Why would God punish children for the sins of their fathers?

Why would God punish children for the sins of their fathers?

The Bible claims that God both does and does not do this. It is one of the clearest and most profound contradictions in the entire Bible.

Any Ideas?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

It's designed to make people 'think' before they 'sin'. As people in general tend to love their children, one of the worst things they can do to them is pass on the wrath of god for no fault of their own but for the parents transgressions.

There are lots of contradictions in the bible, it just shows that the writings were borne by men and that said men proved to be bad editors.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

To the degree that one adopts the habits of one forefathers, one will be held liable for the results

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

This would not apply in my book since God would then be punishing the children for their own sins and not for the sins of their fathers which is what the Bible actually teaches.

 

bible is full of crap,writen by some primitive ancient goat fuckers,dont waste your time trying to make any sense out of its myths
www.skepticsannotatedbible.com

 

I read this book a few months ago and came away slightly disappointed. It seems to get a lot of praise amongst certain folk and institutions, however, I can not agree with their love for the book. It's divided into two main sections: the Old Testament and the New Testament, with both sections further sub-divided into many different chapters. The first section (Old Testament) follows the creation of existence, introduction of human, animals, plants etc, and the punishment of humans by the lead protagonist (God). The God character seems to have been oddly portrayed; especially considering the vast amount of praise people seem to give him. He comes across as a egotistical psychopath, who's obsessed with maintaining his own glory at the expense of the humans he 'created'. Whilst this theme is interesting to start with (the destruction of the 7 tribes part particularly fun), it soon becomes dull. The second section follows a different theme, with its centre storyline follow a character named Jesus Christ. He seems to change much of the original message to something more moral, i.e. less genocide. However, just as he is getting interesting, the character is killed off, only to be 'resurrected' later. All in all the book is a difficult read, should not be taken too heavily, and not one for the kids. It got the two stars for its entertaining introduction and conclusion, and its unique style of writing. However, there are plenty of other books out there that answer similar questions, notably the Outsider by Albert Camus and The Blind Watchmaker by Richard Dawkins.

 

Most children adopt the habits of their parents/community anyway - changing character is practically impossible, except of course by the proper application of religious principles which can actually move beyond the mere determing of "do's" and "do not's" and change the heart.

It wouldn't make sense for people to punished solely for the crimes of their fathers, unless you can establish that they actually decided to take birth by such parents in full understanding of their outstanding impiety

 

Some children can see the error in their evil parent’s ways and actually become just the opposite. And as for those who grow up with good parents, some of them will reject the good they find in their upbringing and turn to an evil way of life anyway. I would make a wild guess that many of the people represented on this forum have rejected the evils they have grown up with.

Why should anyone have to be punished for the sins of their fathers? Why should anyone be so judged? This simply cannot be justice can it?

 

Duh!?

Why not ask it this way: Would God not see Life as Unitary?

Why should God make a distinction between generations?

Interpolate our own view of things. Do we thousands of individual ants, trying to name each one of them, or do we see "a nest of ants". Do we see a thousand blackbirds, trying to tell each one apart from the rest, or do we see "a flock". Notice that the words "flock", "herd", "school", even the word "family" are singular. These words are showing Unity in collectivity.

Anyway, it would be useful to understand the Concept of Karma. The Saints of the East are convinced that God sees things as per Karma, and the Catholicism of the Religious Orders (not the religion of the indoctrinated and indoctrinating Bishops and Priests) conforms remarkably well to the Eastern Views of Karma.

One not only accrues Karma by one's own action, but one is more or less pickled in the Karma of all of one's associations: one has Family Karma, Societal Karma, Cultural Karma. One even assumes the Karma of the Organizations one joins. One who decides to convert to Protestantism suddenly forfeits their Spiritual Sponsorships and is flung outside the Pall of Grace. One who joins the Republican Party, or takes the secret bloody vows of infant sacrifice to become a Free Mason, well, they sign a contract with Satan and take on the Karma of Hell... which often comes with a 6 Figure Plus salary, if that is all one cares about.

Now, in the Ancient Systems, such as Western Stoicism or Eastern Buddhism (that of the original Buddha), the idea for dealing with Karma was to reject and pair down one's associations. Every familiar and social affiliation was rejected. People became anti-social hermits in order to escape karmic consequence. Now, this did not work for a very good reason, and that is because the World quickly went to Hell as everybody renounced their Moral Responsibility. One cannot reject their Human Karma. In rejecting Moral Responsiblity, they had to be held responsible for those consequences as well. Christ, coming along after the development of Western Stoicism and Eastern Buddhism, saw these flaws and taught their correction, that one had to take on More Karma, not less. The more Karmic Responsiblity each good person would assume, the more this would relieve the remainder of Humanity from the Evil Consequences of the Collective Evil.

