DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
---------------------------------------------------------
Religious Convictions
HTML https://religiousconvictions.createaforum.com
---------------------------------------------------------
*****************************************************
DIR Return to: Religious Discussions
*****************************************************
#Post#: 3257--------------------------------------------------
Problems about how the Bible treats children
By: Kerry Date: November 18, 2015, 8:42 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Let us start with this difficult passage:
Leviticus 26:21 And if ye walk contrary unto me, and will not
hearken unto me; I will bring seven times more plagues upon you
according to your sins.
22 I will also send wild beasts among you, which shall rob you
of your children, and destroy your cattle, and make you few in
number; and your high ways shall be desolate.
23 And if ye will not be reformed by me by these things, but
will walk contrary unto me;
24 Then will I also walk contrary unto you, and will punish you
yet seven times for your sins.
25 And I will bring a sword upon you, that shall avenge the
quarrel of my covenant: and when ye are gathered together within
your cities, I will send the pestilence among you; and ye shall
be delivered into the hand of the enemy.
26 And when I have broken the staff of your bread, ten women
shall bake your bread in one oven, and they shall deliver you
your bread again by weight: and ye shall eat, and not be
satisfied.
27 And if ye will not for all this hearken unto me, but walk
contrary unto me;
28 Then I will walk contrary unto you also in fury; and I, even
I, will chastise you seven times for your sins.
29 And ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of
your daughters shall ye eat.
What should we believe here? If all children go to Heaven when
they die, is it really possible that God would send children to
this earth only to have them suffer because of the sins of their
parents? Would God punish the children in order to make the
parents suffer? I don't believe that. I can't believe God
would send children to the earth knowing their fate would be
that their parents eat them, just to make a point of punishing
the parents. Taking them off to Heaven after the beasts kill
them or their parents eat them still doesn't explain anything.
Moreover we read:
Ezekiel 18:2 What mean ye, that ye use this proverb concerning
the land of Israel, saying, The fathers have eaten sour grapes,
and the children's teeth are set on edge?
. . .
19 Yet say ye, Why? doth not the son bear the iniquity of the
father? When the son hath done that which is lawful and right,
and hath kept all my statutes, and hath done them, he shall
surely live.
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.
God does not punish children for the sins of their parents; that
is common sense and we have the word of Ezekiel also to inform
us; and we are reading Leviticus wrong if we read it that way.
It is a hateful doctrine too to believe God would do such a
thing to children because of the sins of their parents; and
according to Jesus, all that is written in the Law and Prophets
is about Love. That should also tell us that interpreting
that passage from Leviticus in a hateful way is in error. It is
also somewhat foolish to say God would do such a thing to
children and then to say He'd make sure they all went to Heaven
because He loves them.
So what is going on in Leviticus 26? Do people take this
chapter seriously? Do they believe it's "inspired" Scripture?
Can they see the Love in it? Do they truly believe what Jesus
said or do they give mere lip service to it?
Matthew 22:35 Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a
question, tempting him, and saying,
36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with
all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour
as thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
Does Leviticus 26 make you love God more by reading it? Does it
make you love your neighbor more? If it doesn't, perhaps you
would love God and others more if you changed some of your
ideas about Him and the Bible.
#Post#: 3258--------------------------------------------------
Re: Problems about how the Bible treats children
By: Kerry Date: November 18, 2015, 9:33 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
There may be some also who say God views all children as
righteous. Is that is true, it is hard to understand why Sodom
was destroyed.
Genesis 18:23 And Abraham drew near, and said, Wilt thou also
destroy the righteous with the wicked?
24 Peradventure there be fifty righteous within the city: wilt
thou also destroy and not spare the place for the fifty
righteous that are therein?
25 That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the
righteous with the wicked: and that the righteous should be as
the wicked, that be far from thee: Shall not the Judge of all
the earth do right?
26 And the Lord said, If I find in Sodom fifty righteous within
the city, then I will spare all the place for their sakes.
27 And Abraham answered and said, Behold now, I have taken upon
me to speak unto the Lord, which am but dust and ashes:
28 Peradventure there shall lack five of the fifty righteous:
wilt thou destroy all the city for lack of five? And he said, If
I find there forty and five, I will not destroy it.
29 And he spake unto him yet again, and said, Peradventure there
shall be forty found there. And he said, I will not do it for
forty's sake.
