Tuesday, January 22, 2013

January 22, 2013 – Ezekiel 18

There is a long explanation about the sins of the father and the son and the affect they have on the other.  Basically, the answer is that they do not affect the other.  The sins of the father are paid for by the father and the sins of the son by the son.  I just gave a talk at life teen that talked about this, but I wouldn’t say that my conclusion was that the sins of the father have no effect.  The actions of the father or the son do have an effect on the other because of their relationship.  The son may not have to pay for the sins of the father in his judgment, but the son is much more likely to fall into sinfulness because of his father’s influence and will then pay for his own sins.  It takes a very strong person to rise above the sinful influence of a parent and many of the sins they may commit because of the influence they may receive mitigation for because that is how they were brought up, but sin is sin, regardless of why you do it.  It just shows how important strong family values are and why our nation, every time it makes another decision about devaluing the family, is taking us in the wrong direction.  Our issues with guns and violence and life issues will not solve any of the problems as long as the family is not viewed as the essential foundational piece of society. 

I also love when God talks about what is “fair”.  Israel says that God is not fair if He punishes them.  But He tells them that it would not be fair if He didn’t punish them because they would be getting away with violations of the law.  We hear the phrase today about “paying your fair share” and that usually means that the people who are super rich need to pay more so that others can get things.  But is it “fair” to take away from what a person earned so that a person can get away with doing nothing.  I don’t think this really applies to a celebrity who really did nothing to become famous except appear on a reality show or had 12 children.  If they get 13 million, I think you should tax that all you want.  And this doesn’t apply to a veteran or a widow with children that cannot get by because they just aren’t able to make ends meet no matter how hard they try.  The “fair” argument tries to paint everyone with a broad brush and that isn’t “fair”.  There are those that have a lot of money and done very little to earn it and there are those that have worked very hard to earn it.  There are those that rely on the government because they have no other choice and there are those that do so by choice.  I agree it is very hard to write a law that is based on how hard a person worked or their motivation for receiving aid, but I think it is wrong to make the “fair share” argument without admitting that there are cases that shouldn’t apply.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home