Yes, yes, Paulist Christianity emphasized individual Salvation. But remember, that Paul was preaching to the Greeks, a Barbaric People still ill-acquainted with the notions of Civilized Collectivity, though they had been acquainted with such ideas and Peoples for their entire History, but like stawart Barbarians, consistently rejected any sense for accepting Moral Responsiblity. Indeed, even the Hebrew Religious Traditions presented too much of a mix of the Individualistic and Collective. What is this nonsense of the yearly killing of live-stock so they could screw around, charge usury, and lie to one another without consequence. Indeed, it was the Moral Infraction that made it so easy for Paul to sell the idea that Christ could be killed for the pleasure of Sinning.

Yes, it is possible that Christ voluntarily assumed a great deal of Collective Karma, and, indeed, this has been the aim of the atonements and asceticisms of many of the Catholic and Eastern Saints, to take on Karma. However, it is one thing to volunteer to take on Karma upon one's self, and it is the opposite to teach that one can off-load their personal Karma upon some Savior. We can therefore designate two Categories, calling one Religion, and calling the other Anti-Religion. Religion instructs one to accept Responsibility for oneself and even for others. Anti-Religion instructs one to reject Moral Responsiblity and to have Faith that some Scape-Goat can be assigned one's guilt.There are Givers and there are Takers. The Takers should not be allowed to call themselves Religious. Rather, they should think of themselves as the Thieves they are.

 

God is merely punishining himself for his own shortcomings and mistakes. Transference anger.

 

Look at it this way. Under this model of "justice" a judge could easily kill the innocent son of a man who committed murder to punish that man and the judge would be completely just in doing so.

Does anyone else see any moral problem with doing this at all? This is sickening to me!

 

God's not fair.

 

I presume the 'does' quote is the famous King James Version of Exodus 34:7:

'Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.'

The classic 'does not' is Ezekiel 18 19-20 quoted here in the Message version:

"Do you need to ask, 'So why does the child not share the guilt of the parent?'
"Isn't it plain? It's because the child did what is fair and right. Since the child was careful to do what is lawful and right, the child will live truly and well. The soul that sins is the soul that dies. The child does not share the guilt of the parent, nor the parent the guilt of the child. If you live upright and well, you get the credit; if you live a wicked life, you're guilty as charged.

The first point to note is that the Ezekiel passage is directly addressing the issue of who God regards as accountable for actions and the answer is that it is the person themselves and not their parents or their children. This is absolutely clear and is refutation to much of the modern politically correct 'psycho-babble' which tries to absolve people from the consequences of their own actions because of their upbringing ('the sins of their parents'). As has been expressed elsewhere on this thread, life is not that simple. Some people overcome very bad backgrounds whilst others have a good upbringing and still go totally off the rails.

So what does the first (Exodus) passage mean? Note the first part of the Exodus passage is stressing how God will 'keep mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin' so if He is described as forgiving the guilty in the first part of the sentence, He could hardly be described as punishing the innocent in a later part.

In fact the word translated 'visiting' in the King James' version is a very accurate translation of the Hebrew which is based on 'paqad' (Strong's 06485). It has a number of meanings including the literal 'visit' but it does not necessarily (or normally) imply direct judgment or punishment.

What is actually being said here is that if you do something wrong, you can't rely on God (or anyone else) to prevent the consequences affecting others, which may include your own immediate family.

As a modern example, there was a TV documentary done of people who were all direct descendants of prominent Nazis. These people, children and grandchildren were all totally innocent of the evil done by their fathers/grandfathers but they all carried a terrible guilt with which they were having great personal difficulty.

On a more mundane level, imagine a man who gets a woman pregnant and deserts her and keeps the whole episode secret. He then marries someone else and has a family. Eventually his first child tracks him down and makes him or herself known. Imagine the hurt caused to the man's wife and her children and the consequences for them (all of course innocent).This of course is unforunately a not totally uncommon story in reality.

So in regard to judgment and punishment, God regards you personally responsible for your own actions (and no one else) but what you do wrong inevitably has consequences and these may cause suffering and anguish not just to you but to innocent people (including your immediate family) for generations after you.

Kind regards,



Gordon.

 

Thanks Gordon,

Here are some of the verses I am currently studying along this topic. You have already commented on some of these.

Does God punish us for the sins of our fathers?

No He Does Not, Great!

Deuteronomy 24:16
The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

2 Kings 14:6
But the children of the murderers he slew not: according unto that which is written in the book of the law of Moses, wherein the LORD commanded, saying, The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, nor the children be put to death for the fathers; but every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

Jeremiah 31:29-30
In those days they shall say no more, The fathers have eaten a sour grape, and the children's teeth are set on edge. But every one shall die for his own iniquity.

Ezekiel18:20
The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

Ummm… Yes He Does, Arggg!

Genesis 9:21-25
And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father .... And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him. And he said, Cursed be Canaan [Ham's son]; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.

Noah believed in this form of “justice” and he was a “righteous” man.