30 And he said unto him, Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I
will speak: Peradventure there shall thirty be found there. And
he said, I will not do it, if I find thirty there.
31 And he said, Behold now, I have taken upon me to speak unto
the Lord: Peradventure there shall be twenty found there. And he
said, I will not destroy it for twenty's sake.
32 And he said, Oh let not the Lord be angry, and I will speak
yet but this once: Peradventure ten shall be found there. And he
said, I will not destroy it for ten's sake.
I would say there weren't ten righteous people there, including
children. Indeed as I read the next chapter, the children were
more vile than their parents. I'll use Young's Literal
Translation here since the KJV alters the word order for some
inscrutable reason.
Genesis 19:4 Before they lie down, the men of the city -- men of
Sodom -- have come round about against the house, from young
even unto aged, all the people from the extremity;
5 and they call unto Lot and say to him, `Where [are] the men
who have come in unto thee to-night? bring them out unto us, and
we know them.'
The KJV reverses this:
4 But before they lay down, the men of the city, even the men of
Sodom, compassed the house round, both old and young, all the
people from every quarter:
5 And they called unto Lot, and said unto him, Where are the men
which came in to thee this night? bring them out unto us, that
we may know them.
Ordinarily yes, one would expect "old" to come before "young" to
show respect for the old. I suppose the KJV translators
reversed this thinking it read better that way; but the original
Hebrew has "young" first. The unusual order in the Hebrew
tells me that the young people were the instigators with the
older men following their lead. The children were worse than
their parents. What hope does a culture have when the adults
are depraved and the children are worse than their parents?
Certainly God did not whisk off such depraved children to
Heaven. Out of Divine Mercy, He intervened to destroy their
culture but to preserve the line of Sodom so they could be
reborn in better circumstances later. Every nation, tribe is
unique, and God wishes to preserve each; but this doesn't always
mean using gentle means. The "seed" of Sodom was preserved in
Lot's offspring; and both tribes which arose from Lot later
intermarried into Israel. Thus the line of Sodom was preserved;
and children could be born into it but not in depraved
conditions. They would be born into Israel with better parents
who would discipline them instead of imitating them the way the
men of Sodom imitated them. God is not willing that any
should perish. That is right; but that doesn't mean whisking
every baby that dies to Heaven, not when God wants them to be
born on the earth in conditions they have a chance to improve
and become worthy citizens of Heaven.
Yes, I know this goes against the grain of many people's
beliefs; but I'd rather believe the Bible than cater to other
people. There are some children who are born wicked.
Psalm 58:3 The wicked are estranged from the womb: they go
astray as soon as they be born, speaking lies.
God loves them anyway. He wants them to be born so they can
repent of the horrible urges they're born with. Life is a
precious thing indeed. Few people can be said to be born
perfect, so we all have things to work on; we can all profit by
living on the earth; but there are a few truly vile children
that go astray almost as soon as they're born if not before.
We have another passage which tells us the children in Sodom
were not godly:
2 Peter 2:6 And turning the cities of Sodom and Gomorrha into
ashes condemned them with an overthrow, making them an ensample
unto those that after should live ungodly;
7 And delivered just Lot, vexed with the filthy conversation of
the wicked:
8 (For that righteous man dwelling among them, in seeing and
hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to day with their
unlawful deeds;)
9 The Lord knoweth how to deliver the godly out of temptations,
and to reserve the unjust unto the day of judgment to be
punished:
Those children who perished in Sodom would be born later into
Israel if they wished and if God was willing, being grafted on.
They would have a better chance at life. They could come to
terms with their own sinful urges if they had better parents and
a better environment. Thus I see the destruction of Sodom as
an act of God's Mercy and attribute it to His Love. It may
seem harsh, but so does cutting off a body part with cancer or
gangrene so the whole body will live.
When a culture reaches the point where children don't have a
chance at improving, it's time for God to intervene. If that
means destroying an entire city or country, so be it. I also
believe the Flood of Noah was an act of Mercy.
#Post#: 3260--------------------------------------------------
Re: Problems about how the Bible treats children
By: Kerry Date: November 18, 2015, 10:57 pm
---------------------------------------------------------
Here is another fascinating paradox that the usual theology
cannot explain. First we read these two passages.
Deuteronomy 7:9 Know therefore that the Lord thy God, he is God,
the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them
that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand
generations;
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.
