Say It Ain't So
I will keep this short. Not because I have little to say, nor because I think the matter I'm addressing is of little significance, nor because I've finally learned the importance of brevity (someday, perhaps), but because I'm rushing off to camp again tomorrow, and I have little time to spare.
Consider this passage: "I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the fathers to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing love to a thousand {generations} of those who love me and keep my commandments." (Exodus 20:5-6)
Assuming that you're as disgusted with what this verse seems to say as I am, can you please explain to me how God is not saying here that he punishes children for their father's sins?
Post a Comment
6 comments:
I think this verse IS saying that children are punished for their father's sins. Bibilically (as well as in the world today) this is certainly the case.
A Biblical example would be the destruction of Canaan, or Jerusalem, or any other sinful city where the children and infants are destroyed along with those being punished for thier sin. As for the world today, well, war in the middle east, world hunger, terrorism and so on are largely caused by the sins of adults and children suffer. (I guess the difference is, in this case the suffering may not directly from God).
I guess the question I would ask is: does God think it is just to punish children for the sins of their parents, or is He mentioning what inevitably what inevitably happens (when adults suffer so do their children)?
And no I don't like this verse any more than you do. I think it's horribly unfair... what I do like is the Bible's willingness (or the willingness of it's writers, I guess) to tackle topics as unpleasant and tragic as this one, which are plain to see but difficult to deal with.
It is certainly true that children in our world suffer for their father's sins (just as we all suffer from the sins of others). But this verse doesn't say that such suffering is a necessary and tragic result of living in a fallen world, it says that God personally, purposely inflicts punnishment on children for their father's sins.
If you want to interpret this verse as descriptive of injustice in a fallen world (not of God's sense of justice) can you explain how keeping God's commandments can, through natural means, have a positive effect on our descendants a thousand generations down the line?
(If you take this number literally, this blessing would last about 20,000 years, give or take, and potentially cover billions of descendants. By comparison, this proclamation was made less than 3500 years ago, and the earth itself is only 6000 years old, according to those who take the Bible most literally.)
The context, the tone, and the wording of this verse seem inescapably clear to me (though I seem to be in the minority). But I've been mistaken about the Bible before, and I would be much relieved (and not entirely suprised) to discover that I'm wrong once again.
I've thought about this verse some more.. this is what I've heard from other people who actually know about this stuff..
In the ancient world (old testament. for example) it seems it was common practice to punish children for their parent's sins. Kings killed the families of traitors (books of Esther and Daniel, for example), Ahab's entire line was wiped out, and so on. Not sure if this was God's idea of justice (I'd like to think it isn't) but He certainly worked biblically in that framework.
Think of King DAvid. First his illegitimate child, and then the entire people of isreal were punished for David's sins. When Achan sinned in Joshua, the peopel of isreal lost a battle.. and some lives.. I'm sure you can think of a billion examples.
It worked the other way as well... God showed favor to Solomon for David's sake... in the OT the greatest reward was always "your line will do such-and-such, your children will do so-and-so, you will have many offspring.." Me personally, I wouldn't be too impressed by a blessing given to my descendants (give it to me!) but back then.. that's how things worked, not sure why, an expert on the ancient world would know.
Also, it's worth noting that God had a very special reward-punishment relationship with isreal.. Do good and prosper, do bad and be punished.. a scenario that plays itself out over and over and over again until Jesus comes... these rewards/punishments were given to the people of isreal as a group.. including the innocent children (the kids dragged off to babylon, wandering the desert for 40 y, etc)... not sure God works what way with the rest of the world anymore.
Maybe these thoughts don't make the verse any easier to swallow. I personally find the idea of corporate responsibility expremely distateful, and kinda scary if I am to be held responsible for the actions of the Christian church or the Western World today..
however, looking that verse the way an ancient Hebrew might have looked at it... Would he have seen injustice and been appalled, or would he have said "ya, punishment for a few generations... that's how things work, that's what our kings do, but holy crap God is sure gracious to those who are obedient!"
Thanks for the thoughts. I could do a broader, more in-depth study of corporate punnishment in the Bible, but I think I'll hold off for a bit. (More pressing matters.) I buy the "that's the way it was back then" arguement to a certain extent, but personally I don't think it covers this instance. But I think it is vitally important that we try to understand these statements as the original readers/hearers would have. This is not the last or only step in Biblical interpretation, but it must be the first. And when it cannot be preformed satisfactoraly (this is probably the case most of the time) we must avoid being dogmatic about our interpretations. So this is where I sit on this issue right now: I don't like the look of it, but I can't say for sure that I'm seeing it clearly. Someday, perhaps.
This is also a verse I have struggled with. It bugged me for a long time, it does seem unfair, and does not portray the benevolent God we are suppossed to have. Then only thing that helped me understand it was to think of a child raised by an abusive parent. Does the child not also tend to become abusive? Sometimes I think God may call us to repent the sins of our father's because we're just the next in line to commit them.
What you say is true, but I don't think it's what this verse is saying.
Post a Comment