Exodus 20:5 , Deuteronomy 5:9
I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation.

Exodus 34:7
Visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children's children unto the third and to the fourth generation.

Numbers 14:18
Visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation.

2 Chronicles 21:10-15
10 Thus Edom has been in revolt against Judah’s authority to this day. At that time Libnah revolted against his rule, because he had forsaken the LORD God of his fathers. 11 Moreover he made high places in the mountains of Judah, and caused the inhabitants of Jerusalem to commit harlotry, and led Judah astray. 12 And a letter came to him from Elijah the prophet, saying, Thus says the LORD God of your father David: Because you have not walked in the ways of Jehoshaphat your father, or in the ways of Asa king of Judah, 13 but have walked in the way of the kings of Israel, and have made Judah and the inhabitants of Jerusalem to play the harlot like the harlotry of the house of Ahab, and also have killed your brothers, those of your father’s household, who were better than yourself, 14 behold, the LORD will strike your people with a serious affliction—your children, your wives, and all your possessions; 15 and you will become very sick with a disease of your intestines, until your intestines come out by reason of the sickness, day by day.

Deuteronomy 23:2
A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.

Now, how could this ever be the child's fault?

Deuteronomy 28:18
Cursed shall be the fruit of thy body.

2 Samuel 12:13-14
13 Then David said to Nathan, "I have sinned against the LORD."
Nathan replied, "The LORD has taken away your sin. You are not going to die. 14 But because by doing this you have made the enemies of the LORD show utter contempt, the son born to you will die."

Here an innocent child is killed because of the sins of his father, David.

2 Samuel 21:6-9
Let seven men of his sons be delivered unto us, and we will hang them up unto the LORD .... And he delivered them into the hands of the Gibeonites, and they hanged them in the hill before the LORD.

1 Kings 2:33
Their blood shall therefore return upon the head of Joab, and upon the head of his seed for ever.

1 Kings 11:11-12
Wherefore the LORD said unto Solomon, Forasmuch as this is done of thee, and thou hast not kept my covenant and my statutes, which I have commanded thee, I will surely rend the kingdom from thee, and will give it to thy servant. Notwithstanding in thy days I will not do it for David thy father's sake: but I will rend it out of the hand of thy son.

1 Kings 21:29
Seest thou how Ahab humbleth himself before me? because he humbleth himself before me, I will not bring the evil in his days: but in his son's days will I bring the evil upon his house.

Isaiah 14:21
Prepare slaughter for his children for the iniquity of their fathers.

Isaiah 47:8-9
8 “ Therefore hear this now, you who are given to pleasures,
Who dwell securely,
Who say in your heart, ‘I am, and there is no one else besides me;
I shall not sit as a widow,
Nor shall I know the loss of children’;
9 But these two things shall come to you
In a moment, in one day:
The loss of children, and widowhood.
They shall come upon you in their fullness
Because of the multitude of your sorceries,
For the great abundance of your enchantments.

Jeremiah 16:10-11
Wherefore hath the Lord pronounced all this great evil against us? ... Because your fathers have forsaken me, saith the Lord.

Jeremiah 29:32
Therefore thus saith the LORD; Behold, I will punish Shemaiah the Nehelamite, and his seed.

Jeremiah 32:18
Thou ... recompensest the iniquity of the fathers into the bosom of their children after them.

Zephaniah 1:8
I will punish the princes, and the king's children, and all such as are clothed with strange apparel.

Perhaps I am wrong about some of these! Or maybe the quoted version is untrustworthy! What do you think?

 

A couple of ways of looking at it

SetiAlpha6:

I'd just say this is the reason the Bible should not be read as a literal revelation from God. The interpretive possibilities of folklore make much more sense than ... well, Biblical literalism.

To the other, though:

Little Howard's father picked up syphilis from a hooker in Chicago. Daddy gave the disease to Mommy before Li'l Howie was born. When Howie was born, he, too, had syphilis. Mommy was pretty much crazy by that point, and, so distressed that she had a boy instead of a girl, dressed Howie up as a girl. He thought he was a girl at least until he was five. Howie grew up very isolated because he was always sick. He never got along well with people, and, in fact, pretty much hated everyone. When he died at thirty-seven, the cancer that killed him may or may not have been caused by the syphilis. Howard Phillips Lovecraft had no children. There are no more Lovecrafts. God punished to the next generation and, perhaps in retribution for H.P.'s raising of Cthulhu, decided to wipe the Earth clean of the bloodline.​

Such is God, I guess.

 

Thank you for your comments, tiassa!

 

Adstar, could you please give me your views on this topic?

Warrior61, could you please give me your views on this, as well?

 

The bible is talking about passing down the affects of sin to the next generations. Like a mother on crack who has a crack baby.

 

Which implies that god is neither omnibenevolent nor omnipotent.

 

Because our choices affect our children and other people (physically and spiritually). There is a ripple effect like a stone thrown into a pond.