That may seem clearcut; but then we read where God tells
Abraham:
Genesis 15:13 And he said unto Abram, Know of a surety that thy
seed shall be a stranger in a land that is not theirs, and shall
serve them; and they shall afflict them four hundred years;
14 And also that nation, whom they shall serve, will I judge:
and afterward shall they come out with great substance.
15 And thou shalt go to thy fathers in peace; thou shalt be
buried in a good old age.
16 But in the fourth generation they shall come hither again:
for the iniquity of the Amorites is not yet full.
That could be misinterpreted to mean that Abraham had iniquity
that was visited on his children to the fourth generation!
#Post#: 3262--------------------------------------------------
Re: Problems about how the Bible treats children
By: bradley Date: November 19, 2015, 12:17 am
---------------------------------------------------------
I personally dont see death as a bad thing whether it be an
adult or child. The spirit lives on free of the pains found in
life under in that case very bad parents. But eating their own
children? I am sure that God would never encourage such
behavior. Now if a walled city was besieged and people
starving, ate their own children, that tells me that those
people deserved to die. I assume they killed the child first,
but regardless, it is evil and God would never promote that.
#Post#: 3265--------------------------------------------------
Re: Problems about how the Bible treats children
By: Deborah Date: November 19, 2015, 1:25 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote]God does not punish children for the sins of their
parents; that is common sense and we have the word of Ezekiel
also to inform us; and we are reading Leviticus wrong if we read
it that way.
It is a hateful doctrine too to believe God would do such a
thing to children because of the sins of their parents; and
according to Jesus, all that is written in the Law and Prophets
is about Love. [/quote]
It is one of those terrible things about sin that it has
consequences for other people as well as for ourselves.
In times of war, people do all kinds of terrible things. And one
outcome of mass starvation is cannibalism. Leviticus describes
it because it was part of what happened in such times, not
because God specifically decreed it or thought it up.
See II Kings 6:24-7:20 for an example.
HTML https://deborahsbiblestudies.wordpress.com/2012/07/28/the-sins-of-the-fathers/
#Post#: 3268--------------------------------------------------
Re: Problems about how the Bible treats children
By: Kerry Date: November 19, 2015, 6:45 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=bradley link=topic=384.msg3262#msg3262
date=1447913838]
I personally dont see death as a bad thing whether it be an
adult or child. The spirit lives on free of the pains found in
life under in that case very bad parents. But eating their own
children? I am sure that God would never encourage such
behavior. Now if a walled city was besieged and people
starving, ate their own children, that tells me that those
people deserved to die. I assume they killed the child first,
but regardless, it is evil and God would never promote that.
[/quote]It may not be safe to assume they killed the child at
all. The children may have died of hunger in the siege and
then the parents age them. The tradition of the Jews says that
the woman who "hid" her son with the promise of sharing him with
the other woman hid the dead body of the son with the intention
of eating the body herself. That took place during a siege, of
course.
2 Kings 6:24 And it came to pass after this, that Benhadad king
of Syria gathered all his host, and went up, and besieged
Samaria.
25 And there was a great famine in Samaria: and, behold, they
besieged it, until an ass's head was sold for fourscore pieces
of silver, and the fourth part of a cab of dove's dung for five
pieces of silver.
26 And as the king of Israel was passing by upon the wall, there
cried a woman unto him, saying, Help, my lord, O king.
27 And he said, If the Lord do not help thee, whence shall I
help thee? out of the barnfloor, or out of the winepress?
28 And the king said unto her, What aileth thee? And she
answered, This woman said unto me, Give thy son, that we may eat
him to day, and we will eat my son to morrow.
29 So we boiled my son, and did eat him: and I said unto her on
the next day, Give thy son, that we may eat him: and she hath
hid her son.
That is horrifying enough, but almost as horrifying is that the
woman dared to relate this to the king as if she was hoping for
him to do something about it, as if some great injustice had
been done to her. Then we see how the degraded king behaved.
30 And it came to pass, when the king heard the words of the
woman, that he rent his clothes; and he passed by upon the wall,
and the people looked, and, behold, he had sackcloth within upon
his flesh.
31 Then he said, God do so and more also to me, if the head of
Elisha the son of Shaphat shall stand on him this day.
Was any of these problems Elisha's fault? Of course not.
