In both of these accountings, the translators added one word to a particular clause in the text of the first commandment which changes the tenor of the commandment, as uttered by the LORD, entirely. In both instances, the translators added the word “am,” which doesn't offend inasmuch as it's necessary to bring the grammar of the narrative out of the caveman high- style apparently favored by the LORD. The word offensive they added is “generation.” The two passages to which these two words were added are nearly identical.
In Exodus 20, Moses (with the help of the translators) writes: "Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me [Exodus 20:5]." There is only one minor difference between this verse and and it's twin in Deuteronomy.
In Deuteronomy, Moses (again, with the translators’ help) writes: "Thou shalt not bow down thyself unto them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me [Deuteronomy 5:9]." The only difference between this verse and it's corollary in Exodus is the seventh word, “unto,” which is translated as “to” in Exodus 20:5– perhaps from the same Hebraic expression which was translated as “unto” in this verse.
What makes this word, “generation,” an unwelcome addition to the respective texts of Exodus 20:5 and Deuteronomy 5:9 is the simple fact that the sentence it's added to is complete without it. This makes the added word unnecessary from a grammatical standpoint. Also, the thought conveyed by the sentence this word is added to is likewise complete without it: making the addition unnecessary from a logical point of view. Why did the translators– twice– think it necessary to add “generation” to this clause of the first commandment? That's the real question.
Let's look at the statement again, without the translators' help. “I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth of them that hate me.” What immediately jumps out of the text, as Moses wrote it (without the 'helps' of the translators), is the fractional nature of the statement. A third or fourth of a composite whole is a much different, and smaller, number than one- hundred- percent of a third or fourth generation of the same composite whole. Also, the generational nature of the statement is already expressed by the words “upon the children,” making the added word almost redundant: if not for a somewhat ambiguous propaganda value implied by it’s addition.
Thus, the net result of adding “generation” to the text is to muddy the doctrinal waters in which it swims; and to cast the king who commissioned the translational work itself in a “godly” aura, if, and when, he (as the LORD presumably does) visits vengeance upon the children of his own detractors. The fact that for the LORD to so punish children for the mischief of their fathers makes Him a hypocrite never seems to enter into the equation for the translators.
In Deuteronomy 24:16, Moses says: “The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.” Ezekiel records the LORD himself saying, “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 [Ezekiel 18:20a - d].” Obviously, either the LORD lied in his recitation of the first commandment, or Moses and the prophets lied– or both– but this is beside the point.
This issue of generational retribution is one of the most wishy- washy elements of the canon, leading ultimately to the erroneous belief that Jesus could pay the price for the sins of others: by becoming their ‘sacrifice’- by- cold- blooded- murder. (Murder is, by the way, sin– not atonement for sin.) Besides which, there's the karmic alchemy of Job’s comedy. Who's sins did Job pay for?
Solomon wrote: “There is a vanity which is done upon the earth; that there be just men, unto whom it happeneth according to the work of the wicked; again, there be wicked men, to whom it happeneth according to the work of the righteous: I said that this also is vanity [Ecclesiastes 8:14].” This “vanity” is also mercy and grace: the favorite subjects of Christian discourse; and the increase of thieves and murderers.
Mercy is not getting what you deserve. Does this not apply to Job’s comedy? Did Job not deserve the “hedge [Job 1:10]” of protection he enjoyed, pre- tribulation? Did not the LORD call him “a perfect and an upright man,” twice (Job 1:8 & 2:3): before he used Satan to try him? Did the children of Israel deserve the 'promised land'?Grace, likewise, is a perversion of justice.
Grace is getting what you don't deserve. Job received much tribulation he didn't deserve, didn't he? The children of Israel received houses they built not; agricultural properties and the produce thereof, which they cultivated and planted not; flocks and herds they nurtured not; human traffic, including wives for- the- taking. Did they deserve to come- up like thieves?
In Deuteronomy 32:20 (in the song of Moses), the LORD is alleged to have told the whole nation they were "very froward [first mention]" and deserving an "end" of his own conjuring: when they had as yet to to cross Jordan and begin to "possess" the land promised Abraham, on the other side (where nine and- a- half tribes would remain after the conquest). Do "very froward" thieves deserve to be successful in their thefts?
If science is correct; and all the seemingly- infinite wealth of energy and potential in the universe is, in fact, finite: what happens to the righteous when “there be wicked men, to whom it happeneth according to the work of the righteous,” as Solomon wrote? How do the books of the finite resources of mercy and grace balance in such a case; unless the mercy and grace the wicked receive are the just deserts the “just men, unto whom it happeneth according to the work of the wicked” would receive, if not for the mercy and grace of being rewarded with the just deserts of the wicked?
No comments:
Post a Comment