The sins of the fathers are visited on the children

My mother was a card-carrying communist. Really. Imagine a little kid's life in a very small town where everybody knew everybody else's business. There were kids who weren't allowed to play with me or even to speak to me. Can we say ostracized?

Imagine being dragged off to cell meetings every couple of weeks and kept up until all hours when the meetings were over before getting to go home and go to bed, then school the next day.

I look back now and the worst thing she'd be called these days is a socialist. Well...except for that whole violent overthrow of the government thing and stuff ;)
 

Pepper said:
The only "sin" they passed is genetic, having to do with certain health conditions; nothing willful on their part, accidental.
Click to expand...

I think this passage refers to the Nurture part of the Nature vs Nurture debate ...never have understood why it's a debate since both impact behavior.
 
My parents were kind, loving people. I can't think of anything they did wrong.

When I read about what parents do to children -- through malice, negligence, or whatever -- I find it hard to believe.
 

Georgiagranny said:
My mother was a card-carrying communist. Really. Imagine a little kid's life in a very small town where everybody knew everybody else's business. There were kids who weren't allowed to play with me or even to speak to me. Can we say ostracized?

Imagine being dragged off to cell meetings every couple of weeks and kept up until all hours when the meetings were over before getting to go home and go to bed, then school the next day.

I look back now and the worst thing she'd be called these days is a socialist. Well...except for that whole violent overthrow of the government thing and stuff ;)
Click to expand...
That's amazing. I've heard of "red diaper babies" but that is wild.
 
The word "sin" sounds quaintly archaic. But here's a Bible quote that contradicts it. Except that "every man" part is a little bit alarming!

Deuteronomy 24:16 - 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.
 
horseless carriage said:
I wouldn't put my father on a pedestal but I have nothing but admiration and praise for the man.
His beloved wife, my mother, died at the age of 33 leaving him in the 1950's with four children, all
under the age of ten, to raise alone. That's after he had fought the authorities, tooth and nail, for
trying to put us up for adoption.

The stress nearly killed him when in 1961, an ulcer that had formed, ruptured. But my Dad is a survivor
and his children, although growing, needed a parent. He recovered, slowly but surely he got his life on
track. He's no saint, but he never shirked his duties and he never dated another woman. Mother was all
he ever wanted. In 2008, fifty two years after mother passed away, they were reunited. My Dad, my hero.

View attachment 204871
Click to expand...
What a beautiful memorial of your father! He was a handsome man!
 
The "Sins of the Fathers" are those men who contribute little or nothing to their children....other than their Sperm. The number of unwed mothers is increasing, and without a traditional family environment to grow up in, more and more of those children are being raised "on the streets" and contributing to our growing crime and drug issues.

I firmly believe in the old saying...."It takes a neighborhood to raise a child". Unfortunately, in so many cases, today, that "neighborhood" is just a cesspool of crime and neglect.
 
My take on this is that it is Old Testament thinking when the father was the head of the household. What he did, or did not do, has serious implications for his whole family and retinue.

I remember being appalled as a teenager to read the story of Joshua sacking the town of Jericho (???). The city's treasures were confiscated but one soldier kept some of the loot for himself. As a consequence he and his whole family were put to death. In other words, the sins of the father were visited on his children.

That story offended me greatly because I had no understanding of historical and cultural context of the text. I was just 13 years old but I still remember my feeling of outrage. It was the beginning of my rejection of religion.
 
If our parents stuck with each other, and of course raised us as best they could we've been very lucky haven't we!

That said, I can see how the OP has an element of truth to it, even in families where we've done okay generally. :unsure:
 
Warrigal said:
I remember being appalled as a teenager to read the story of Joshua sacking the town of Jericho (???). The city's treasures were confiscated but one soldier kept some of the loot for himself. As a consequence he and his whole family were put to death. In other words, the sins of the father were visited on his children.
Click to expand...
That was done because the victor wanted no one of the family alive to seek revenge, not sins of the father IMO. It was a practical matter, saving oneself in advance.
 
Good point, but the victor would have had his priest/prophet beside him providing justification for the act in religious terms. Saying such as these have a habit of entering the common vernacular and get passed down through the generations long after the original context has been forgotten.
 
Look far enough back and we all (I think) have sins of our forefathers (and probably mothers) to bear. Slavery, persecution, genocide, colonization and so on. In fact the people who did those things were more successful and more likely to leave children, us, behind.

For example Genghis Khan has about 16,000,000 living descendants today, maybe even people here (https://www.discovermagazine.com/the-sciences/1-in-200-men-direct-descendants-of-genghis-khan). He slaughtered a lot of people... and fathered a bunch too.

According to 23 and me I am a descendant of Niall "Noígíallach" or in English Niall of the Nine Hostages. So are millions of other people of Irish or Scottish heritage. He seems to have been a very successful warlord around about 400 AD, defeating a lot of other warlords to become an Irish King and established a dynasty that lasted several hundred years. I don't want to think of, or feel responsible for the carnage he must have created in doing that (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niall_of_the_Nine_Hostages).

Best we can do is acknowledge it and try to do better.
 
Last edited:
Warrigal said:
Good point, but the victor would have had his priest/prophet beside him providing justification for the act in religious terms. Saying such as these have a habit of entering the common vernacular and get passed down through the generations long after the original context has been forgotten.
Click to expand...
My take on it is a bit different, in an age when the ordering of the deaths of first born children could occur, because a new leader was said to have been born, and all the inhabitants of cities might be slaughtered if they tried to resist an invading army, so they were extremely brutal times, where the killing of a whole family could occur as a warning to others not to transgress, or whatever it might have been.
 
While I was waiting in the doctor's surgery this morning I checked out the bible on the shelf and looked up the story of Joshua (Chapter 7). It makes it very clear that everything in the city of Jericho was to be burned to the ground to obliterate the culture, particularly the religion and religious symbols.

The man who tried to save some items for himself was therefore in direct violation of the first commandment and he and his family, and their animals were also wiped from the face of the earth.

Nasty.
 
Last edited:
Warrigal said:
While I was waiting in the doctor's surgery this morning I checked out the bible on the shelf and looked up the story of Joshua (Chapter 7). It makes it very clear that everything in the city of Jericho was to be burned to the ground to obliterate the culture, particularly the religion and religious symbols.
The man who tried to save some items for himself was therefore in direct violation of the first commandment and he and his family, and their animals were also wiped from the face of the earth. Nasty.
Click to expand...
"Nasty" you say,
not horrendously cruel, vindictive, terrifying, unbelievable, shocking kind of justice, etc., etc., just "Nasty"! (only joking, I knew you meant those things too ;) ).
However, if anyone doubts the power of religion, this is yet another example of the way in times gone past the part religion played, and even the potential risks leaders felt were associated with disparate religions, (and even those who do not believe in any kind of religion at all, follow their own moral code, ethics, or almost their own creed you could say, so are vaguely connected to religions I'd suggest).

I still argue therefore none of us would be here today but for the effects of religion in the past, (though I doubt I can prove it to everyone's satisfaction!).
 
I spoke to a lady vicar in Wiltshire, in the south of England this morning, because funnily enough, her sermon appeared to touch on some aspects of our discussion, (I think we were in agreement overall too). 👩‍⚖️🙏

The really quite remarkable fact though was the whole service, though the subject matter, and bible readings are laid out years in advance she said, was very topical because of the three named storms we've had in the UK during just one week, (the last of which, "Franklin", is still passing through!). :unsure:
 
Well you know when they divorce. Who gets caught the most? The kids.

My mother put an end to use seeing the bio-dad shortly after she married my stepfather. I'm not 100% why but I think this incident was the cause. I would have been 7. I said something to him disparaging about my mother. I don't want to say what it was but I do remember it. It wasn't nice but it was from the perspective of a 7 year old.

My mother went off the rails with her borderline personality disorder (something I didn't realize she even had until my mid 40's) because my stepfather is so passive, she got by with it all. So what did the bio dad do? Told my mother what I said of coarse. It was to get back at my mother of but he never cared or considered the abuse this unleased on me. And it did. Thanks you POS.

Also my mother always refered to my bio dad as "your father" never "my ex husband" which he certainly was also. Like I had any input in the decision.
 
Remy said:
Well you know when they divorce. Who gets caught the most? The kids. My mother put an end to use seeing the bio-dad shortly after she married my stepfather. I'm not 100% why but I think this incident was the cause. I would have been 7. I said something to him disparaging about my mother. I don't want to say what it was but I do remember it. It wasn't nice but it was from the perspective of a 7 year old.
My mother went off the rails with her borderline personality disorder (something I didn't realize she even had until my mid 40's) because my stepfather is so passive, she got by with it all. So what did the bio dad do? Told my mother what I said of coarse. It was to get back at my mother of but he never cared or considered the abuse this unleased on me. And it did. Thanks you POS.
Also my mother always referred to my bio dad as "your father" never "my ex husband" which he certainly was also. Like I had any input in the decision.
Click to expand...
I made the "mistake" you could say, of discussing with my former brother in law the fact my then four or five year old daughter never spoke to me of her stepfather, (my wife and I having separated when she was two years old, and she/they went to live at his house).

My daughter didn't allow this to happen to her again, as the next time I picked her up for a contact visit she had three things lined up to tell me about him, (obviously my discussions with the brother in law had got back to her mother and stepfather).

The reason I spoke of it being odd my daughter didn't mention her stepfather at all for a couple of years, was firstly because it is a bit odd, but secondly I suspected it was connected with an incident where my daughter was sent from the dinner table to her room, (apparently she'd been speaking too much!). I never discussed this sending to her room business with anyone luckily, or as you suggested happened to you, this may have got back to the mother/stepfather too, and had a negative impact.

There we are, all "supposition" of course, and never likely to be resolved as to what happened exactly, but as you rightly point out, my daughter was the one in the most vulnerable position.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top