32 But Elisha sat in his house, and the elders sat with him; and
the king sent a man from before him: but ere the messenger came
to him, he said to the elders, See ye how this son of a murderer
hath sent to take away mine head? look, when the messenger
cometh, shut the door, and hold him fast at the door: is not the
sound of his master's feet behind him?
33 And while he yet talked with them, behold, the messenger came
down unto him: and he said, Behold, this evil is of the Lord;
what should I wait for the Lord any longer?
The messenger said this because of a similar passage:
Deuteronomy 28:53 And thou shalt eat the fruit of thine own
body, the flesh of thy sons and of thy daughters, which the Lord
thy God hath given thee, in the siege, and in the straitness,
wherewith thine enemies shall distress thee:
54 So that the man that is tender among you, and very delicate,
his eye shall be evil toward his brother, and toward the wife of
his bosom, and toward the remnant of his children which he shall
leave:
55 So that he will not give to any of them of the flesh of his
children whom he shall eat: because he hath nothing left him in
the siege, and in the straitness, wherewith thine enemies shall
distress thee in all thy gates.
56 The tender and delicate woman among you, which would not
adventure to set the sole of her foot upon the ground for
delicateness and tenderness, her eye shall be evil toward the
husband of her bosom, and toward her son, and toward her
daughter,
57 And toward her young one that cometh out from between her
feet, and toward her children which she shall bear: for she
shall eat them for want of all things secretly in the siege and
straitness, wherewith thine enemy shall distress thee in thy
gates.
That passage has other references to children:
18 Cursed shall be the fruit of thy body, and the fruit of thy
land, the increase of thy kine, and the flocks of thy sheep.
32 Thy sons and thy daughters shall be given unto another
people, and thine eyes shall look, and fail with longing for
them all the day long; and there shall be no might in thine
hand.
41 Thou shalt beget sons and daughters, but thou shalt not enjoy
them; for they shall go into captivity.
I believe that often when the Bible says God will do this or
that, it means His Laws. If I jump off a tall building,
gravity can kill me. God is responsible for gravity. In a
way, it would be right to say God killed me. God is also
responsible for allowing Satan to be about. I believe Satan
serves a purpose, similar to that of pain. If we get out of
line, Satan is there to buffet us -- not to punish us but to
tell us something is wrong and we need to correct it. Pain is
similar. Thank God for pain. Without pain, you could have
your hand in a fire and not know it. You could lose it before
you knew anything was wrong. Whatever Satan's attitude may be,
I still believe he serves God. Indeed he could even be
described as "part of God." I'd say a part that broke off and
was pretending to be separate -- but still a part of God. That
this is the case is seen by two other passages which can
confound.
1 Chronicles 21:1 And Satan stood up against Israel, and
provoked David to number Israel.
2 Samuel 24:1 And again the anger of the Lord was kindled
against Israel, and he moved David against them to say, Go,
number Israel and Judah.
#Post#: 3270--------------------------------------------------
Re: Problems about how the Bible treats children
By: Kerry Date: November 19, 2015, 6:48 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Deborah link=topic=384.msg3265#msg3265
date=1447917959]
It is one of those terrible things about sin that it has
consequences for other people as well as for ourselves.
In times of war, people do all kinds of terrible things. And one
outcome of mass starvation is cannibalism. Leviticus describes
it because it was part of what happened in such times, not
because God specifically decreed it or thought it up.
See II Kings 6:24-7:20 for an example.
HTML https://deborahsbiblestudies.wordpress.com/2012/07/28/the-sins-of-the-fathers/
[/quote]I think you need to account for verse 27.
Leviticus 26:27 And if ye will not for all this hearken unto me,
but walk contrary unto me;
28 Then I will walk contrary unto you also in fury; and I, even
I, will chastise you seven times for your sins.
29 And ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of
your daughters shall ye eat.
#Post#: 3285--------------------------------------------------
Re: Problems about how the Bible treats children
By: Deborah Date: November 20, 2015, 1:49 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Kerry link=topic=384.msg3270#msg3270
date=1447937320]
I think you need to account for verse 27.
Leviticus 26:27 And if ye will not for all this hearken unto me,
but walk contrary unto me;
28 Then I will walk contrary unto you also in fury; and I, even
I, will chastise you seven times for your sins.
