[TruthTalk] Exegetical Fallacies and Generational Sin

[Judy Taylor]

From: "Jonathan Hughes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>  Judy, Your posts today remind me of a raccoon that has been backed into a corner and knows only to fight back.  You are not above reproach or rebuke on this forum.  Each time someone rebukes you, you bring out your tired old line you don't know me.  Blah blah blah.    jt: No Jonathan - You don't hear me. I may as well be talking to a wall. You read the words but you do not have an understanding heart. Your doctrine is like the two big blinders on a horse.   I know what you have written and will comment on it.  You are responsible for what you write on the forum.  This must be a stretching experience for you to realize that what you say matters and that you won't get away with it.    jt: You must realize that the same holds true for you Jonathan.   I must ask you to read your own post again, this time without the blinders. You quote your esteemed teacher Wright and his ideas on leukemia.  Let me quote: "There is a pastor I know of in Georgia who ministers in the light of this wisdom and many are healed from what is considered incurable chronic disease.  He has written a book called "The More Excellent Way" and in his experience leukemia is tied to "deep rooted bitterness coming from unresolved rejection by a father quote "I have always found a breach between the person who has that disease and their father. I've never found a mother involved in the breach; abandonment by a father, literally or emotionally, is also implicated"  Our son-in-law is a good father, but he came out of a shocking situation although he is an Annapolis graduate and a high achiever in everything he puts his hand to.  The chickens have a way of coming home to roost.  If we, as a family, can accept the truth and deal with it, there will be healing of all breaches and perfect peace in the Lord.   Now connect the dots. Leukemia is tied to deep rooted bitterness coming from unresolved rejection by a father.  I have always found a breach between the person who has that disease (Jenna) and their father (your son-in-law). (brackets mine  they are there to help you understand what you wrote)  Therefore if you agree with Henry Wright's opinion (and you must or why else would you mention it and then connect it to your son-in-law in the very next sentence?) Jenna must have deep rooted bitterness, and you son-in-law must have contributed to a breach between himself and Jenna.  Are you so blind that you cannot see what you have written?    jt: I know what I wrote Jonathan but the above dot connecting is your own presumption. I had been discussing generational sin (remember the man born blind?) Jesus said it was neither his sin or that of his parents and the same holds true for my grandaughter.  You don't know about the rejection by a father that her own father experienced and this is not the kind of atmosphere where I would want to go into all that.  Too much accusation and anger.   You then go on to talk about your son-in-law and how the chickens have a way of coming home to roost.   jt: Yes sin. Be sure your sin will find you out is a spiritual admonition.  Noone gets away with anything.   You then mention how your family needs to work out its issues (accept the truth and deal with it are you exact words).  It is your connection between what Wright says and what Jenna has here, not mine.  It is your connection between what Wright says about your son-in-law here, not mine.  Own up to what you post. Hiding behind your pleas that I listen to the devil will not help ya here.   jt: Yes and it is your misunderstanding that perverts what I have written here and the teaching of Henry Wright. I will acknowledge my own words, I do not take ownership of your interpretation.   Regarding the ad hominem card you played.  Ad hominem arguments try to discredit a claim or proposal by attacking its proponents instead of providing a reasoned examination of the proposal itself.    jt: You are constantly judging and attacking me personally Jonathan ie: You describe me as hard, not compassionate, hard hearted.  If I have time I will round up all of your adjectives and post them.  You never ask questions, you judge first and defend your judgment later.   Hmmm, I attacked your viewpoint on this issue, not you.  That your viewpoint sickens me I have left no doubt.  I have provided a reasoned examination of my viewpoint, plus many resources for you to consider.  You in turn have not made a reasoned examination at all.  Instead you attack where people who wrote an article went to school.    jt: You have a strange idea of attack Jonathan.  I call an attack what you do with your adjectives describing my person. Whereas what I sent to the List concerning Mr. Hampton Keithley and his father were to show where he was coming from doctrinally - since he lost his own father (after a years battle with cancer) 2yrs ago he may have been completely closed to anything other than his present dispensational doctrine along with his belief that at times "God sovereignly causes disease to come on people for their growth"   You do an email of the Henry Wright review I posted that did not attempt to argue even ONE point.  It only says (i.e. what your review says to me), this review is horrible; this man accuses my idol and I can't take it.    jt: I didn't have time to make an argument Jonathan. We have two grandchildren staying with us right now so my time is limited. Also I don't believe anything I say to you would make a difference because you are so set in your ideas. It would not be time well spent.  I would be glad to try to find time to search the scriptures and debate a person who is genuinely interested.   