What are your thoughts?

[UnamSanctam]

Ex 20:5b-c (and Deut 5:9b-c)

I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,

Is this applicable to people whose parents are baptized (= part of the People of God), but who "hates" God?
So, if someone had such parents, but came to faith, would that curse still hang on them, and their children, and their children's children? And their children?

 

[Shane R]

The first half of your question, Is this applicable to people whose parents are baptized, is answered thus by Chrysostom: The statement . . . is not universal in application but is spoken about certain ones who came out of Egypt. For after they saw the Lord's signs and wonders in Egypt, they committed worse sins than their forefathers who saw none of these things.

I think you are mis-conceiving who is said to hate the Lord. It is the children as well as the parents. Thus, the doctrine of personal responsibility is upheld (Ezek. 18). Each person is offered the opportunity of repentance but some resist and refuse, thus perishing.

 

[Valiant87]

The history of Israel is full of incidents in which the punishment for a perverse generation was not brought about until multiple generations had past. Not because God hated the children, but because He is merciful as well as just and therefore give space for repentance. The sins that plagued the Northern Kingdom began with the Jereboam's generation, but were not fully punished for centuries afterwards.

 

[UnamSanctam]

The first half of your question, Is this applicable to people whose parents are baptized, is answered thus by Chrysostom: The statement . . . is not universal in application but is spoken about certain ones who came out of Egypt. For after they saw the Lord's signs and wonders in Egypt, they committed worse sins than their forefathers who saw none of these things.

That's interesting! Would you happen to know what Chrysostom (I LOVE the guy's Easter Sermon, btw!) based that interpretation on?

I think you are mis-conceiving who is said to hate the Lord. It is the children as well as the parents. Thus, the doctrine of personal responsibility is upheld (Ezek. 18). Each person is offered the opportunity of repentance but some resist and refuse, thus perishing.

I re-read the passage.....and I can't see that?
I don't think that the matter at hand here, is eternal damnation or salvation, rather that of "temporal" divine punishment.
Basically what I'm thinking is this:
X is baptized, but hates God ("God is a big fat woman of color who's busy murdering children in Africa"-style). X has children. These children come to faith.

Now, of course they are SAVED because of that faith. But...I think I'm wondering whether or not that fact removes anything from the clause in Ex 20 and Deut 5. ROUGHLY (very!) equivalent to the criminal who regrets what he did. That's all well and good.....but it doesn't mean he'll just walk out of jail - he still has to serve his time.

....Does this make sense? I'm starting to confuse myself

 

[Hummie]

This is a little on topic, but different direction.

My ancestors of my surname were cursed in 1525 by the Archbishop of Glascow.
It is a really amazing curse and almost difficult to read.
It's here:
ht*p://www.bbc.co.uk/cumbria/features/2003/07/restoration/the_curse.shtml

I don't think I am allowed to post links yet, so put an asteric in it you'll have to change.

I would hope that this curse did not carry on all these generations until now! I like to think that my faith trumps all. God is "love."