Posts
English Patient: H1 Work Visa
-
submitted by Gina Han
*Setting: *Sister J is celebrating and hugging sister D, who just got
confirmation that her boss will sponsor her for the H1 work vis...
1 day ago
10 comments:
If we want to say that it is unfair, we are trying to distinguish the descendants from their ancestors; however, in reality we know that this is not the case. We know that the character of Gehazi would be passed down to his offspring and this pattern would continue. In that way, the descendants are also being punished because sin is generational. This idea of generational sin is throughout the Bible such as the line of Cain, the Amalekites, etc.
@Robert
The idea of 'generational sin', as you put it, very much is in the bible, and to argue against that wouldn't make sense. The question, though, is why does someone have to be punished for the sin of parents or ancestors? You say we are trying but failing to distinguish between ancestors and descendants, but I would argue that we very much are different people, that I am not some collective soul with my ancestors, and that I very much can have a different character than them. So if I was a descendant of Gehazi, why would I have to be punished for what he did?
Just a little bit of devil's advocate here ^_^
A "common sense" response is to simply say that sin is by nature unfair. I remember Daniel's example a while back that demonstrates sin being unfair. For example, what if he decided to sin against someone by punching that person? From the other person's perspective, he's received a wrong already. True, it isn't "fair" that he's being punished for Daniel's sin, but that is the nature of sin. Why does that person have to be punished for Daniel's sin? Isn't it unfair? Yes, but that's unfortunately part of what happens. It's like children of an alcoholic--they didn't sin, but they still suffer from the rage, outbursts of anger, and even financial burden created by alcoholism. It's not fair for them, but sin affects others in a generational sense, in the same way that blessings also affect others in that way too (parents moving from a poor country, working hard, sacrificing themselves for their children give them greater opportunities for success).
The way I read it, it seems that in 2 Kings 5:27, God's prophet is pronouncing a curse upon Gehazi's descendants. I don't think it is analogous to a person experiencing the consequences of a punch, because the leprosy isn't the natural outworking of Gehazi's sin, but an imposed punishment, right? So then I'd reiterate Dan's question.
Just wondering, are you suggesting that Gehazi's descendents all had leprosy forever (since that's literally what it says)? So there's still a group of people that are born with leprosy today?
Hmm, actually after I posted, I wanted to take back my comment =). I was thinking, if the curse upon the descendants is merely descriptive of what would take place through the passing on of Gehazi's genes (making a person more susceptible to contracting leprosy), then Allen's analogy would make sense. =)
I'm not sure if we need to bring genes into this.
The unfairness of sin still stands whether or not it's a "natural" consequence or not. i.e., even if it's natural, one could still say that it's unfair for a parent's sin to mess up the children.
This is a difficult question, but how I view it is that there is nothing that says the world has to be fair, as in we have to experience the same amount of impact/punishment from sin.
People have mentioned it before, sin is unfair. In order for it to mean something, it has to have consequences, and consequences that are substantial too.
Also, secondly even though there are obvious ramifications for other people's sins in our lives, we at least are not judged for other people's sin (maybe someone can show the contrary).
I think there are two main points to be made from all of this, and what we need to clarify when we talk about 'generational sin', like God 'cursing' Gehazi and his descendants. The first is what's already been said, that the free will given to us allows us to change the state of reality for others, in both a positive and negative way. The second is to recognize what it means to a man and his descendants to be cursed by a prophet(and ultimately by God). Assuming God is sovereign over all of time, it makes perfect sense that a group of people would be 'cursed' by God, not necessarily because God says 'hey, you're part of this guy's family right? I'm going to curse you'; It makes sense because He may very well be saying 'Gehazi, YOU have cursed your ancestors, in doing this wrong'. This just goes back to the ripple effect of sin.
I think Dan makes a good point in saying that "God's curse" is not just a prescriptive measure by God, but perhaps a descriptive statement about what just happened. I am reminded of the first "curse" -- when Adam and Eve sinned. I think it would be rather simplistic to say, "Wow, why is God cursing these poor human beings?" It's hard to draw a line between what God is doing as a punishment and what Adam has just done to himself.
Post a Comment