I have no arguments against it, I don't know how to use scripture as the reviewer did to make my point;   jt: The reviewer used his own opinion along with accusation to make his points just like you do Jonathan, not only that he used the exact same jargon such as "arguments from silence" etc. and the old tired "Judas went out and hung himself, go do likewise" - almost like a canned sermon.  Didn't take long to locate him.   I guess I better just put this guy down (call him a dispensationalist, ask God to forgive him etc.).  It is exactly what you do whenever you encounter critique on this forum.  You accuse those that disagree with you as listening to Satan, spindoctors, etc.  It is almost laughable if it were not so pathetic.   jt: No Jonathan, anyone who wants to be a dispensationalist has my blessing, that is not the problem with you. Your problem is that you are constantly judging and accusing and you don't see that you are doing it.  But I recognize the voice of the accuser when I encounter him.   What sickens me most is that only Lance has had the guts to stand up against this aberrant teaching (actually Terry did come forth and say that you may not always be right in your interpretation here you blasted him with your, I didn't say it, God did line that is so tiresome).  This is a 4 year old girl with leukemia and we are blaming her and her father for it and we think we have scripture to back this up? Shame on the rest of the group.   jt: Jonathan the above is entirely a figment of your own imagination.  I don't play the "blame game" this is your thinking.   Jonathan "The days are coming," declares the LORD, "when I will plant the house of Israel and the house of Judah with the offspring of men and of animals. Just as I watched over them to uproot and tear down, and to overthrow, destroy and bring disaster, so I will watch over them to build and to plant," declares the LORD. "In those days people will no longer say, 'The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge.' Instead, everyone will die for his own sin; whoever eats sour grapes--his own teeth will be set on edge. "The time is coming," declares the LORD, "when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah." Jer 31:27-30   jt: I agree - everyone dies for their own sin; it is how we respond to generational curses that determines the outcome. But I'm sure your spin will be different.   It was established in the Law that children would not be punished for the sins of their father (Deuteronomy 24:16, comp. II Kings 14:6).  The idea of generational sin does not come from a scriptural foundation, but from world viewpoint.    jt: What is YOUR point Jonathan?  Are you saying that Deut 24:16 and 2 Kings 14:6 negate the third Commandment?   Colossians 2:8 describes the process by which the world develops wrong ideas with these three terms: philosophy (a wrong idea that has no basis in truth), vain deceit (false reasoning to support the idea) and traditions of men (wide acceptance of the wrong idea and false reasoning to support it).  This process has only one purpose: to take away personal responsibility, create bondage to sin and deceive people regarding the nature of God.   jt: This is rich. You and Lance are the ones who defend tradition and quote theologians constantly and now you accuse me of trying to take away personal responsibility.  Who is the one who is trying to put it all off on God?  ME??? This same false line of reasoning has been spiritualized and there are those who would twist the scriptures to try to promote the idea of generational sins or curses.  "My sin is not really my fault, it is the result of a curse put on me because of my father's sin, there's nothing I can do about it, I'm not responsible."    jt: You shouldn't talk about what you don't understand Jonathan. The Bible is primarily a spiritual book and God Himself is Spirit.  Generational sin gets noone off the hook - It's our choice. We can take responsibility for the iniquity of our fathers, own it, and repent as the children of Israel did in the days of Ezra and Nehemiah, or we can deny responsibility, call the curse a blessing from the Lord and wallow in self-pity over it.     But, there's nothing new under the sun.  Israel in Ezekiel's day had accepted the same world viewpoint, which prompted God to deal with it in Ezekiel 18. When you read it, pay particular attention to verses 1-4, 20-24 and 30-32. Ezekiel 18:1-4 (NIV) The word of the Lord came to me: "What do you people mean by quoting this proverb about the land of Israel: 'The fathers eat sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge'? As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign Lord, you will no longer quote this proverb in Israel. For every living soul belongs to me, the father as well as the son--both alike belong to me. The soul who sins is the one who will die."   jt: Yes this is the "righteous judgment of God" the soul who sins is the one who will die.   Ezekiel 18:14-16,18-20 (NIV) "But suppose this son has a son who sees all the sins his father commits, and though he sees them, he does not do such things: He does not eat at the mountain shrines or look to the idols of the house of Israel... He does not oppress anyone... He does not commit robbery, but gives his food to the hungry and provides clothing for the naked... He will not die for his father's sin; he will surely live. But his father will die for his own sin, because he practiced extortion, robbed his brother and did what was wrong among his people. Yet you ask, 'Why does the son not share the guilt of his father?' Since the son has done what is just and right and has been careful to keep all my decrees, he will surely live. The soul who sins is the one who will die. The son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous man will be credited to him, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against him."   jt: And what do you think this changes?  It is the same righteous judgment of God as it has always been - The soul that sins is the one who dies. An excellent reason to take responsibility, confess, repent, and move on.