage does not end with spiritual transformation. It extends to the physical landscape:

"And they will say, 'This land that was desolate has become like the garden of Eden (kegan-'Eden, כְּגַן־עֵדֶן, H1588 + H5731).'" — Ezekiel 36:35 (MT)

The comparison to Eden is explicit. The ruined cities are rebuilt and inhabited. The desolate land becomes a garden. The population swells:

"I will multiply them like the flock (tson, צֹאן, H6629) for sacrifice, like the flock of Jerusalem during her appointed feasts, so the ruined cities will be full of flocks of people." — Ezekiel 36:38 (MT)

The simile — "like the flock of Jerusalem during her appointed feasts" — presupposes a functioning temple with active festivals. The city fills with people the way the temple courts filled with sacrificial animals at Passover and Tabernacles. This is not metaphor; it is the kind of concrete, measurable image that prophetic promise uses when describing a literal future.

The Terminus: Ezekiel 39:7, 22, 29

Three statements in Ezekiel 39 close the loop opened in chapter 20. Each contains a finality marker — the Hebrew adverb 'od (עוֹד, H5750), meaning "again, anymore" — that signals irreversibility.

Ezekiel 39:7 — "I will make my holy name known in the midst of my people Israel, and I will not let my holy name be profaned anymore ('od). And the nations will know that I am YHWH, the Holy One in Israel."

The verb chalal (H2490) appears one last time — negated, with 'od. The name will never again be profaned. This is a terminal statement. It has no historical counterpart. After the Babylonian return, the name was profaned again (Malachi addresses this directly). After any historical restoration, further failure followed. The "never again" demands a final act.

Ezekiel 39:22 — "The house of Israel will know that I am YHWH their God from that day forward (min-hayyom hahu' vahal'ah)."

The temporal marker min-hayyom hahu' vahal'ah (מִן־הַיּוֹם הַהוּא וָהָלְאָה, "from that day and onward") is a one-directional phrase. It establishes a starting point with no endpoint. From that day, Israel will know YHWH — permanently, without relapse. No historical period matches this description.

Ezekiel 39:29 — "And I will not hide my face from them anymore ('od), for I will have poured out my Spirit on the house of Israel — declares the Lord YHWH."

The hiding of God's face (hester panim, a concept rooted in Deuteronomy 31:17-18) is the most severe form of divine discipline — withdrawal of presence. This verse declares its permanent end. The basis is the outpouring of the Spirit (shaphakh, H8210, "pour out" + ruach, H7307), which connects directly to the Spirit-promise of 36:27. The two passages are one event viewed from two angles.

These three "never again" statements form an irreversible terminus. They do not describe a restoration that might fail. They describe a final act after which the pattern of profanation-judgment-restoration ceases because the profanation itself is ended permanently.

The companion passage in Ezekiel 37:21-28 — which shares over half its vocabulary with chapter 36 — reinforces this with two additional permanent markers: an "everlasting covenant" (berit 'olam, בְּרִית עוֹלָם, H1285+H5769, Ezekiel 37:26) and "my sanctuary in their midst forever" (miqdashi betokham le'olam, Ezekiel 37:28). The covenant is not renewed but eternal; the sanctuary is not rebuilt but permanent. These terms belong to the same theological arc as the "never again" statements of chapter 39.

What the Text Says and What We Infer

This study has traced the "for my name's sake" construction across the canon. Now we must distinguish what the text directly states from what we infer.

What the text directly states:

• God's motive for restoring Israel is his own name, not Israel's merit (Ezekiel 36:22 — direct statement).
• The same motive operated in the Exodus (Psalm 106:8, Ezekiel 20:9), the wilderness (Ezekiel 20:14, 22), and will operate in the future restoration (Ezekiel 20:44, 36:22-23).
• The restoration involves regathering from all nations (36:24), cleansing (36:25), new heart and spirit (36:26-27), permanent land-dwelling (36:28), Eden-like transformation (36:35), and temple-flock population (36:38).
• The terminus is irreversible: no more profanation (39:7), permanent knowledge of YHWH (39:22), permanent divine presence through the Spirit (39:29).
• The recognition formula, distributed across all three major sections of Ezekiel, shifts from judgment contexts (chapters 5-32) to restoration contexts (chapters 33-39) — an observable pattern in the verse-by-verse distribution.

What we infer from the text (necessary inference):

• When we compare the specific terms of Ezekiel 36:24-38 to the Babylonian return, the historical event does not match the textual scope. The return was from one empire, not "all nations." No national heart-transformation or Spirit-outpouring accompanied it. The land did not become "like Eden." The name continued to be profaned — Malachi 1:6-14 documents this directly, addressing post-return Israel for dishonoring YHWH's name at the altar. This comparison is not a theological judgment but a textual observation: the promises specify more than the history delivered.
• No subsequent historical period matches the terminal language either. The "never again" of 39:7 and the "from that day forward" of 39:22 describe a permanent condition. No historical period of Israel's experience has been characterized by unbroken knowledge of YHWH without relapse.
• The eschatological conclusion follows: the promises remain outstanding in their full, textual terms. This is the reading most consistent with taking the text at face value. Those who argue for a spiritual or ecclesiological fulfillment carry the burden of explaining what "all nations," "the land that I gave to your fathers," "garden of Eden," "temple-flock," and "never again" mean if they do not mean what they appear to mean. That is a legitimate theological enterprise — but it requires interpretive work beyond what the text of Ezekiel itself provides.

