John 9:1-3 … "And as Jesus passed by, He saw a man which was blind from his birth. And His disciples asked Him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind. Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him."
It was an opinion among the Jews that birth defects of all kinds were the effects of sin. The common Jewish view was that the sins of the parents would result in birth defects in their children. The disciples must have accepted that view in this case, knowing the man was blind from his birth; so it was a question the disciples asked to determine,
1.) Whether it was his fault, believing that an infant could sin before he was born; consequently this blindness came upon the child as a result of that sin; or ...
2.) His blindness was from his parent's sin. Notice they only gave Jesus these two choices and He rejected them both.
Many of the Jews, as it appears from their writings, believed in the doctrine of transmigration of souls; that the soul of a man, because of sin, might be compelled by God at their death, to pass into a new body and be punished in this next life with birth defects.
So they ask whether the man himself had sinned before he was born, in his mothers womb; believing that it was possible for an infant to sin in the womb, and to be punished with some bodily infirmity as a consequence. Or could it have been from sin in a pre-existent state while in a previous body; and now the punishment for that sin was to be put into a blind body in this life.
Jesus said in Matthew 22:29 …"You do err not knowing the Scriptures." This is a case in point, as there is nothing in scripture about a pre-existent state or sinning before birth. This is the danger of following someone's opinion.
It is true, many of our physical problems are brought on us by either our own sins in this present life, or problems can be inherited from our parents and caused by their sins; drugs, alcohol, etc.
The second question they ask comes from misunderstanding Exodus 20:5 … "I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate Me …"
I have heard this verse used trying to prove that some children's problems are from sins being passed down in their blood line … a generational curse … which I will speak towards later.
The idea, view or opinion is that … God transfers … this sin nature from father to son. This generational curse can not be true if 0ne looks at this verse from Exodus, the second of the Ten Commandments.
Exodus 20:1-17 … "And God spoke all these words, saying …
1.) Thou shalt have no other gods before me …
2.) Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image … Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me …
3.) Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain …
4.) Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.
5.) Honor thy father and thy mother …
6.) Thou shalt not kill.
7.) Thou shalt not commit adultery.
8.) Thou shalt not steal.
9.) Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
10.) Thou shalt not covet …"
I believe this view of passing on sin, comes from a misunderstanding which comes from not looking at the reason behind this statement by God. The only reason "the iniquity of the fathers" is passed on or "visited upon" their children is this. Generally, children learn and follow in the footsteps of their parents; especially when it comes to their faith, or "religion." These fathers in teaching their children the "sin of idolatry" are raising them to continue in it, thereby "visiting" each generation that follows.
Just as we can be a third or forth generation "Christian" … "Idolaters" likewise can be of the third and forth generation and beyond as well.
This scripture speaks only to the children who walk in the steps of their father's "sin of idolatry." God said … "of them that hate me … " The children themselves will suffer only the consequences of their own sin.
No man can or will be condemned by God's Divine justice for a sin which he was never guilty of committing.
Therefore, how can our children today be held in bondage because of some sin committed by us, of which they had nothing to do with? If this is possible, then this doctrine (if I may use that term) would be a type of generational curse and would give credibility to the doctrine that certain types or classifications of sin run in families.
Unless there are material reasons; physical genes, DNA, the chemical genetic makeup of our bodies that are given from parent to child … I don't believe in generational curses. Sorry.
Concerning generational curses of a spiritual type, Paul wrote these words in 2nd Corinthians 5:17 …"Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new."
Paul didn't say some things are passed away… but rather "old things" are passed away; behold (look and see) "all things" are new. Therefore I believe any former traits or tendencies passed on from parent to child; like a curse … when you are born again, when you receive God's new nature; the "old things" are done away with just like our sin. If there was a curse, "the Blood of Jesus" breaks the curse. I'm not speaking of our sin nature; we never lose that as long as we are in these bodies, but "the curse of sin" has been done away with.
Let me leave no doubt as to where I stand concerning generational curses. They can be physical; cancer, heart trouble, etc. run in families. That's a matter of medical history.
They can also be spiritual. The main curse is on all mankind; we have received the fallen nature of Adam. There may be other spiritual curses beyond the one covered in Exodus 20:5 that we spoke about; curses that follow your children if you do not raise them … "in the way they should go, in the fear of God."
I'm not going to accept any curses; especially those from the devil.
It is possible for me to be wrong … I have been once or twice.
Thursday, August 7, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment