When Jesus and his disciples met a blind beggar, as they were leaving the Temple, some of them asked Jesus, if the reason for his being born blind was for his sins or his parents (John 9:1-2). Their question presents a problem on two counts. First, if the disciples question concerns a sin committed by the man prior to his birth, where did this idea come from, since Jews didn’t believe in the transmigration of souls? That’s a Hindu doctrine. Nevertheless, there are some who believe there is evidence in Josephus that Jews tinkered with the idea. However, a closer look reveals Josephus had resurrection in mind, not reincarnation or the transmigration of souls, and resurrection was only for the righteous. So, it is difficult to understand what Jesus’ disciples referred to, if they thought the blind man’s condition was due to his own sins. Perhaps their question was phrased in a manner that expected a negative answer, because the thought was ridiculous, but this is only a guess.
Secondly, it seems apparent that, at least for some instances, the Jews believed that a man’s descendants would be punished by God for the father’s sins and this would be manifest in sickness or some debilitating impairment. At this point in my study, I wish to acknowledge that my argument has been framed from an article written by Dr. Rabbi Zev Farber on The Torah.com website.[1] My study will draw a different conclusion than the esteemed rabbi’s, but I am grateful to be able to frame my study from his labor in the scriptures. We shall begin with a quote from the Babylonian Talmud:
Rabbi Yossi bar Chanina said: “Moses made four decrees upon [the people of] Israel which four prophets came and canceled… [for the purpose of our study, I’ll focus only in what the prophet Ezekiel claimed, because it pertains to Jesus’ disciples’ question in John 9:2]
Moses said (Exodus 34:7): ‘He visits the iniquity of the fathers on the children.’ Ezekiel came and canceled this (Ezekiel 18:4): ‘The one who sins will die.’ (Babylonian Talmud, tractate Makkoth : 24a; brackets and italics mine)
I assume Dr. Farber’s scripture excerpts are taken from the Tanakh, the Hebrew Bible. He quotes:
Exodus 34:6 Yhwh passed before him and he (God or Moses?) proclaimed: “Yhwh! Yhwh! A God compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, abounding in kindness and faithfulness, 7 extending kindness to the thousandth generation, forgiving iniquity, transgression, and sin; yet he does not remit all punishment, but visits the iniquity of parents upon children and children’s children, upon the third and fourth generations.” (emphasis mine)
The conclusion Dr. Farber makes is similar to what Jesus’ disciples draw from seeing the man born blind (John 9:2):
“This text (i.e. Exodus 34:6-7) claims that although God is merciful, God does not simply wipe the slate clean when begged for forgiveness. Rather God inflicts punishment on the sinner and/or his descendants for four generations.” (parenthesis mine)
Afterward, Dr. Farber refers to the incident where the spies went into the Promised Land and brought back an evil report, and even wanted to slay Moses. When the Lord wanted to slay the nation and keep his promises to Abraham through Moses, Moses then says to God:
Numbers 14:17 Therefore, I pray, let my Lord’s forbearance be great, as You have declared, saying, 14:18 ‘Yhwh! slow to anger and abounding in kindness; forgiving iniquity and transgression; yet not remitting all punishment, but visiting the iniquity of fathers upon children, upon the third and fourth generations.’14:19 Pardon, I pray, the iniquity of this people according to Your great kindness, as You have forgiven this people ever since Egypt.” (emphasis mine)
And Dr. Farber’s conclusion is:
“Again, although God is merciful, Moses admits that God does not actually remit all punishment, and that the sinner and/or his descendants will receive some punishment.”
Now the “Sour Grape Theology” (term coined by our esteemed rabbi, Dr. Farber, for which I am grateful):
Ezekiel 18:1 The word of Yhwh came to me: 2 What do you mean by repeating this proverb concerning the land of Israel, “The parents have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are blunted”? 3 As I live, says the Lord Yhwh, this proverb shall no more be used by you in Israel. 4 Know that all lives are mine; the life of the parent as well as the life of the child is mine: it is only the person who sins that shall die.
Ezekiel spends the rest of the chapter showing the man who sins will be punished, not his descendants, unless they follow what their fathers do. My point in bringing all this out is this. Apparently, this false understanding of the Lord’s character continued even to the first century, as evidenced in the disciples’ question.
The problem, as I understand it, is one of translation, and I mean no disrespect for the Tanakh, for there are several translations used in the Christian community that would agree with the Tanakh. I used it here, because I believe it was used by Dr. Farber, and it suited my purpose to address John 9:2.
Nevertheless, the phrase “remit all punishment” quoted in Exodus 34:6-7 and Numbers 14:17-19, comes from the single Hebrew word naqah (H5352). In many other translations the same word is rendered “hold (or be) guiltless” (Exodus 20:7; Numbers 5:32; Deuteronomy 5:11; 1Kings 2:9), or “hold (or be) innocent” (Job 9:28; Psalm 19:13; Proverbs 6:29; 28:20; Jeremiah 2:35). It is also translated with words like “cleanse, clear, acquit and blameless. To claim it should be translated “punish” in places like Exodus 34:7 and Numbers 14:18 is pure conjecture, in my opinion. Why would the translators use punishment here and not ‘innocent, clear, guiltless or blameless?’ They all seem to fit. However, they would interpret the Lord’s character in a better light without abusing the meaning of the text.
Ezekiel wasn’t disagreeing with Moses (or the Torah/Law). Rather, he was offering a correct understanding of the text. The Jews by his time had misunderstood the Lord, and this, sadly, continued to Jesus’ day, as noted in the disciples’ question (John 9:2). What the Lord seems to be saying is (paraphrased): “Okay, I’ll forgive and have mercy, but know this: I’m not clearing you of guilt; by not punishing this generation, and the sins of the father will continue to the fourth generation (and beyond).” Generational sin is difficult to correct. Folks begin to believe the sin is truth, or what we can expect from life, but this isn’t so, as Ezekiel points out.
________________________________________________
[1] The article is: “Punishing Children for the sins of their Parents”. Dr. Rabbi Zev Farber is the Senior Editor of TheTorah.com, and a Research Fellow at the Shalom Hartman Institute’s Kogod Center. He holds a Ph.D. from Emory University in Jewish Religious Cultures and Hebrew Bible, an M.A. from Hebrew University in Jewish History (biblical period), as well as ordination (yoreh yoreh) and advanced ordination (yadin yadin) from Yeshivat Chovevei Torah (YCT) Rabbinical School. He is the author of Images of Joshua in the Bible and their Reception (De Gruyter 2016) and editor (with Jacob L. Wright) of Archaeology and History of Eighth Century Judah (SBL 2018).
Smoodock's Blog 