What we must not claim:

• The text does not specify when these promises will be fulfilled. Ezekiel provides no date, no timeline, and no sequence relative to other prophetic events (Daniel's seventy weeks, for example). Any attempt to place Ezekiel 36 on a prophetic calendar is inference, not exegesis.
• The text does not explicitly connect this restoration to the New Testament concept of the church. Whether the church participates in these promises, or whether they belong exclusively to national Israel, is a question the text of Ezekiel does not address. That question requires a canonical theology that integrates Ezekiel with the New Testament — a legitimate enterprise, but one that goes beyond what Ezekiel 36 itself says.

The vocabulary overlap between Ezekiel 36 and Jeremiah 31:31-34 confirms that these are companion prophecies describing the same event from different angles. Ezekiel emphasizes the name-motive and the physical restoration; Jeremiah emphasizes the covenant-renewal and the internalization of Torah. Together they describe a single comprehensive act of God.

The Name in the New Testament

The Greek equivalent of shem (H8034) is onoma (ὄνομα, G3686). The New Testament picks up the "for the name" pattern in two distinct streams — forgiveness and suffering.

Forgiveness for the Name

"I am writing to you, little children, because your sins are forgiven on account of his name (dia to onoma autou, διὰ τὸ ὄνομα αὐτοῦ)." — 1 John 2:12 (TAGNT)

The preposition dia (G1223) + accusative onoma serves the same theological function as the Hebrew lema'an shem — identifying the name as the ground of divine action. Forgiveness in the New Testament operates on the same principle as in Psalm 25:11 — not because of the sinner's merit, but because of what the name requires. The name that was profaned among the nations (Ezekiel 36:20) is the same name on account of which sins are forgiven (1 John 2:12). The profanation-sanctification dynamic of Ezekiel 36 finds its personal application here.

Suffering for the Name

The second stream is striking: bearing the name brings not only forgiveness but hostility.

"And you will be hated by all nations on account of my name (dia to onoma mou, διὰ τὸ ὄνομά μου)." — Matthew 24:9 (TAGNT)

"But all these things they will do to you on account of my name (dia to onoma mou), because they do not know the one who sent me." — John 15:21 (TAGNT)

"Then they left the presence of the council, rejoicing that they were counted worthy to suffer dishonor for the Name (hyper tou onomatos, ὑπὲρ τοῦ ὀνόματος)." — Acts 5:41 (TAGNT)

The phrase in 3 John 1:7 is remarkable: hyper tou onomatos — simply "for the Name," with no possessive pronoun. The Name has become a title in its own right, needing no further specification. Everyone in the early church knew which name was meant. (Note: some manuscripts of Acts 5:41 also read without a pronoun, but the TAGNT includes αὐτοῦ; 3 John 1:7 stands alone unambiguously across textual traditions.)

Paul's calling is framed in the same terms:

"For I will show him how much he must suffer for my name's sake (hyper tou onomatos mou)." — Acts 9:16 (TAGNT)

And the pattern extends to the church at Ephesus:

"I know you are enduring patiently and bearing up for my name's sake (dia to onoma mou), and you have not grown weary." — Revelation 2:3 (TAGNT)

The traveling missionaries of 3 John exhibit the same logic:

"For they went out for the sake of the Name (hyper tou onomatos), receiving nothing from the Gentiles." — 3 John 1:7 (TAGNT)

The New Testament does not abandon Ezekiel's theology. It extends it. The name that God will sanctify among the nations (Ezekiel 36:23) is the same name for which the church suffers (Acts 5:41), the same name on account of which sins are forgiven (1 John 2:12), and the same name for which missionaries go out to the Gentiles (3 John 1:7). The "for the name" construction has moved from Hebrew prophecy into Greek praxis — from something God will do in the future to something the church participates in now.

Conclusion

Ezekiel 36:22 asserts a motive that runs through the entire biblical narrative: God acts for his name. The Exodus was for the name (Psalm 106:8). The wilderness preservations were for the name (Ezekiel 20:9, 14, 22). David's leading was for the name (Psalm 23:3). Forgiveness was for the name (Psalm 25:11, 1 John 2:12). Isaiah's deferral of anger was for the name (Isaiah 48:9). The future restoration will be for the name (Ezekiel 36:22-23).

The specific promises of Ezekiel 36:24-38 — universal regathering, sprinkling with clean water, new heart, indwelling Spirit, permanent land-dwelling, Eden-like transformation, temple-flock population — remain unfulfilled in their stated terms. The three terminal statements of Ezekiel 39:7, 22, and 29 — "never again profaned," "from that day forward," "I will not hide my face anymore" — have no historical counterpart. The text anticipates a final, irreversible act in which the name is sanctified permanently through Israel's restoration before the watching nations.

The construction lema'an shemi thus provides a theological grammar for the entire arc of redemptive history. It explains the past (why God delivered despite rebellion), the present (why forgiveness and suffering both operate "for the name"), and the future (why God will complete what he has promised). The motive is not charity. It is not sentimentality. It is the self-consistency of a God whose name — whose revealed character — demands that what he has spoken, he will perform.

"For my own sake, for my own sake, I do it — for how should [my name] be profaned? My glory I will not give to another." — Isaiah 48:11 (MT)