29 And ye shall eat the flesh of your sons, and the flesh of
your daughters shall ye eat.
[/quote]
Verse 27: all these curses come about only if the Israelites are
disobedient and unfaithful - and ignore all God's lesser
warnings.
You need to read the whole paragraph and not stop at verse 29.
God will use enemy invaders to chastise His people, and these
are the things that happened in ancient Middle Eastern warfare.
Of course the children will suffer; they always do in wartime,
disproportionately. The lurid description of death and
destruction is intentionally lurid and graphic - it is meant to
shock and frighten, like the New Testament depictions of Hell.
#Post#: 3290--------------------------------------------------
Re: Problems about how the Bible treats children
By: Kerry Date: November 20, 2015, 6:37 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Deborah link=topic=384.msg3285#msg3285
date=1448005756]
Verse 27: all these curses come about only if the Israelites are
disobedient and unfaithful - and ignore all God's lesser
warnings. [/quote]Yes, that is very clear in the context of the
passage, very clear. First they are told if they are
disobedient, beasts will attack their children; and if they
persist in their disobedience, they will eat their children.
Yes, I'm aware of this. I still don't see your point.
[quote]You need to read the whole paragraph and not stop at
verse 29. God will use enemy invaders to chastise His people,
and these are the things that happened in ancient Middle Eastern
warfare. Of course the children will suffer; they always do in
wartime, disproportionately.
[/quote]You still have not yet explained why God said He would
do this. Would God create situations so that parents would eat
their children? Why would God do that if the children were
innocent? Would God do that if they were innocent?
[quote] The lurid description of death and destruction is
intentionally lurid and graphic - it is meant to shock and
frighten, like the New Testament depictions of Hell.[/quote]I
would say the description is meant to motivate people for the
good and away from evil. It is not like a modern movie
designed to frighten people with unreal events. We read later
about two women who did eat a child. That still leaves the
question on the table unanswered: Would God punish children for
their parents' sins?
God said He would chastise them. If that meant God would use
enemy invaders, it wouldn't change the fact that God was doing
it; but don't you find it a bit odd to think God could get
"enemy invaders" to do His Will when He couldn't get Israel to?
And are the children included in those whom God is
chastising? Or is God allowing babies to be eaten in order to
chastise the parents?
#Post#: 3296--------------------------------------------------
Re: Problems about how the Bible treats children
By: Deborah Date: November 20, 2015, 11:42 am
---------------------------------------------------------
[quote author=Kerry link=topic=384.msg3290#msg3290
date=1448023079]
Yes, that is very clear in the context of the passage, very
clear. First they are told if they are disobedient, beasts
will attack their children; and if they persist in their
disobedience, they will eat their children. Yes, I'm aware of
this. I still don't see your point.[/quote]
Why did you ask me to 'account for' this verse then?
[quote]You still have not yet explained why God said He would do
this. Would God create situations so that parents would eat
their children? Why would God do that if the children were
innocent? Would God do that if they were innocent?
... And are the children included in those whom God is
chastising? Or is God allowing babies to be eaten in order to
chastise the parents?[/quote]
I don't claim to understand why God would choose to chastise
Israel in this way and not in another way. He doesn't tell us,
except that it is His 'last resort'.
I don't think that individual guilt or innocence comes into it.
The nation as a whole has broken the covenant, therefore the
nation as a whole suffers. The children are part of the nation,
they are included in the covenant by virtue of being born to
Israelite parents. War is a blunt instrument, it makes no
distinction between the deserving and the undeserving. The
inevitable question is: why does God use that method of
punishment? But I don't know the answer to that question.
[quote]I would say the description is meant to motivate people
for the good and away from evil. It is not like a modern movie
designed to frighten people with unreal events. We read later
about two women who did eat a child. That still leaves the
question on the table unanswered: Would God punish children for
their parents' sins?
[/quote] He tells us that in some cases He does (e.g. Exodus
20:5). (This is at the level of the community again, not
individuals) We may not like the idea, but that is what He says.
[quote]God said He would chastise them. If that meant God would
use enemy invaders, it wouldn't change the fact that God was
doing it; but don't you find it a bit odd to think God could get
"enemy invaders" to do His Will when He couldn't get Israel to?
[/quote] It's much easier to get people to kill and destroy
than to get them to do good...
*****************************************************
DIR Next Page