A grave contradiction?

by dark angle 20 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • dark angle
    dark angle

    Notion:

    All mankind has sinned because our greatx4 grand father Adam sinned. sin is passed through generation. sins payment is death, so everyone will die. but jesus came and paid the sins of all by letting himself killed or willingly be put to death. (suicide?) so everyone could live and have everlasting life.

    The contradiction:

    2 Kings 14:6: Yet he did not put the sons of the assassins to death, in accordance with what is written in the Book of the Law of Moses where the LORD commanded: "Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sins."

    Deuteronomy 24:16: Fathers shall not be put to death for their sons, nor shall sons be put to death for their fathers; everyone shall be put to death for his own sin.

    so, if adams own sin resulted in his own death, we should not ,in anyway, be condemned with our greatx4 grand fathers guilt. the whole point of Jesus death is also useless.

  • Narkissos
    Narkissos

    An "orthodox" theologian would probably object that you are mixing up the transmission of "sin" (in the very basic sense that every human being "is a sinner") with the fact of being punished for somebody else's "sin" (as a specific offence). In the classical "original sin" doctrine everyone dies for his/her own sins -- just, being "sinless" isn't an option.

    There is a basic contradiction in the concept of "sin" which I think can be traced back to its dual origin in ritual and moral/civil law. The earliest use of the Hebrew words usually translated as "sin" belong to the priestly vocabulary: here "sin" has strictly nothing to do with morality and everything to do with ceremonial uncleanness: unwittingly touching a corpse, getting a skin disease, moisture on the walls of your house, giving birth, having sex within "marriage," are all "sins" barring you from contact with the sacred until you perform the appropriate rituals. This kind of "sin" is highly "infectious" -- it communicates through mere contact -- but it is not a moral offence (only refusing to go through the purification process would be).

    Then prophetic texts have (in an initially metaphorical and subversive way) extended this priestly vocabulary out of its original scope to apply it to moral offences such as dealt in the civil law (murder, adultery, theft, etc.), and beyond. The use of "sin" in the Torah reflects both influences. It should be noted, btw, that it took some time before the principle of individual punishment (for "sins" in the sense of civil or religious offences, not ritual uncleanness) was carried over from the realm of human justice to that of divine justice. Deuteronomy which limits human punishment to the individual wrongdoer still accepts that Yhwh punishes the sins of the fathers on the children to the third of fourth generation. Only later (cf. Ezekiel 18) did the "dissonance" kick in.

    The later Christian (and rabbinical) concepts of sin depend on this complex and confused heritage. It cannot think of "sin" in a purely ritual (non-moral) manner as the older priests did. The concept of moral flaw or failure is always attached to "sin". But on the other hand the old priestly concept persists in the idea that "sin" is somehow "infectious," and exceeds individual actions and retribution. This may shed some light on the Augustinian idea of "original sin", as a new rationalisation trying to make sense of this basically contradictory concept of "sin" (in a sense which is not strictly "scriptural") as both moral and inherited.

  • WTWizard
    WTWizard

    Just another way Jehovah tries to put Himself above justice. Power and pride--that's all He ever displays (at that, the wicked pride of having created such misery).

  • burningbridges
    burningbridges

    Numbers 14-

    18

    ‘Jehovah, slow to anger and abundant in loving-kindness, pardoning error and transgression, but by no means will he give exemption from punishment, bringing punishment for the error of the fathers upon sons, upon the third generation and upon the fourth generation.’

    nice one huh? different saying here....

  • DaCheech
    DaCheech

    it's all one big lovely book

  • heathen
    heathen

    I think the deal was that the mosaic law was about eye for an eye and life for a life , adam sentenced all mankind to the grave with with his act of rebellion then jesus made himself a sacrifice equal to the perfect human to give mankind a redeemer and also offer the faithful and true a chance at a spirit life in the kingdom of the heavens . We all suffer and die in this world regardless but the hope is a resurrection that is run by jesus . Jesus only had to give up his flesh not his soul in this thing. He went back to living as a spirit .

  • dark angle
    dark angle

    18 ‘Jehovah, slow to anger and abundant in loving-kindness, pardoning error and transgression, but by no means will he give exemption from punishment, bringing punishment for the error of the fathers upon sons, upon the third generation and upon the fourth generation.’

    Interesting!

    this is also contradictory in itself. he says he's slow to anger and abudandt in loving kindness, but will hate you ang harbour grudge thoughout your offsprings and your offsprings' offsprings, if you defy him. so much of a forgiving loving god.

  • trevor
    trevor

    Just when I thought I knew it all, Narkissos comes along and with his usual flair demonstrates what real education is.

    Viva la France!

  • dark angle
    dark angle

    yep, thanks for the insights Narkissos. i've enjoyed reading your short history lesson.

  • S3RAPH1M
    S3RAPH1M

    The scribes who inked those words didn't think it would debunk their own theology.

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit