Add Part V ch02–ch03 (demonology), expand Testimony, capitalize entities

Part V Demonology:
- ch02 The Enemy's Doorways & Discernment: taxonomy (ranks Peon→Foot
  Soldier→Soldier→General; the rule of ownership), three phases
  (Infestation→Oppression→Possession, corroborated by Ed Warren / Amorth),
  doorways (occult, objects, places=history, trauma, generational sin,
  sin/metanoia, sound), ranked signs, corroboration discernment, authority.
- ch03 Possession: body-not-spark; three stages (obsession rejected);
  documented + witnessed signs; subtypes (classic/pact/transient);
  deliverance built on ch01 + rule of ownership; aftercare. Dr. Richard
  Gallagher verified (CNN/WaPo) and corrected (Catholic layman, not clergy).

Part III Testimony: new accounts #16 The Girl in the Bedroom, #17 The
Stranger at Walmart, #18 The Possessed Man (appended to preserve 1–15
numbering and cross-refs).

Book-wide: hostile entities now capitalized (Demon/the Enemy/Legion/ranks);
adjective "demonic" stays lowercase. Retroactive sweep of Part I ch01/ch03/
ch04, Part II ch02, Part III, Part V ch01.

Docs: OUTLINE, GLOSSARY, STYLE-GUIDE updated. Input seeds (part5-ch02/ch03)
and research folders (generational_sin, sin, stages_of_posession_research)
plus daily_prayer.md and additional_testimony.md added.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>

input/generational_sin/sources/01-ancestral-sin-wikipedia.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,166 @@
+Ancestral sin
+Ancestral sin, generational sin, or ancestral fault (Koine Greek: προπατορικὴ ἁμαρτία; προπατορικὸν ἁμάρτημα; προγονικὴ ἁμαρτία), is the doctrine that teaches that individuals inherit the judgement for the sin of their ancestors.[1][2] It exists primarily as a concept in Mediterranean religions (e.g. in Christian hamartiology); generational sin is referenced in the Bible in Exodus 20:5.[3][4]
+The classical scholar Martin West draws a distinction between an ancestral curse and an inherited guilt, punishment, adversity or genetic corruption.[5]
+Background
+[edit]The most detailed discussion of the concept is found in Proclus's De decem dubitationibus circa Providentiam (5th-century AD), a propaedeutic handbook for students at the Neoplatonic Academy in Athens. Proclus makes clear that the concept is of hallowed antiquity, and making sense of the apparent paradox is presented as a defense of ancient Greek religion. The main point made is that a city or a family is to be seen as a single living being (animal unum, zoion hen) more sacred than any individual human life.[6]
+The doctrine of ancestral fault is similarly presented as a tradition of immemorial antiquity in ancient Greek religion by Celsus in his True Doctrine (2nd-century AD), a polemic against Christianity. Celsus is quoted as attributing to "a priest of Apollo or of Zeus" the saying that "the mills of the gods grind slowly, even to children's children, and to those who are born after them".[7] The idea of divine justice taking the form of collective punishment is also ubiquitous in the Hebrew Bible, e.g. the Ten Plagues of Egypt, the destruction of Shechem, etc., and most notably the recurring punishments inflicted on the Israelites for lapsing from Yahwism.[8]
+Teaching by religion
+[edit]In Christianity
+[edit]The Bible speaks of generational sin in Exodus 20:5, which states that "the iniquities of the fathers are visited upon the sons and daughters—unto the third and fourth generation."[3] This concept implies that "unresolved issues get handed down from generation to generation", but that "Jesus is the bondage breaker ... [and] He is able to break the cycle of this curse, but only if we want Him to."[citation needed]
+The formalized Christian doctrine of original sin is a direct extension of the concept of ancestral sin (imagined as inflicted on a number of succeeding generations), arguing that the sin of Adam and Eve is inflicted on all their descendants indefinitely, i.e. on the entire human race. It was first developed in the 2nd century by Irenaeus, the Bishop of Lyon, in his struggle against Gnosticism.[9][10] Irenaeus contrasted their doctrine with the view that the Fall was a step in the wrong direction by Adam, with whom, Irenaeus believed, his descendants had some solidarity or identity.[11]
+Ezekiel 18:19-23 states "the son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son; the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him."[12][13]
+Eastern Orthodoxy
+[edit]Ancestral sin is the object of a Christian doctrine taught by the Orthodox Church as well as other Eastern Christians. Some identify it as "inclination towards sin, a heritage from the sin of our progenitors".[14] But most distinguish it from this tendency that remains even in baptized persons, since ancestral sin "is removed through baptism".[15]
+Saint Gregory Palamas taught that, as a result of ancestral sin (called "original sin" in the West[citation needed]), man's image was tarnished, disfigured, as a consequence of Adam's disobedience.[16] The Greek theologian John Karmiris writes that "the sin of the first man, together with all of its consequences and penalties, is transferred by means of natural heredity to the entire human race. Since every human being is a descendant of the first man, 'no one of us is free from the spot of sin, even if he should manage to live a completely sinless day'. ... Original Sin not only constitutes 'an accident' of the soul; but its results, together with its penalties, are transplanted by natural heredity to the generations to come. And thus, from the one historical event of the first sin of the first-born man, came the present situation of sin being imparted, together with all of the consequences thereof, to all natural descendants of Adam."[17]
+Roman Catholicism
+[edit]With regard to breaking generational curses, clergy of the Catholic Charismatic Renewal have developed prayers for healing.[18]
+The Catechism of the Catholic Church, the Greek translation of which uses "προπατορική αμαρτία" (literally, 'ancestral sin') where the Latin text has "peccatum originale", states: "Original sin is called 'sin' only in an analogical sense: it is a sin 'contracted' and not 'committed'—a state and not an act. Although it is proper to each individual, original sin does not have the character of a personal fault in any of Adam's descendants."[19] Eastern Orthodox teaching likewise says: "It can be said that while we have not inherited the guilt of Adam's personal sin, because his sin is also of a generic nature, and because the entire human race is possessed of an essential, ontological unity, we participate in it by virtue of our participation in the human race. 'The imparting of Original Sin by means of natural heredity should be understood in terms of the unity of the entire human nature, and of the homoousiotitos[20] of all men, who, connected by nature, constitute one mystic whole. Inasmuch as human nature is indeed unique and unbreakable, the imparting of sin from the first-born to the entire human race descended from him is rendered explicable: "Explicitly, as from the root, the sickness proceeded to the rest of the tree, Adam being the root who had suffered corruption" (Saint Cyril of Alexandria).'"[21]
+Evangelical-Lutheranism
+[edit]The Evangelical-Lutheran Churches teach:[22]
+Not only was the guilt of Adam imputed to his descendants,1 but his children and children’s children have inherited from their first ancestor his corrupt nature, being flesh born of the flesh, wholly depraved, totally blind of understanding in spiritual things, of perverse appetites, their will opposed to the will of God and only prone to evil, all their faculties enslaved in the service of sin,8 without any ability in any measure to work their own spiritual restoration.[22]
+Methodism
+[edit]In Article VII of the Articles of Religion, the Methodist Churches teach the doctrine of original sin, "the corruption of the nature of every man, that naturally is engendered of the offspring of Adam, whereby man is very far gone from original righteousness, and of his own nature inclined to evil, and that continually."[23] When a believer is entirely sanctified, original sin is eradicated and the believer is made perfect in love.[24][25]
+With respect to generational curses, the Methodist Church in Singapore teaches that "God showers mercy on those who love Him and keep His commandments"; it also holds that "God also warns that if the people do not follow the commandments and turn away, there will be the danger of false forms of worship which will have profound consequences for future generations—their children and grandchildren will not be properly instructed regarding the covenant relationship with God and with one another."[26] Parents who do not heed God's commandements in particular areas of their lives will "nurture children who turn away from God in these same areas."[27] Holding that Galatians 3:13 teaches that Jesus redeemed humankind from curses, Methodism teaches that "If we repent of our sins—including the ones we learnt from our parents (which they learnt from their parents before them)—turn towards God and are serious about cooperating with the Holy Spirit to live a new life in Christ, we can be set free from the effects of this universal curse."[27]
+The Wesleyan Methodist Church likewise teaches that "Jesus Christ made it possible by breaking the curse of sin through the cross" and that it is the free will of the believer "to walk in that victory."[28]
+Judaism
+[edit]The Hebrew Bible provides two passages of scripture regarding generational curses:[29]
+The Lord, the Lord, compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in loving-kindness and truth ... Yet he does not leave the guilty unpunished; he punishes the children and their children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation.
+— Exodus 34:7
+Parents are not to be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their parents; each will die for their own sin.
+— Deuteronomy 24:16
+The Talmud rejects the idea that people can be justly punished for another person's sins and Judaism in general upholds the idea of individual responsibility. One interpretation is that, even though there is no moral guilt for descendants, they may be negatively impacted as a consequence of their forebear's actions.[29]
+Hinduism
+[edit]Some holy writing in Hinduism states,[30]
+The thin bamboo rod in the hand of the Brahmana is mightier than the thunderbolt of Indra. The thunder scorches all existing objects upon which it falls. The Brahmana's rod (which symbolizes the Brahmana's might in the form of his curse) blasts even unborn generations. The might of the rod is derived from Mahadeva.
+Hinduism has family curses, elsewhere.[31]
+Japanese Shinto
+[edit]This section needs expansion. You can help by adding missing information. (September 2022) |
+Although Shinto has its own view of sin, ancestral sin is not one opted for. Instead, Shinto pushes for all humans being inherently pure, with any accumulated sin, or kegare, being what is accumulated in one's current life.[32] These are to be removed purification rituals, such as harae.
+Greek mythology
+[edit]This section needs additional citations for verification. (August 2025) |
+In Greek mythology, the Erinyes exacted family curses.[33][34] Certain dynasties have had tragic occurrences happen upon them.
+The House of Cadmus, who established and ruled over the city of Thebes, was one such house. After slaying the dragon and establishing Thebes upon the earth that the dragon terrorized, Ares cursed Cadmus and his descendants because of the dragon's sacredness to Ares. Similarly, after Hephaestus discovered his wife, Aphrodite, having a sexual affair with Ares, he became enraged and vowed to avenge himself for Aphrodite's infidelity by cursing the lineage of any children that resulted from the affair. Aphrodite later bore a daughter, Harmonia, the wife of Cadmus, from Ares' seed.
+Cadmus, annoyed at his accursed life and ill fate, remarked that if the gods were so enamoured of the life of a serpent, he might as well wish that life for himself. Immediately Cadmus began to grow scales and change into a serpent. Harmonia, after realizing the fate of her husband, begged the gods to let her share her husband's fate. Of the House of Cadmus, many had particularly tragic lives and deaths. For example, King Minos of Crete's wife fall madly in love with the Cretan Bull and bore the Minotaur. Minos would later be murdered by his daughters whilst bathing. Semele, the mother of Dionysus by Zeus, was turned into dust because she glanced upon Zeus's true godly form. King Laius of Thebes was killed by his son, Oedipus. Oedipus later (unknowingly) marries the queen, his own mother, and becomes king. After finding out he gouges his eyes and exiles himself from Thebes.
+Another dynasty that was cursed and was subject to tragic occurrences was the House of Atreus (also known as the Atreides). The curse begins with Tantalus, a son of Zeus who enjoyed cordial relations with the gods. To test the omniscience of the gods, Tantalus decided to slay his son Pelops and feed him to the gods as a test of their omniscience. All of the gods, save Demeter, who was too concerned with the abduction of her daughter Persephone by Hades, knew not to eat from Pelops's cooked corpse. After Demeter had eaten Pelops's shoulder, the gods banished Tantalus into Tartarus where he would spend eternity standing in a pool of water beneath a fruit-bearing tree with low branches. Whenever he would reach for a fruit, the branches would lift upward so as to remove his intended meal from his grasp. Whenever he would bend over to drink from the pool, the water would recedes into the earth before he could drink. The gods brought Pelops back to life, replacing the bone in his shoulder with a bit of ivory with the help of Hephaestus, thus marking the family forever afterwards.
+Pelops would later marry Princess Hippodamia after winning a chariot race against her father, King Oenomaus. Pelops won the race by sabotaging of King Oenomaus’ chariot, with the help of the king's servant, Myrtilus. This resulted in King Oenomaus’s death. Later, the servant Myrtilus, who was in love with Hippodamia, was killed by Pelops because Pelops had promised Myrtilus the right to take Hippodamia's virginity in exchange for his help in sabotaging the king's chariot. As Myrtilus died, he cursed Pelops and his line, further adding to the curse on the House of Atreus.
+King Atreus, the son of Pelops and the namesake of the Atreidies, would later be killed by his nephew, Aegisthus. Before his death, Atreus had two sons, King Agamemnon of Mycenae and King Menelaus of Sparta. King Menelaus's wife, Helen of Sparta, would leave him for Prince Paris of Troy, thus beginning the Trojan War. However, prior to their sailing off for the war, Agamemnon had angered the goddess Artemis by killing one of her sacred deer. As Agamemnon prepared to sail to Troy to avenge his brother's shame, Artemis stilled the winds so that the Greek fleet could not sail. The seer Calchas told Agamemnon that if he wanted to appease Artemis and sail to Troy, he would have to sacrifice the most precious thing in his possession. Agamemnon sent word home for his daughter Iphigenia to come to him so that he may sacrifice her, framing it to her that she was to be married to Achilles. Iphigenia, honored by her father's asking her to join him in the war, complied. Agamemnon sacrificed his daughter and went off to war.
+Clytemnestra, the wife of Agamemnon and mother to Iphigenia, was so enraged by her husband's actions that when he returned victorious from Troy, she trapped him in a robe with no opening for his head whilst he was bathing and stabbed him to death as he thrashed about. Orestes, the son of Agamemnon and Clytemnestra, was torn between his duty toward avenging his father's death and his sparing his mother. However. after praying to Apollo for consultation, Apollo advised him to kill his mother. Orestes killed his mother and wandered the land, ridden with guilt. Because of the noble act of avenging his father's at the expense of his own soul and reluctance to kill his mother, Orestes was forgiven by the gods, thus ending the curse of the House of Atreus.
+Witchcraft
+[edit]This section needs expansion. You can help by adding missing information. (September 2022) |
+The term witchcraft is not well-defined but, at least within factions, the belief in family curses persists.[35] In paganism, the common belief is that curses passed down through family may present itself through personal misfortune, such as addiction and poverty. [36] Another includes karmic debt, a concept suggesting that actions in one's own past life--especially negative ones--carry on with them through reincarnation.[37] Through personal self improvement and reflection on not only one's past, but their lineage, one may free themselves from a curse.
+Skeptical views
+[edit]Modern skeptics deny that curses of any nature, including family curses, even exist,[38][39] even if some fervently believe in them.[40]
+Modern Western attitudes to personal individuality and to individual achievement do not always sit well with notions of inherited sin.[41] Psychologists and philosophers tend to portray persistent human failings as part of human nature, rather than using "original sin" metaphors.[42]
+Historical examples
+[edit]Nathaniel Hawthorne felt that his family was cursed because of the actions of two of his ancestors, John Hathorne and his father William. William Hathorne was a judge who earned a reputation for cruelly persecuting Quakers, and in 1662, he ordered the public whipping of Ann Coleman. John Hathorne was one of the leading judges in the Salem witch trials. He is not known to have repented for his actions. So great were Nathaniel Hawthorne's feelings of guilt, he re-spelled his last name Hathorne to Hawthorne.[43]
+Famous examples
+[edit]- The curse of the Alcmaeonidae
+- The Curse of the Braganzas (from John IV of Portugal to Louis Philip)
+- The Curse of Tippecanoe; not quite a family curse, as it relates to occupational succession, not genetic, but deserves mention
+- The Kennedy curse (from Joseph P. Kennedy Jr. to Maeve Kennedy McKean)
+- The Dangbar Family
+- The Sedgwick family[relevant? – discuss]
+- The Von Erich family
+- The family of Bruce Lee, also known as "The Curse of the Dragon" (Bruce Lee and Brandon Lee)
+- The House of Grimaldi is said to have been cursed for their conquest of the Rock of Monaco, although stories differ as to how they were cursed.
+Family curses in fiction
+[edit]As he lies dying, in Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet Mercutio says, "A plague o' both your houses", blaming both the Capulets and Montagues. As the play progresses, his words prove prophetic.[45]
+There is a family curse in The House of the Seven Gables.[46]
+In Arthur Conan Doyle's The Hound of the Baskervilles, it was thought that the Baskerville family had a legendary family curse, of a giant black hound, "... a foul thing, a great, black beast, shaped like a hound, yet larger than any hound that ever mortal eye has rested upon."[47][48]
+In the 2007 South Korean psychological-supernatural suspense horror film Someone Behind You, a young woman named Ga-In (Yoon-Jin-seo) sees families and friends slaughtering and attacking one another and realizes that she is followed by an inexplicable curse causing those around her to get rid of her. Despite all of this she is constantly reminded by an eerie student never to trust her family, her friends, or even herself. Ga-In has hallucinations of those who would attempt to attack her, then sees a disturbing vision of a monstrous being warning her that the bloodshed will intensify. The film was also released in America retitled as Voices.[49][relevant? – discuss]
+See also
+[edit]- Apostolic succession
+- Blood curse
+- Christian views on sin
+- Concupiscence
+- Curse of Ham
+- Curse and mark of Cain
+- Curse of Turan
+- Curse of the Atreides
+- Curse tablet
+- Demonic possession
+- Evil eye
+- Exorcism in Christianity
+- Haunted doll
+- Jewish deicide
+- Jinx
+- Kindama
+- La Llorona
+- Pele's Curse
+- Sacraments
+- Sacramentals
+- Sanctification
+- The Scottish Play
+- Superman curse
+- Theology of Søren Kierkegaard
+- Tutankhamun's Curse
+- Usog
+- Wandering Jew
+References
+[edit]- ^ Smith, Chuck (17 February 2014). "Generational Sin?". Calvary Chapel. Retrieved 29 April 2021.
+- ^ John Piper (3 November 2015). "Can My Life Be Plagued by Generational Sins, Hexes, or Curses?". Desiring God. Retrieved 29 April 2021.
+- ^ a b Johnson, Selena (2006). The Sin of Racism: How to be Set Free. Hamilton Books. p. 104. ISBN 978-0-7618-3509-7.
+- ^ Ghent, Rick; Childerston, Jim (1994). Purity & Passion. Moody Press. p. 100. ISBN 978-0-8024-7130-7.
+- ^ West 1999, p. 33f: "Critics have often spoken of an inherited curse when what they mean is inherited guilt, or some kind of genetic corruption, or persistent but unexplained adversity."
+- ^ Gagné 2013, pp. 23–25.
+- ^ Gagné 2013, p. 60: "Ὀψὲ, φησι, θεῶν ἀλέουσι μύλοι, και Ἐς παίδων παῖδας τοί κεν μετόπισθη γένωνται."
+- ^ Krašovec 1999, p. 113. Explicitly in Isaiah 14:21, Exodus 20:5, Exodus 34:6–7, Jeremiah 32:18. Krašovec, Jože, Reward, punishment, and forgiveness: the thinking and beliefs of ancient Israel in the light of Greek and modern views
+- ^ ODCC 2005, p. Original sin.
+- ^ "What the Early Church Believed: Original Sin". Catholic Answers. 2024. Retrieved 19 May 2024.
+But this man... is Adam, if the truth be told, the first-formed man... We, however, are all from him; and as we are from him, we have inherited his title [of sin] (Against Heresies 3:23:2 [inter A.D. 180-190]).
+- ^ J. N. D. Kelly Early Christian Doctrines (San Francisco: Harper Collins, 1978) p. 171, referred to in Daniel L. Akin, A Theology for the Church, p. 433
+- ^ "Foundations Of Faith". Global Christians. Harvestime International Institute. Retrieved August 11, 2025.
+- ^ "Ezekiel 18:20". Bible Gateway. Retrieved August 11, 2025.
+- ^ The Nature of Sin Archived 2008-09-08 at the Wayback Machine; same text also at The Nature of Sin
+- ^ St Nikodemos the Hagiorite: Exomologetarion; cf. "Το βάπτισμα ... αποβάλλει την παλαιά φύση της αμαρτίας (το προπατορικό αμάρτημα)" (Ανδρέα Θεοδώρου: Απαντήσεις σε ερωτήματα δογματικά (εκδ. Αποστολικής Διακονίας, 1997), p. 156-161).
+- ^ "A Discussion of the Orthodox Perception of the Nature of God". Archived from the original on January 6, 2009.
+- ^ "Archpriest Alexander Golubov: Rags of Mortality: Original Sin and Human Nature". Orthodox Research Institute.
+{{cite web}}
+: CS1 maint: url-status (link) - ^ "Prayer for Healing the Family Tree" (PDF). Southern California Renewal Communities. 2013. Retrieved 29 April 2021.
+- ^ "Catechism of the Catholic Church - IntraText, 404–405". www.vatican.va.
+- ^ The correct word form is homoousiotes; the quoted text erroneously uses its genitive form homoousiotetos, and confusingly uses an 'i' instead of an 'e' in the penultimate syllable following a mixed Greek transliteration scheme with both modern and classical elements.
+- ^ Archpriest Alexander Golubov: Rags of Mortality: Original Sin and Human Nature quoting John Karmiris, A Synopsis of the Dogmatic Theology of the Orthodox Catholic Church, trans. from the Greek by the Reverend George Dimopoulos (Scranton, Pa.: Christian Orthodox Edition, 1973), p. 36
+- ^ a b "Hereditary Guilt and Sin". Concordia Lutheran Conference. 29 March 2022. Retrieved 24 May 2026.
+- ^ "Original or Birth Sin". Independent Methodist Arminian Resource Center. 2026. Retrieved 24 May 2026.
+- ^ Christensen, Michael M. (17 November 2015). God, Adam, and You: How Original Sin, the Flesh, and Holiness Integrate in the Christian Life. Wipf and Stock Publishers. p. 57. ISBN 978-1-4982-3067-4.
+- ^ "Sanctification". The Free Methodist Church in Canada. 2026. Retrieved 24 May 2026.
+- ^ Tan, Daniel C. (31 July 2020). "Does Generational Curse Exist in Families". Methodist Church in Singapore. Retrieved 24 May 2026.
+- ^ a b "How should I view generational sin or curses with respect to my family?". Methodist Church in Singapore. 1 February 2026. Retrieved 24 May 2026.
+- ^ Hurd, Laura (9 October 2023). "Generational Curses". Wesleyan Church. Retrieved 24 May 2026.
+- ^ a b Sacks, Jonathan (24 August 2015). "To the Third and Fourth Generations (Ki Teitse 5775)". Rabbi Sacks. Retrieved 25 April 2020.
+- ^ Archive, Internet Sacred Text. "The Mahabharata, Book 13: Anusasana Parva: Anusasanika Pa..." Internet Sacred Text Archive.
+- ^ "The Aitareya Brahmanam of the Rigveda, containing the earliest speculations of the Brahmans on the meaning of the sacrificial prayers, and on the origin, performance and sense of the rites of the Vedic religion". Bahadurganj, Allahabad Sudhindra Nath Vasu. 1922.
+- ^ "BBC - Religions - Shinto: Purity in Shinto". www.bbc.co.uk. Retrieved 2024-08-28.
+- ^ Banducci, Laura (2007). "Family Curses in Modern and Ancient History". Bulletin. 17.
+- ^ "Family Curses in Modern and Ancient History". 8 August 2015.
+- ^ "The Family Curse: What Modern Witches Need to Know". February 18, 2016.
+- ^ Homeschoolers, Pagan (2023-11-14). "Breaking Generational Curses: A Guide to Freedom". Pagan Homeschoolers. Retrieved 2024-08-28.
+- ^ "Is your number under KARMIC DEBT? Find out". The Times of India. 2023-06-15. ISSN 0971-8257. Retrieved 2024-08-28.
+- ^ "Why Do People Believe in Curses?". September 2019.
+- ^ "Why do people believe in curses?". August 30, 2019.
+- ^ Mariani, Mike (November 19, 2015). "Science Is Proving That Tragic Curses Are Real".
+- ^
+Kahler, Erich (1956). Man The Measure: A New Approach To History. New York: Routledge (published 2019). ISBN 9780429709340. Retrieved 4 June 2021.
+The recurring theme of the great Greek tragedians [...] is ancestral sin [...]. Man is caught between the inescapable tribal duties and the dawning awareness of free, individual morality. And with this the great theme of Greek man is given; it was carried further by Greek philosophy – the struggle for assertion of human individuality [...].
+{{cite book}}
+: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) - ^
+Compare:
+Boyce, James (23 July 2014). Born Bad: Original Sin and the Making of the Western World. Melbourne: Black Inc. (published 2014). ISBN 9781922231642. Retrieved 4 June 2021.
+No theologian, from the sixth century to the present day, would say that there is evil in created human nature; that would be a slight on a loving God.
+- ^ Brooks, Rebecca Beatrice (September 15, 2011). "The Life of Nathaniel Hawthorne".
+- ^ Carroll, Robert (December 19, 2013). "Kennedy curse". skepdic.com. Retrieved 2020-06-14.
+- ^ "Why Does Mercutio Say "A Plague O' Both Your Houses"?". 4 August 2015.
+- ^ Smiley, Jane (13 May 2006). "A house divided". TheGuardian.com.
+- ^ "The Hound of the Baskervilles | Encyclopedia.com". www.encyclopedia.com.
+- ^ "The Hound of the Baskervilles | LibriVox". librivox.org.
+- ^ Barton, Steve (26 March 2009). "Voices (2009)".
+- Gagné, Renaud (2013). Ancestral Fault in Ancient Greece. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 978-1-107-03980-3.
+- Krašovec, Jože. (1999). Reward, punishment, and forgiveness : the thinking and beliefs of ancient Israel in the light of Greek and modern views. Leiden: Brill. ISBN 9789004114432.
+- Cross, Frank L.; Livingstone, Elizabeth A., eds. (2005). Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. Oxford: University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-280290-3.
+- West, Martin L. (1999). "Ancestral Curses". In Griffin, Jasper (ed.). Sophocles Revisited. Essays presented to Sir Hugh Lloyd-Jones. Oxford University Press. pp. 31–45.
+External links
+[edit]- How to Break a Generational Curse – Knox Presbyterian Church (Presbyterian Church in Canada)
+- Prayers for Breaking Generational Curses – Crosswinds International Ministries (Nondenominational Christianity)
+- Inside the Kennedy family 'curse' – CNN
+- Inside the 'cursed' Monaco Royal family – Mirror
+- Ted Kennedy spoke of a family curse after Chappaquiddick. He had good reason. – The Washington Post

input/generational_sin/sources/02-christian-views-on-sin-wikipedia.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,204 @@
+Christian views on sin
+In Christianity, sin is an immoral act and transgression of divine law.[1] The doctrine of sin is central to the Christian faith, since its basic message is about redemption in Christ.[2]
+Hamartiology, a branch of Christian theology which is the study of sin,[3] describes sin as an act of offence against God by despising his persons and Christian biblical law, and by injuring others.[4] Christian hamartiology is closely related to concepts of natural law, moral theology and Christian ethics.
+Among some scholars, sin is understood mostly as legal infraction or contract violation of non-binding philosophical frameworks and perspectives of Christian ethics, and so salvation tends to be viewed in legal terms. Other Christian scholars understand sin to be fundamentally relational—a loss of love for the Christian God and an elevation of self-love ("concupiscence", in this sense), as was later propounded by Augustine in his debate with the Pelagians.[5] As with the legal definition of sin, this definition also affects the Christian understanding of grace and salvation, which are thus viewed in relational terms.[6]
+Etymology
+[edit]Hamartiology (from Greek: ἁμαρτία, hamartia, "a departure fr. either human or divine standards of uprightness"[7] and -λογια, -logia, "study")
+In the Bible
+[edit]Old Testament
+[edit]The first use of sin as a noun in the Christian Greek Old Testament is in Genesis chapter 4, verse seven "sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it"[8] waiting to be mastered by Cain,[9] a form of literary theriomorphism.[10]
+The Book of Isaiah announced the consequences of sin: "But your iniquities have separated you from your God; your sins have hidden his face from you, so that he will not hear. For your hands are stained with blood, your fingers with guilt. Your lips have spoken falsely, and your tongue mutters wicked things" — a separation between God and man, and unrequited worshipping.[11]
+Original sin
+[edit]Original sin is the Christian doctrine that humans inherit a tainted nature and a proclivity to sin through the fact of birth.[12] Theologians have characterized this condition in many ways, seeing it as ranging from something as insignificant as a slight deficiency, or a tendency toward sin yet without collective guilt, referred to as a "sin nature", to total depravity or automatic guilt of all humans through collective guilt.[13]
+Christians believe the doctrine of humanity's state of sin resulted from the fall of man, stemming from Adam's rebellion in Eden, namely the sin of disobedience in consuming from the tree of knowledge of good and evil.[14][15]
+The concept of original sin was first alluded to in the 2nd century by Irenaeus, in his controversy with certain dualist Gnostics. Other church fathers such as Augustine of Hippo also developed the doctrine,[14] seeing it as based on the New Testament teaching of Paul the Apostle (Romans 5:12–21 and 1 Corinthians 15:22) and the Old Testament verse of Psalm 51:5.[16][17][18][19][20] Tertullian, Cyprian, Ambrose and Ambrosiaster considered that humanity shares in Adam's sin, transmitted by human generation. Augustine's formulation of original sin was popular among Protestant reformers, such as Martin Luther and John Calvin, who equated original sin with concupiscence, affirming that it persisted even after baptism and completely destroyed freedom.[14] The Jansenist movement, which the Catholic Church declared to be heretical, also maintained that original sin destroyed freedom of will.[20]
+Substantial branches of hamartiological understanding, including Catholic,[21] Presbyterian,[22] Continental Reformed,[23] and Reformed Baptist[24] subscribe to the doctrine of original sin,[25] which they believe Paul espouses in Romans 5:12–19 and which Augustine of Hippo popularized in Western Christianity and developed into a notion of "hereditary sin". Augustine taught that God holds all the descendants of Adam and Eve accountable for Adam's sin of rebellion, and as such all people deserve God's wrath and condemnation – apart from any actual sins they personally commit.[26]
+In contrast, Pelagianism states that humans enter life as moral "blank slates" (tabulae rasae) responsible for their own moral nature.[27][28] The Fall that occurred when Adam and Eve disobeyed God affected humankind only minimally as it established a negative moral precedent.[29][30]
+A third line of thinking takes an intermediate position, asserting that since the Fall the sin of Adam has naturally affected human beings such that they have inborn tendencies to rebel against God (in which rebellion by personal choice all accountable humans, except Jesus and, to Catholics, Mary, will choose or have chosen to indulge).[31] This is the hamartiological position of the Eastern Christian churches, often called ancestral sin as opposed to original sin, but it is sometimes viewed as Semi-Pelagianism in the West, especially by the Reformed.
+Generational sin
+[edit]The Bible speaks of generational sin in Exodus 20:5, which states that "the iniquities of the fathers are visited upon the sons and daughters — unto the third and fourth generation."[32] This concept implicates that "unresolved issues get handed down from generation to generation", but that "Jesus is the bondage breaker...[and] He is able to break the cycle of this curse, but only if we want Him to."[32] Theologian Marilyn Hickey explicates this concept, teaching that 2 Thessalonians 2:7 references "the unseen and mysterious connection between a father's sins and the path of his children"; she provides an example in which if a "father is a liar and a thief, his children are prone to the same behavior".[33] Hickey states that "Through the power of Jesus Christ, no generational curses need remain in our family lineage" and says that prayer is efficacious in ending the cycle of ancestral sin.[33] James Owolagba adds that in addition to prayer, frequent church attendance including regular reception of the sacraments, especially Holy Communion, aids in delivering an individual from generation sin.[34]
+Divisions
+[edit]Within some branches of Christianity, there are several defined types of sin:
+- Original sin—Most denominations of Christianity interpret the Garden of Eden account in Genesis in terms of the fall of man. Adam and Eve's disobedience was the first sin man ever committed, and their original sin (or the effects of the sin) is passed on to their descendants (or has become a part of their environment). See also: total depravity.
+- Concupiscence
+- Venial sin
+- Mortal sin
+- Seven deadly sins
+- Eternal sin—Commonly called the Unforgivable sin (mentioned in Matthew 12:31), this is perhaps the most controversial sin, whereby someone has become an apostate, forever denying themselves a life of faith and experience of salvation; the precise nature of this sin is often disputed.
+Catholic views
+[edit]Thomas Aquinas
+[edit]The way Thomas Aquinas viewed sin and vices was radically different from later approaches, especially that of 17th-century moral theology. He presented sin and vices as contraries of virtues. He discusses the subject in his Summa Theologica part Ia–IIae (Prima secundae) qq. 71–89.[38]
+In one of his definitions of sin Thomas quotes Augustine of Hippo's description of sin as "a thought, words and deed against the Eternal Law."'[39]
+Now there are two rules of the human will: one is proximate and homogeneous, viz. the human reason; the other is the first rule, viz. the eternal law, which is God's reason, so to speak (quasi ratio Dei). Accordingly Augustine includes two things in the definition of sin; one, pertaining to the substance of a human act, and which is the matter, so to speak, of sin, when he says, word, deed, or desire; the other, pertaining to the nature of evil, and which is the form, as it were, of sin, when he says, contrary to the eternal law. (STh I–II q.71 a.6)[40]
+To recognise the possibilities of sin in man is equal to acknowledge his human nature, his control and mastery of his own actions. Sin is a motion to the goal, it is judged by the object to which it is directed. The field of sin is the same as the field of virtue. There are three major fields: relationship with God, with oneself and with the neighbour. Thomas distinguished between mortal and venial sins. Mortal sin is when a person has irreparably destroyed the very principle of his/her order to the goal of life. Venial sin is when he/she has acted in a certain disordered way without destructing that principle:
+Consequently it is a mortal sin generically, whether it be contrary to the love of God, e.g. blasphemy, perjury, and the like, or against the love of one's neighbour, e.g. murder, adultery, and such like: wherefore such sins are mortal by reason of their genus. Sometimes, however, the sinner's will is directed to a thing containing a certain inordinateness, but which is not contrary to the love of God and one's neighbour, e.g. an idle word, excessive laughter, and so forth: and such sins are venial by reason of their genus. (STh I–II q.72 a.5)
+According to Aquinas the gravity of sin depends also on "some disposition of the agent" (cf. STh I–II q. 18, aa. 4, 6). Sin, venial by reason of its object, may become mortal. It happens when person fixes his/her ultimate happiness, the last end of his/her life (Lat. finis ultimus) in the object of that venial sin. When venial sin is used as a way to provoke mortal sin it becomes mortal as well, e.g. when someone uses empty conversation or a chat to seduce someone to commit adultery. Also sin, mortal by reason of its object, may become venial because of the agent's disposition when his/her evil act does not have full moral capacity, i.e. is not deliberated by reason. That may happen for instance when sudden movements of unbelief arise in the mind. (Cf. STh I–II q.72 a.5).
+The difference and gravity of sins may be discerned on the grounds of spirit and flesh, even mortal sins may differ in gravity. Carnal sins like lust, adultery or fornication, gluttony and avarice, because the person who commits them is inordinately directed towards material goods that are a serious matter, are mortal sins. They may cause much shame and infamy. But spiritual sins like blaspheming of God or apostasy are, according to Thomas, still greater evil, as they have more of the aversion from God. They are directed against a greater object. The formal, essential element of sin is more at the centre in them. (cf. STh I–II q.72 a.2)[35][41]
+According to another formulation of the concept of sin in the Summa, at the heart of sin is "the turning away from the immutable good", i.e. God, and "inordinate turning to mutable good", i.e. creatures. (STh I–IIae q.87 a.4) This cannot be understood as if in the concrete sinful deed the sinner commits two separate and independent acts. Both aversio and conversio constitute one single guilty action. At the root of the inordinate turning to the creatures is self-love which expresses itself in disordered desire (cupiditas) and rebellion towards God (superbia).[42]
+Speaking about sloth (Lat. acedia) Thomas points out that every deed which "by its very nature is contrary to charity is a mortal sin". An effect of such deed is the destruction of "spiritual life which is the effect of charity, whereby God dwells in us." Sin of a mortal character is always committed with the consent of reason: "Because the consummation of sin is in the consent of reason"'. (cf. STh II–IIae q.35 a.3) Venial and mortal sins can be compared to sickness and death. While venial sin impairs full healthy activity of a person, mortal sin destroys the principle of spiritual life in him/her.[43]
+Catechism of the Catholic Church
+[edit]The Catechism of the Catholic Church states the following.
+Catholic doctrine distinguishes between personal sin (also sometimes called "actual sin") and original sin. Personal sins are either mortal or venial.
+Mortal sins are sins of grave (serious) matter, where the sinner performs the act with full knowledge and deliberate consent. (cf. Catechism of the Catholic Church (§1857) The act of committing a mortal sin destroys charity, i. e. the grace in the heart of a Christian; it is in itself a rejection of God (Catechism of the Catholic Church (§1855). If left un-reconciled, mortal sins may lead to eternal separation from God, traditionally called damnation.
+Venial sins are sins which do not meet the conditions for mortal sins. The act of committing a venial sin does not cut off the sinner from God's grace, as the sinner has not rejected God. However, venial sins do injure the relationship between the sinner and God, and as such, must be reconciled to God, either through the Sacrament of Reconciliation or receiving the Eucharist (after proper contrition fulfilled).
+Both mortal and venial sins have a dual nature of punishment. They incur both guilt for the sin, yielding eternal punishment in the case of mortal sins and temporal punishment for the sin in the case of both venial and mortal sins. Reconciliation is an act of God's mercy, and addresses the guilt and eternal punishment for sin. Purgatory and indulgences address the temporal punishment for sin, and exercise of God's justice.
+Roman Catholic doctrine also sees sin as being twofold: Sin is, at once, any evil or immoral action which infracts God's law and the inevitable consequences, the state of being that comes about by committing the sinful action. Sin can and does alienate a person both from God and the community. Hence, the Catholic Church's insistence on reconciliation with both God and the Church itself.
+The Roman Catholic view of sin has recently expanded. Monsignor Gianfranco Girotti, Regent of the Catholic Apostolic Penitentiary, has said that "known sins increasingly manifest themselves as behavior that damages society as a whole,"[44] including, for example:
+- "certain violations of the fundamental rights of human nature, through genetic manipulations [or experiments],"
+- "drug [abuse], which weakens the mind and obscures intelligence,"
+- "environmental pollution,"
+- "abortion and pedophilia," and
+- the widening social and economic differences between the rich and the poor, which "cause an unbearable social injustice" (accumulating excessive wealth, inflicting poverty). The revision was aimed at encouraging confession or the Sacrament of Penance.
+Mortal sins, which are any severe and intentional actions that directly disobey God, are often confused with the seven deadly sins, which are pride, envy, wrath, sloth, greed, gluttony, and lust. They are not, however, the same. The seven deadly sins are called "deadly" because they might lead another to commit other sins. Some forms of the seven deadly sins (i.e. debilitating one's health because of their love of food) can constitute as grave matter, while others may just be venial (i.e. over-eating).
+Another group of four or five sins distinguished by the Church are the sins that cry to heaven: murder, sodomy, oppression of the weak, and defrauding the laborer.[45]
+Eastern Orthodox views
+[edit]The Eastern Orthodox Church presents a view of sin distinct from views found in Catholicism and in Protestantism, that sin is viewed primarily as a terminal spiritual sickness, rather than a state of guilt, a self-perpetuating illness which distorts the whole human being and energies, corrupts the Image of God inherent in those who bear the human nature, diminishes the divine likeness within them, disorients their understanding of the world as it truly is, and distracts a person from fulfilling his natural potential to become deified in communion with God.
+Lutheran views
+[edit]In Lutheranism, sins are of two classes:[46]
+As to their effect, sins are divided into mortal sins and venial sins. Mortal sins are those which result in the death of the sinner. This term takes in all the sins of the unbelievers. In the case of the believers those sins are called mortal which force the Holy Spirit to depart from one’s heart, which destroy faith. Venial sins are sins which, though they in themselves merit eternal death, are daily forgiven to the believer. They are also called sins of weakness. They do not drive the Holy Spirit from the heart, do not extinguish faith.[46]
+Venial sins are sins of weakness; they are limited to believers, and do not kill faith, because they are not done intentionally. In themselves they are real sins and are worthy of death, but through faith Christians have forgiveness for them. Mortal sins are such as kill faith and drive the Holy Spirit from the heart, because no man can sin willfully intentionally and at the same time believe in Christ for the forgiveness of his sins.[47]
+The Smalcald Articles of Lutheranism teach that apostasy from the Christian faith can occur through loss of faith or through falling into a lifestyle characterized by mortal sin:[48]
+It is, accordingly, necessary to know and to teach that when holy men, still having and feeling original sin, also daily repenting of and striving with it, happen to fall into manifest sins, as David into adultery, murder, and blasphemy, that then faith and the Holy Ghost has departed from them [they cast out faith and the Holy Ghost]. For the Holy Ghost does not permit sin to have dominion, to gain the upper hand so as to be accomplished, but represses and restrains it so that it must not do what it wishes. But if it does what it wishes, the Holy Ghost and faith are [certainly] not present. For St. John says, 1 John 3:9: Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin, … and he cannot sin. And yet it is also the truth when the same St. John says, 1:8: If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us.[48]
+The Lutheran divine Martin Chemnitz, who contributed to the development of Lutheran systematic theology, delineated what are considered mortal sins:[49]
+For Scripture distinguishes between sins, namely that in the saints or reborn there are some sins because of which they are not condemned, but at the same time retain faith, the Holy Spirit, grace, and the forgiveness of sins. (Rom 7:23–8:1; 1 Jn 1:8–9; Ps 32:1). But Scripture testifies that there are also some other sins in which also the reconciled, when they have fallen, lose faith, the Holy Spirit, the grace of God, and life eternal, and render themselves subject to divine wrath and eternal death unless, turned again, they are reconciled to God through faith (Rom 8:13; 1 Cor 6:10; Gal 5:21; Eph 5:5; Col 3:6; 1 Jn 3:6, 8; 1 Tim 1:19; 2 Per 1:9). And the useful distinction between mortal and venial sin is drawn from this basis.[49]
+With respect to the examination of conscience, Chemnitz implored Lutheran clergy to remind the faithful of what sins are mortal (especially the seven deadly sins) and venial sins.[49]
+Methodist views
+[edit]The Wesleyan–Arminian theology of Methodism teaches that humans, though being born in total depravity, can turn to God as a result of prevenient grace and do good; this prevenient grace convicts humans of the necessity of the new birth (first work of grace), through which he is justified (pardoned) and regenerated.[50] After this, to willfully sin would be to fall from grace.[50] When the believer is entirely sanctified (second work of grace), his/her original sin is washed away.[50]
+Methodist theology firstly distinguishes between original sin and actual sin:[51]
+Original sin is the sin which corrupts our nature and gives us the tendency to sin. Actual sins are the sins we commit every day before we are saved, such as lying, swearing, stealing.[51]
+It further categorizes sin as being (1) "sin proper" and (2) "involuntary transgression of a divine law, known or unknown" (called infirmities).[50][52] Sins proper (or sin, properly so called) are those that are committed freely and willfully (which can cause one to fall away).[53][50][54] 'Sin, improperly so called' include those in the "category of benign neglect, fruits of infirmity (forgetfulness, lack of knowledge, etc)".[50] In traditional Methodist theology, infirmities are not classified as sins, as explained by Wesley, "Such transgressions you may call sins, if you please: I do not, for the reasons above-mentioned."[55] John Wesley explains the matter like this:[56]
+Nothing is sin, strictly speaking, but a voluntary transgression of a known law of God. Therefore, every voluntary breach of the law of love is sin; and nothing else, if we speak properly. To strain the matter farther is only to make way for Calvinism. There may be ten thousand wandering thoughts, and forgetful intervals, without any breach of love, though not without transgressing the Adamic law. But Calvinists would fain confound these together. Let love fill your heart, and it is enough![56]
+If a person backslides through sin proper but later returns to God, he or she must repent and be entirely sanctified again, according to Wesleyan-Arminian theology.[57] With regard to the penalty of sin, Methodist theology teaches:[58]
+We believe that sin is the willful transgression of the known law of God, and that such sin condemns a soul to eternal punishment unless pardoned by God through repentance, confession, restitution, and believing in Jesus Christ as his personal Savior. This includes all men "For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God." Rom. 3:23. (Prov. 28:13, John 6:47; Acts 16:31; Rom. 6:23, I John 1:9; I John 3:4).[58]
+Original sin
+[edit]Wesleyan-Arminian theology holds to the orthodox Christian doctrine of original sin. The Church of the Nazarene explains it as such:
+"We believe that original sin, or depravity, is that corruption of the nature of all the offspring of Adam by reason of which everyone is very far gone from original righteousness or the pure state of our first parents at the time of their creation, is averse to God, is without spiritual life, and inclined to evil, and that continually. We further believe that original sin continues to exist with the new life of the regenerate, until the heart is fully cleansed by the baptism with the Holy Spirit."[59]
+This original sin remains after salvation and may only be removed by entire sanctification (the second work of grace or baptism with the Holy Spirit).
+"We believe that entire sanctification is that act of God, subsequent to regeneration, by which believers are made free from original sin, or depravity, and brought into a state of entire devotement to God, and the holy obedience of love made perfect. It is wrought by the baptism with or infilling of the Holy Spirit, and comprehends in one experience the cleansing of the heart from sin and the abiding, indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit, empowering the believer for life and service. Entire sanctification is provided by the blood of Jesus, is wrought instantaneously by grace through faith, preceded by entire consecration; and to this work and state of grace the Holy Spirit bears witness."[59]
+Holiness adherents are known by their emphasis "on the belief that entire sanctification takes place instantaneously in a crisis experience."[60]
+Actual sin
+[edit]The definition of sin is a vital doctrine to the Methodist Churches, especially those of the Holiness movement.[61][62] Richard S. Taylor explains "Many, perhaps most, of the errors which have protruded themselves into Christian theology can be finally traced to a faulty conception of sin. Because someone's notions of sin were a bit off-color, his entire trend of reasoning was misdirected."[63]
+The Wesleyan Holiness movement, as part of the wider Methodist tradition, holds strongly to John Wesley's definition of sin:
+"Nothing is sin, strictly speaking, but a voluntary transgression of a known law of God. Therefore, every voluntary breach of the law of love is sin; and nothing else, if we speak properly. To strain the matter farther is only to make way for Calvinism. There may be ten thousand wandering thoughts, and forgetful intervals, without any breach of love, though not without transgressing the Adamic law. But Calvinists would fain confound these together. Let love fill your heart, and it is enough!"[56]
+The Church of the Nazarene defines sin as:
+"We believe that actual or personal sin is a voluntary violation of a known law of God by a morally responsible person. It is therefore not to be confused with involuntary and inescapable shortcomings, infirmities, faults, mistakes, failures, or other deviations from a standard of perfect conduct that are the residual effects of the Fall. However, such innocent effects do not include attitudes or responses contrary to the spirit of Christ, which may properly be called sins of the spirit. We believe that personal sin is primarily and essentially a violation of the law of love; and that in relation to Christ sin may be defined as unbelief."[59]
+Methodism, inclusive of the Wesleyan-holiness movement, emphasizes the possibility of freedom from all sin, and the voluntary nature of actual sin. As explained by Charles Ewing Brown "Every sinner in the world today knows more or less clearly that he is doing wrong."[64] H. Orton Wiley, the premier Holiness theologian of the last 100 years, explains that in defining sin, "the power to obey or disobey is an essential element."[65] According to the Methodist cleric Phineas Bresee, the founder of the Nazarene Church, "A failure to distinguish between sin and infirmity, puts an undue emphasis upon sin, and has a tendency to discourage earnest seekers from pressing on to full deliverance form the carnal mind. Calling that sin which is not sin, opens the door to actual sinning."[66] The traditional view in Wesleyan-Arminian theology is that total ignorance eliminates the possibility of sin.[67] As explained by Methodist bishop Francis Asbury: "The transgressor must know the law and willfully act the transgressor, the law is a transcript of the divine nature."[68]
+It is with this understanding of actual sin, that lead the Wesleyan-Holiness movement to emphasize the necessity and possibility of living without committing sin. As John Allen Wood, one of the Methodist leaders of the Welsyean-Holiness movement explains in his work, Perfect Love: "The Lowest type of Christian sinneth not and is not condemned. The minimum of salvation is salvation from sinning."[69] This leads D. S. Warner, the founder of the Church of God to conclude "Holiness writers and teachers, as far as my knowledge extends, uniformly hold up a sinless life, as the true test and Bible standard of regeneration."[70]
+Eastern Christian views
+[edit]The (Chalcedonian) Eastern Orthodox Church as well as the (non-Chalcedonian) Oriental Orthodox use "sin" both to refer to humanity's fallen condition and to refer to individual sinful acts. In many ways the Eastern Orthodox Christian view of sin is similar to the Jewish, although neither form of Orthodoxy makes formal distinctions among "grades" of sins.
+The Eastern Catholic Churches, which derive their theology and spirituality from same sources as the Eastern Orthodox and Oriental Orthodox, tend not to adhere to the Roman Catholic distinction between mortal and venial sin taught by the Latin Church. Like the Orthodox Churches, however, the Eastern Catholic Churches do make a distinction between sins that are serious enough to bar one from Holy Communion (and must be confessed before receiving once again) and those which are not sufficiently serious to do so. In this respect, the Eastern Tradition is similar to the Western, but the Eastern Churches do not consider death in such a state to automatically mean damnation to "hell."[citation needed]
+Jehovah's Witnesses
+[edit]Jehovah's Witnesses believe that sin is inherited, like a disease, and has been passed on from generation to generation of humans, beginning with Adam and Eve, whom Witnesses believe are real historical characters.[71] They believe that it began with the Devil, and then with humans wanting to decide for themselves what was good and bad. They believe that at that very moment they lost perfection and began to die. Jehovah's Witnesses consider human beings to be souls, and so when a human dies due to sin, they believe that his soul dies as well.[71] They believe that Jesus is the only human ever to have lived and died sinless.[72]
+The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints
+[edit]Members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints believe that individuals are only responsible for the sins they personally commit. In their Articles of Faith the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints teaches, "We believe that men will be punished for their own sins, and not for Adam's transgression."[73] Latter-day Saints also believe that sin is the consequence of the Fall of Adam and Eve, and that all sin originates from Satan. They also believe that "little children" (meaning those under the age of 8, or "the age of accountability"), while capable of sinning, are not held accountable for their actions, and their sins are covered by the atonement of Jesus Christ.[74][75]
+Atonement
+[edit]In Christianity, it is generally understood that the death of Jesus was a sacrifice that relieves believers of the burden of their sins. However, the actual meaning of this precept is very widely debated. The traditional teaching of some churches traces this idea of atonement to blood sacrifices in the ancient Hebraic faith.
+Christian theologians have presented different interpretations of atonement:
+- Barbara Reid, a dissenting Roman Catholic feminist and Dominican nun, argues that commonly conceived atonement theologies are harmful, especially to women and other oppressed minorities.[76] Other liberal and radical theologians have also challenged traditional views of atonement. (see collective salvation)
+- Billy Graham, a Baptist evangelist, characterized the United States as a most sinful nation and called upon his listeners to repent to Christ while they still had time.[77]
+See also
+[edit]- Biblical law in Christianity
+- Christian ethics
+- Heaven (Christianity)
+- Law of Christ
+- Moral theology
+- Reconciliation
+- Sacraments (Catholic Church)
+References
+[edit]- ^ "sin". Oxford University Press. Archived from the original on July 4, 2017. Retrieved 28 August 2017.
+- ^ Rahner, p. 1588
+- ^ "Hamartiology - Define Hamartiology at Dictionary.com". Dictionary.com. Retrieved 20 November 2014.
+- ^ Sabourin, p. 696
+- ^ On Grace and Free Will (see Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, trans. P.Holmes, vol. 5; 30–31 [14–15]).
+- ^ For a historical review of this understanding, see R.N.Frost, "Sin and Grace", in Paul L. Metzger, Trinitarian Soundings, T&T Clark, 2005.
+- ^ Bauer, Walter; Danker, Frederick William (2000). A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. University of Chicago Press. doi:10.7208/chicago/9780226028958.001.0001. ISBN 978-0-226-03933-6.
+- ^ Berlin, Adele; Brettler, Marc Zvi (2014). Jewish study bible (2 Rev ed. (November 2014) ed.). [S.l.]: Oxford University Press. p. 17. ISBN 978-0199978465. Retrieved 1 April 2016.
+Sin couches at the door; Its urge is toward you, Yet you can be its master.
+- ^ Gen 4:7, cf. 1 Pet 5:8
+- ^ Synthesis: bulletin du Comité national de littérature comparée / Comitetul Național pentru Literatură Comparată, Institutul de Istorie și Teorie Literară "G. Călinescu." – 2002 "Sin is personified as (an animal?) which "crouches" at the door of Cain (Gen 4:7). As Gerhard von Rad (Genesis, 105) remarks, 'The comparison of sin with a beast of prey lying before the door is strange, as is the purely decorative use"
+- ^ Isaiah 59:2–3
+- ^ Vawter 1983, p. 420.
+- ^ Brodd 2003.
+- ^ a b c ODCC 2005, p. Original sin.
+- ^ Brodd, Jeffrey (2003). World Religions. Winona, MN: Saint Mary's Press. ISBN 978-0-88489-725-5.
+- ^ Nathan, Peter (2003). "The Original View of Original Sin". www.vision.org. Retrieved 2013-10-14.
+- ^ Porvaznik, Phil. "Original Sin Explained and Defended". www.philvaz.com. Archived from the original on 2013-10-21. Retrieved 2023-01-03.
+- ^ Preamble and Articles of Faith Archived 20 October 2013 at the Wayback Machine – V. Sin, Original and Personal – Church of the Nazarene. Retrieved 13 October 2013.
+- ^ Are Babies Born with Sin? Archived 2013-10-21 at the Wayback Machine – Topical Bible Studies. Retrieved 13 October 2013.
+- ^ a b Forget, Jaques (1913). Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. . In Herbermann, Charles (ed.).
+- ^ "Catechism of the Catholic Church - PART 1 SECTION 2 CHAPTER 1 ARTICLE 1 PARAGRAPH 7". Scborromeo.org. Retrieved 2014-08-21.
+- ^ "Historic Church Documents at". Reformed.org. Retrieved 2014-08-21.
+- ^ "Historic Church Documents at". Reformed.org. Retrieved 2014-08-21.
+- ^ "THE BAPTIST CONFESSION OF FAITH" (PDF). Rblist.org. Retrieved 20 November 2014.
+- ^ "Calvin". History.hanover.edu. Retrieved 2014-08-21.
+- ^ Bavinck, Herman. Reformed Dogmatics Vol. 3. (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2004) Pages 75-125 detail the historical development of Hamartiology, including Pelagius's position and the mediating positions)
+- ^ Puchniak 2008, p. 123.
+- ^ Harrison 2016, p. 79.
+- ^ Visotzky 2009, p. 44.
+- ^ Harrison 2016, p. 81.
+- ^ Stavros Moschos. "Original Sin And Its Consequences". Biserica.org. Retrieved 24 January 2017.
+- ^ a b Johnson, Selena (2006). The Sin of Racism: How to be Set Free. Hamilton Books. p. 104. ISBN 978-0-7618-3509-7.
+- ^ a b Marilyn Hickey (1 March 2001). Breaking Generational Curses: Overcoming the Legacy of Sin in Your Family. Destiny Image Publishers. ISBN 978-1-60683-161-8.
+- ^ Owolagba, James (2018). "Is Inter-generational curses true? What can be done?" (PDF). Our Lady of Peace Roman Catholic Parish. Retrieved 2 May 2021.
+- ^ a b Thomas Aquinas (c. 1270). . Translated by The Fathers of the English Dominican Province. Benzinger Brothers Printers to the Holy Apostolic See (published 1917) – via Wikisource.
+- ^ Catholic Encyclopedia: Omission, New Advent, retrieved 28 February 2012
+- ^ Aquinas: Aquinas's Thoughts On Morality, The Philosopher's Lighthouse, archived from the original on 11 February 2012, retrieved 28 February 2012
+- ^ Pinckaers, pp. 220 and 225–6
+- ^ Contra Faustum, 22, 27, PL 44,418:
+- ^ Thomas Aquinas (c. 1270). . Translated by The Fathers of the English Dominican Province. Benzinger Brothers Printers to the Holy Apostolic See (published 1917) – via Wikisource.
+- ^ Farrell, pp. 255–272
+- ^ Josef Pieper (2001). The Concept of Sin. pp. 60–63.; cf. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica II–IIae q34 a2; I q94 a1; II–IIae q162 a6; I–IIae q72 a2.
+- ^ Farrell, p. 353
+- ^ "Vatican lists new sinful behaviors". Associated Press. 2008. Archived from the original on 2008-03-11. Retrieved 2008-03-10.
+- ^ Catechism of the Catholic Church, 1997: "1867 The catechetical tradition also recalls that there are "sins that cry to heaven": the blood of Abel, the sin of the Sodomites, the cry of the people oppressed in Egypt, the cry of the foreigner, the widow, and the orphan, injustice to the wage earner."
+- ^ a b Pieper, Franz (1950). Christian Dogmatics. Concordia Publishing House. p. 568. ISBN 978-0-570-06712-2.
+{{cite book}}
+: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) - ^ Koehler, Edward W.A. (1939). A Summary of Christian Doctrine. Concordia Publishing. p. 73.
+- ^ a b Curtis, Heath (8 July 2015). Things you may have forgotten you believed in: Mortal Sin and the Loss of Salvation. Gottesdienst: The Journal of Lutheran Liturgy.
+{{cite book}}
+: CS1 maint: publisher location (link) - ^ a b c Chemnitz, Martin (2007). Ministry, Word, and Sacraments: An Enchiridion; The Lord's Supper; The Lord's Prayer. Concordia Publishing House. ISBN 978-0-7586-1544-2.
+- ^ a b Rothwell, Mel-Thomas; Rothwell, Helen (1998). A Catechism on the Christian Religion: The Doctrines of Christianity with Special Emphasis on Wesleyan Concepts. Schmul Publishing Co. p. 49.
+- ^ Olson, Mark K. (4 June 2022). "John Wesley on Sin and Holiness". Wesley Scholar. Retrieved 23 May 2024.
+- ^ Brown, Allan (1 June 2008). "Questions About Entire Sanctification". God's Bible School & College. God's Bible School and College. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
+The only way a person can "lose" ("reject" is a better term) his entire sanctification is through willful sin or unbelief (which is also sin).
+- ^ Trinklein, John (1 August 2016). "Holiness Unto Whom? John Wesley 's Doctrine of Entire Sanctification in Light of The Two Kinds of Righteousness". Concordia Seminary. Retrieved 30 June 2019.
+- ^ Wesley, John (1872). The Works of John Wesley., Third Edition., vol. 11. London: Wesleyan Methodist Book Room. p. 396.
+{{cite book}}
+: CS1 maint: publisher location (link) - ^ a b c Wesley, J. (1872). The Works of John Wesley. Vol. 12 (Third ed.). London: Wesleyan Methodist Book Room. p. 394.
+- ^ Brown, Allan P. (1 June 2008). "Questions About Entire Sanctification". God's Bible School & College. Retrieved 17 June 2019.
+Does an entirely sanctified person who rebels against God but later comes back to Him need to be entirely sanctified again? We do know that a person can rebel against God and later turn back in repentance and then be "re-saved." Answer: Yes. To come back to God is the action of a backslider having his re in need of continual cleansing. The verb "cleanses us" is a present indica-relationship with God restored. After the restoration, one must walk in the light and obey Romans 12:1 and offer himself a living, holy, and acceptable sacrifice to God. This can be done only by a person in right relationship with God.
+- ^ a b Declaration of Principles: Manual of the Wesleyan Holiness Association of Churches. Wesleyan Holiness Association of Churches. 2017. p. 10.
+- ^ a b c "Articles of Faith". nazarene.org. Church of the Nazarene. Retrieved 2021-01-11.
+- ^ Cross, F. L.; Livingstone, Elizabeth A., eds. (2005). The Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press. p. 783.
+- ^ Black, Brian (2023). Properly Defining Sin. Heritage Publications. p. viii, 5.
+The eradication of the sin nature and complete victory over willful sin were two of the key beliefs of the Methodist Church.
+- ^ Black, Brian (2023). Properly Defining Sin. Heritage Publications. p. viii, 5.
+The Wesleyan position teaches that one is actually made righteous and cleansed from sin through the grace of God and the power of the Holy Spirit. One must live a victorious, sinless life to be eligible for heaven. This doctrine is based upon the biblical principle that sin is a willful choice to rebel against God. If after being converted a person returns back to a life of rebellion against God, he has rejected salvation and is no longer eligible for heaven. ... the Methodist message believed that the grace of God enabled a person to choose salvation; furthermore, it taught that one could be delivered from committing sin as well as obtain heart purity from the corruption of indwelling sin.
+- ^ Taylor, Richard Shelley (2002). A Right Conception of Sin : Its Relation to Right Thinking and Right Living. Salem, Ohio: Schmul Pub. Co.
+- ^ Charles Ewing Brown, The Meaning of Salvation (Salem, OH: Schmul, 1982), |PAGE|)
+- ^ H. Orton Wiley, Christian Theology, vol. 2 (Kansas City, MO: Beacon Hill Press of Kansas City, 1940–1952), 59–60.
+- ^ "What is Sin". www.biblical-theology.net. Retrieved 2021-01-11.
+- ^ E. P. Ellyson, Bible Holiness (Kansas City, MO: Beacon Hill, 1952), |PAGE|)
+- ^ "To William McKendree" (PDF). The Journal and Letters of Francis Asbury. 3: 771. 1958.
+- ^ Wood, J A. 2016. Perfect Love, or, Plain Things for Those Who Need Them : Concerning the Doctrine, Experience, Profession, and Practice of Christian Holiness. Wilmore, Kentucky: First Fruits Press.
+- ^ Warner, D S. 1880. Bible Proofs of the Second Work of Grace ; or, Entire Sanctification as a Distinct Experience, Subsequent to Justification : Established by the United Testimony of Several Hundred Texts : Including a Description of the Great Holiness Crisis of the Present Age, by the Prophets. Goshen, Ind.: E.U. Mennonite Pub. Society.
+- ^ a b "Where Are the Dead?". What Does the Bible Really Teach?. pp. 57–65.
+- ^ "Conquering the Enemy Death—How Jesus Conquered Death". JW.ORG. Retrieved 2022-11-17.
+- ^ "Articles of Faith 1". www.churchofjesuschrist.org. Retrieved 2020-05-28.
+- ^ "Moroni 8". www.churchofjesuschrist.org. Retrieved 2020-05-28.
+- ^ "Doctrine and Covenants 68". www.churchofjesuschrist.org. Retrieved 2020-05-28.
+- ^ Barbara E. Reid, Taking Up the Cross: New Testament Interpretations Through Latina and Feminist Eyes (Fortress, 2007), 17–19.
+- ^ Rosell, G.M. (2020). The Surprising Work of God: Harold John Ockenga, Billy Graham, and the Rebirth of Evangelicalism. Wipf & Stock Publishers. p. 146. ISBN 978-1-5326-9947-4. Retrieved 2023-04-03.
+Bibliography
+[edit]- Black, Brian (2023). Properly Defining Sin. Middleburg: Heritage Publications.
+- Cross, Frank L.; Livingstone, Elizabeth A., eds. (2005). Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. Oxford: University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-280290-3.
+- Harrison, Carol (2016). "Truth in a Heresy?". The Expository Times. 112 (3): 78–82. doi:10.1177/001452460011200302. S2CID 170152314.
+- Puchniak, Robert (2008). "Pelagius: Kierkegaard's use of Pelagius and Pelagianism". In Stewart, Jon Bartley (ed.). Kierkegaard and the Patristic and Medieval Traditions. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd. ISBN 978-0-7546-6391-1.
+- Vawter, Bruce (1983). "Original Sin". In Richardson, Alan; Bowden, John (eds.). The Westminster Dictionary of Christian Theology. Westminster John Knox. ISBN 9780664227487.
+- Visotzky, Burton L. (2009). "Will and Grace: Aspects of Judaising in Pelagianism in Light of Rabbinic and Patristic Exegesis of Genesis". In Grypeou, Emmanouela; Spurling, Helen (eds.). The Exegetical Encounter Between Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity. Leiden: Brill. pp. 43–62. ISBN 978-90-04-17727-7.
+- Mc Guinness, I. Sin (Theology of), in: New Catholic Encyclopaedia, vol. XIII, (reprinted 1981), The Catholic University of America, Washington D.C., pp. 241–245.
+- Rahner, Karl, Schoonberg, Piet. "Sin", in: Encyclopedia of Theology: A Concise Sacramentum Mundi . (1986) Tunbridge Wells, Kent, UK: Burns & Oates, ISBN 0-86012-228-X, pp. 1579–1590.
+- Farrell, Walter, A companion to the Summa vol. 2 – The Pursuit of Happiness (1985 /reprinted 2nd ed./) Westminster, Maryland – London: Christian Classics, Sheed & Ward, ISBN 0-7220-2520-3 (UK) 0-87061-119-4 (USA), p. 467.
+- Pieper, Josef, The Concept of Sin (2001), translated by Edward T. Oakes SJ, South Bend, Indiana: St. Augustines Press, ISBN 1-890318-08-6, pp. 128.
+- Pinckaers, Servais, The Sources of Christian Ethics, (translated from French by M. T. Noble O.P.), Washington, D.C., The Catholic University of America Press, 1995. Reprinted: Edinburgh: T&T Clark, ISBN 0-567-29287-8 p. 489
+- Sabourin, Leopold SJ, Sin, in: The Oxford Companion to the Bible (1993). Bruce M. Metzger, Michael D. Coogan (ed.) New York – Oxford: Oxford University Press, ISBN 0-19-504645-5, pp. 696.

input/generational_sin/sources/03-generational-sin-biblical-foundations-and-contempo.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,19 @@
+Generational Sin: Biblical Foundations and Contemporary Views
+Explore the biblical roots and modern perspectives on generational sin, examining its theological interpretations and contemporary relevance.
+Explore the biblical roots and modern perspectives on generational sin, examining its theological interpretations and contemporary relevance.
+The concept of generational sin raises compelling questions about the transmission of moral and spiritual consequences across generations. Rooted in ancient texts, this idea has shaped theological debates and community practices for centuries.
+Given its enduring relevance, understanding both the biblical foundations and modern interpretations is essential for a comprehensive grasp of how these beliefs influence contemporary thought and behavior.
+The notion of generational sin finds its roots in several passages within the Old Testament, where the consequences of one’s actions are depicted as extending beyond the individual to affect their descendants. One of the most frequently cited verses is Exodus 20:5, where God warns that He will “visit the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and fourth generation of those who hate Me.” This verse, part of the Ten Commandments, underscores the gravity of idolatry and disobedience, suggesting a divine retribution that spans multiple generations.
+Another significant reference is found in Deuteronomy 5:9, which echoes the sentiment expressed in Exodus. Here, the text reiterates the idea that the sins of the parents can have repercussions for their children and grandchildren. This repetition in different books of the Bible highlights the importance of this concept in the ancient Hebrew worldview. It suggests a collective responsibility and a communal understanding of sin and its consequences.
+The book of Numbers also contributes to this theme. In Numbers 14:18, it is stated that “The Lord is slow to anger, abounding in love and forgiving sin and rebellion. Yet He does not leave the guilty unpunished; He punishes the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation.” This passage balances the notion of divine mercy with the reality of divine justice, emphasizing that while forgiveness is available, the repercussions of sin are not easily erased.
+In the prophetic literature, the theme of generational sin is further explored. For instance, in Jeremiah 32:18, the prophet acknowledges God’s justice, stating, “You show love to thousands but bring the punishment for the parents’ sins into the laps of their children after them.” This verse reflects a nuanced understanding of divine justice, where both mercy and retribution coexist.
+Theological interpretations of generational sin have evolved considerably, reflecting the changing understandings of justice, responsibility, and community within different historical and cultural contexts. In early Christian thought, theologians like Augustine grappled with the concept by linking it to the doctrine of original sin. Augustine argued that humanity inherited a fallen nature from Adam, affecting not just individuals but entire generations. This perspective underscored a collective human condition in need of redemption through divine grace.
+As theological thinking progressed, figures like Thomas Aquinas offered more nuanced interpretations. Aquinas acknowledged the inherited consequences of sin but emphasized individual moral responsibility. He argued that while the effects of sin could be transmitted socially and environmentally, each person retained the ability to choose good or evil. This distinction allowed for a more balanced view, integrating both communal and personal dimensions of sin.
+During the Reformation, Martin Luther and John Calvin further refined these ideas. Luther’s emphasis on the priesthood of all believers implied a democratization of spiritual responsibility, challenging the notion of inherited guilt. Calvin, on the other hand, focused on the sovereignty of God and predestination, suggesting that divine justice operated beyond human understanding. These differing views highlighted the complexity of reconciling generational sin with individual agency and divine justice.
+In modern theological discourse, scholars often revisit these historical interpretations to address contemporary issues. Liberation theologians, for instance, view generational sin through the lens of social justice, examining how systemic inequalities and historical injustices perpetuate suffering across generations. This perspective shifts the focus from individual moral failings to broader societal structures, urging collective action to break cycles of oppression.
+Psychological and sociological insights also contribute to current theological discussions. The concept of generational trauma, for example, explores how the emotional and psychological impacts of past events can affect subsequent generations. This interdisciplinary approach enriches theological interpretations, offering a more holistic understanding of how sin and its consequences manifest in human experience.
+Modern perspectives on generational sin often intersect with contemporary understandings of psychology, sociology, and systemic issues, offering a richer and more multifaceted view. Today, many theologians and scholars examine how cultural, economic, and social factors contribute to the persistence of harmful behaviors and attitudes across generations. This approach shifts the focus from purely spiritual explanations to include tangible, real-world influences.
+For example, the concept of epigenetics has introduced a scientific dimension to discussions about inherited consequences. Epigenetics explores how environmental factors can alter gene expression, potentially passing these changes down through multiple generations. This scientific insight provides a biological basis for the notion that the consequences of one’s actions can extend beyond their lifetime, resonating with the ancient idea of generational sin but grounding it in modern empirical research.
+In parallel, the rise of trauma-informed care has reshaped how we understand the transmission of adverse experiences. Professionals in mental health and social services now recognize that trauma can have profound, long-lasting effects on individuals and communities. This understanding has led to more compassionate and holistic approaches to healing, emphasizing the need for societal support systems that can help break these cycles of suffering.
+The role of education and social policy also plays a critical part in contemporary views on generational sin. Educators and policymakers are increasingly aware that addressing generational issues requires systemic change. Initiatives aimed at improving access to quality education, healthcare, and economic opportunities are seen as essential steps in mitigating the long-term impacts of past injustices and harmful behaviors.
+Religious communities, too, are re-evaluating their teachings and practices in light of these modern insights. Many faith leaders now advocate for a more inclusive and proactive stance, emphasizing collective responsibility and social justice. This shift reflects a broader trend within religious thought, moving away from punitive interpretations and towards a more restorative approach that seeks to address root causes and promote healing.

input/generational_sin/sources/04-generational-curse-in-the-bible-meaning-verse-free.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,64 @@
+One of the most common teachings among Preachers worldwide (and in Africa especially) is Generational Curses in the Bible.
+But have you ever asked yourself what a generational curse means, if it is biblical, and how to get rid of it? It happens that we are looking at it today!
+In this study, we will look at the term 'generational curse' in the Bible, discuss what it means (which may be contrary to what you heard), and see how the scriptures address it. I pray you understand and find this helpful.
+What Is A Generational Curse?
+Generational Curse is the affiliation of two words, an adjective and a noun: Generational and Curse.
+Generational is a word derived from "generation," a term that describes a social group or groups of people living in a particular period and people related by an extended family tree.
+Until the nineteenth century, "generational" was broadly linked to people in a family, including father and mother, grandfather and grandmother, and great-grandfather and great-grandmother, to mention a few.
+In the Bible, for instance, the twelve tribes of Israel were identical to people born to Jacob and their children and grandchildren, linked to them and after them as their generations on genealogical terms. Yet, all of them could be linked back to Isaac, Abraham, and Adam in a broader picture.
+To make a clear distinction between Generation and Generational, take note of the terms Identical and People. While generation refers to a particular people and their offspring, generational refers to things identical to them. It could be a lifestyle, an infection, or a trait.
+The term Curse can be a noun and a verb, but it has to do with language.
+- As a noun: It refers to abusive language or an utterance believed to affect people or things negatively.
+- As a verb: It refers to using abusive language or negative words on people or things.
+More precisely, cursing another person and saying someone is with a curse are two different things. The first suggests an action, while the latter assumes a visible effect of the first. And that is the common idea behind the term Generational Curse.
+A Generational Curse, therefore, describes a curse that is traceable to a member or members of a family. While it originates from negative and profane statements, it refers to the effects of the statements being visible along the family line or among descendants.
+I must note that the cause of a curse is sin, and the effect is the consequence of sin. However, it is written in Proverbs 26:2:
+“As the bird by wandering, as the swallow by flying, so the curse causeless shall not come.” (KJV)
+That verse speaks to something important, and we will see that as we look at the Generational Curse in the Bible.
+Generational Curse In The Bible
+The first time the term "Curse" appeared in the Bible was in Genesis 3 after Adam sinned (first for the Serpent in verse 14 and for the land in verse 17). It was more of a declaration of the consequences of the sin of man and reached everyone guilty.
+Cain and Abel came forth from Adam and Eve as brothers. In Genesis 4, Cain killed his brother, and according to verse 11, the ground that received Abel's blood cursed Cain. What happened? Cain followed in the footsteps of his parent and was cursed.
+“Yahweh said, ‘What have you done? The voice of your brother’s blood cries to me from the ground. Now you are cursed because of the ground, which has opened its mouth to receive your brother’s blood from your hand. From now on, when you till the ground, it won’t yield its strength to you. You will be a fugitive and a wanderer in the earth.’” (Genesis 4:10–12 WEB)
+That sounds like the same things said to Adam in Genesis 3:17–19 (WEB):
+“To Adam he said, ‘Because you have listened to your wife’s voice, and ate from the tree, about which I commanded you, saying, ‘You shall not eat of it,’ the ground is cursed for your sake. You will eat from it with much labor all the days of your life. It will yield thorns and thistles to you; and you will eat the herb of the field. By the sweat of your face will you eat bread until you return to the ground, for out of it you were taken. For you are dust, and to dust you shall return.’”
+I understand that controversy exists concerning the Curse and the Lord. Some people say God cursed man, and others say God did not. However, a careful examination of the passage reveals that rather than cursing (as in inflicting evil upon them), the Lord told the wrongdoers that they were with a curse and declared the curse consequential to their sins.
+However, there was a personal term used in the case of the woman (I will multiply your pain in childbearing) to allude that God inflicted increased pain with childbearing. So, I understand the sensitivity and how careful and constructive I must be to say that God cursed man (including male and female), and the curse was a declaration of the consequences of their wrongdoings (in disapproval of it). And you can see that each curse was peculiar to individuals and their deeds.
+The Bible did not say "Generational Curse" there, nor anywhere else. The closest there could be to it is with the concept of the fallen state of man and a repercussion of parental actions and inactions upon their children. We will see that in a moment.
+Visiting the Iniquity of the Fathers
+When people talk about Generational Curses, the scripture that usually comes to mind is Exodus 34:7. So let us look at that together.
+“Yahweh passed by before him, and proclaimed, ‘Yahweh! Yahweh, a merciful and gracious God, slow to anger, and abundant in loving kindness and truth, keeping loving kindness for thousands, forgiving iniquity and disobedience and sin; and that will by no means clear the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, and on the children’s children, on the third and on the fourth generation.’” (Exodus 34:6–7 WEB)
+That portion literally says that the Lord, who is both loving, merciful, and forgiving to thousands, does not ignore sin. But He allows the consequences of the wrongdoings of the fathers to their children and grandchildren, to the third and fourth generation.
+However, that message seems to be a repetition of a message previously communicated to the children of Israel in Exodus 20:
+“‘You shall not make for yourselves an idol, nor any image of anything that is in the heavens above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: You shall not bow yourself down to them, nor serve them, for I, Yahweh your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and on the fourth generation of those who hate me, and showing loving kindness to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments.’” (Exodus 20:4–6 WEB)
+From here, we understand that those who experience the repercussions of the sins of their fathers are those who follow the steps of their fathers (those who hate the Lord or the disobedient ones). But the Lord shows mercy to those who follow after the commandments of the Lord.
+Rather than a Generational Curse per se, we see a generational consequence for sin. That is for those who continue in that sin.
+For instance, a father who drinks and gets drunk dies of drunkenness, and his son who saw him drink and decided to continue in his drinking lifestyle will die of drunkenness. The one who chooses not to follow that drunkenness will not partake in that kind of consequence. That is the pattern.
+Another instance is poverty. A father was seen always spending money on women and never had much. His son grew up to take from his father and remained poor like his father. The pattern is the order of replication that arrives at the same result.
+Therefore, the Generational Curse in the Bible is the declaration that those (parents and their descendants) who persist in rebellion will incur shared repercussions. In the broader context, the issue was about idol worship or the worship of other gods in rebellion against the true God.
+The Man Born Blind: Curse or Glory?
+But what about the story of the once blind man from birth in John 9:1–34? That was not a Generational Curse but could be a result of natural factors or the wrongdoings of his parent (like genetic issues such as the SS genotype).
+However, Jesus Christ made known that it was for the glory of God. But something took my attention as the Pharisees engaged the man and later sent him away.
+“They answered him, ‘You were altogether born in sins, and do you teach us?’ They threw him out.” (John 9:34 WEB)
+That took my attention back to my first part of consideration: the fallen state of man. In Genesis 2:16–17 (WEB):
+“Yahweh God commanded the man, saying, ‘You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; but you shall not eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil; for in the day that you eat of it, you will surely die.’”
+When the man finally ate of the tree, according to Genesis, the man died eventually, and that death continued throughout generations. Paul acknowledged the continuity of that death upon people who sinned in Romans 5:14.
+Overall, one thing is clear: one man sinned, and the consequence passed to his descendants because they all sinned. But where do we see the curse? It is in the declaration.
+In Ezekiel 18:1–4 (WEB), Ezekiel said:
+“Yahweh’s word came to me again, saying, What do you mean, that you use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying, The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge? As I live, says the Lord Yahweh, you shall not use this proverb any more in Israel. Behold, all souls are mine; as the soul of the father, so also the soul of the son is mine: the soul who sins, he shall die.”
+How To Break A Generational Curse
+Assuming you believe you are a partaker in a Generational Curse (maybe your parents or grandparents did wrong things) you would be concerned about how to get rid of it. To do so, you should first come to the Generational Curse Breaker.
+Who is the Generational Curse Breaker? While some claim it is their pastors or prophets and prophetesses, I believe that person is Christ Jesus (see Acts 10:43 and 2 Corinthians 5:17).
+And by now, I expect that you understood the curse as a declaration of the consequences of sin and see that none of the prophets and pastors of old or this present age became a substitute for sins. But Isaiah had this to say about Christ in Isaiah 53:5-6:
+“But he was pierced for our transgressions. He was crushed for our iniquities. The punishment that brought our peace was on him; and by his wounds we are healed. All we like sheep have gone astray. Everyone has turned to his own way; and Yahweh has laid on him the iniquity of us all.”
+Apostle Paul summarized everything together when he said in Galatians 3:13-14 (WEB):
+“Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us. For it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree,’ that the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Christ Jesus; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.”
+The redemption we receive from the curse of the law is by faith in Christ Jesus.
+The problem is this: some people who claim to believe in Christ think they can go ahead and live as they like and not experience the consequences for their wrongdoings in the land. There is abundant grace in Christ Jesus, but it is not for people to continue in sin.
+In Summary
+Generational Curse In The Bible is a declaration of the consequences of sin, which is evident across generations. It comes as a result of disobedience to the commandment of God (as we see in Adam) and in actions against humanity (as we see in Cain).
+Not everything traceable across the family tree is a Generational Curse, as we see in the case of the man born blind.
+However, where there is a curse across generations, it is consequential to sin, and contrary to some pastors and prophets, Christ Jesus is the solution because He gave Himself as the substitutionary sacrifice for our sins (and there is no curse in Christ).
+To the Faithful Today, Peter said in 1 Peter 2:9 (WEB):
+“But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession, that you may proclaim the excellence of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light: who in time past were no people, but now are God’s people, who had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.”
+In addition, Christ commands us to live right and do good to others, and we should follow suit because doing good will produce good and vice versa.
+Shalom aleichem.

input/generational_sin/sources/05-generational-sins-and-curses-are-they-biblical.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,48 @@
+Generational Sins and Curses: Are They Biblical?
+Question: Recently I was asked to discuss the Bible’s teaching on the subject of generational sins, and generational curses. This is the view that the sins of past generations, and God’s punishment of them, can extend down the years, and directly affect our welfare today. That a curse pronounced by God (or even by some individual invoking demon powers), can continue to affect generation after generation.
+The idea is said to be based on certain statements in the Bible. For example: “I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generations” (Exod. 20:5, italics mine; cf. 34:6-7; Num. 14:18; Deut. 5:9).
+So, is it possible that the problems we’re having in our lives today may be traced back to sins committed by, or curses put on, our parents, or grandparents, or even our great-grandparents?
+Answer: This concept is prevalent in a lot of self-described spiritual warfare and deliverance ministries. It’s also present, in a secularized form, in some theories of psychology and psychotherapy. And it’s a tantalizing idea. To some extent, it fuels the inborn desire we have to find someone else to blame for our troubles. When the Lord faced Adam and Eve with their disobedience in Eden (Gen. 3:1-13), Adam tried to blame Eve (and God, as well!), and Eve tried to pass the buck to the serpent (Satan). And that’s been going on ever since!
+Influence versus Direct Causation
+It’s not difficult to see that what we do as parents has an influence on our children Our conduct brings certain consequences that touch their lives. Racial prejudice provides an example. If children hear parents speaking hatefully of people with a different ethnic heritage or different skin colour, the children can pick up on that. And they in turn may pass the same way of thinking on to their children. With a boost from our sin nature–wrong-headedness and bad habits can certainly show up in one generation after another.
+That is likely what’s behind Stephen’s accusation against the Jewish leaders of his day: “You stiffnecked and uncircumcised in heart and ears! You always resist the Holy Spirit; as your fathers did, so do you [you’re perpetuating the attitudes of your forefathers]” (Acts 7:51, italics mine).
+It also seems close to what’s in view in First Peter 1:18-19: “You were not redeemed with corruptible things, like silver or gold, from your aimless [fruitless, empty] conduct received by tradition from your fathers, but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot” (italics mine). The phrase “received by tradition from your fathers,” in Young’s Literal Translation, is simply: “delivered by fathers.” The Greek word is patroparadotos, indicating something handed down from one’s forefathers. It refers to teachings and practices that are passed on from one generation to the next.
+But that’s not what is at issue with reference to the generational sins/curses teaching. Influence is not the same as direct causation.
+So is it possible that sinful patterns in our lives have been directly transferred from a previous generation by some kind of spiritual osmosis? Or that we are under a curse, and suffering for something done in our grandparents’ day? Spiritual warfare proponents such as Benny Hinn, Joyce Meyer, and Neil Anderson (Freedom in Christ Ministries) think so. Believers are taught to pray for freedom from the bondage of generational sins or curses, in order to gain the victory that’s theirs in Christ. But is that helpful? Or even legitimate?
+Misapplied Scriptures
+Since there is nothing said in the Bible about the practice just described, where does it come from? It’s based on imagination, speculation, pop psychology, and the alleged experiences of some. As well, there’s a misinterpretation and misapplication of God’s Word (often lifting verses out of their legitimate context).
+Not only does the abuse of Scripture do great harm in the specific instance of theorizing about generational sins and curses, it does even more widespread damage. It trains the untaught and unsuspecting to believe that’s how God’s Word is to be handled, thus robbing them of the help God has provided in other areas.
+Instead of producing “freedom in Christ,” the teaching often seems to generate anything but! For some it leads to an unhealthy obsession with the past. Or worry about whether they’ve been able to identify all the relevant sins and curses of past generations. Or uncertainty as to whether they’ve managed to deal fully and finally with them. For others it’s led to a fatalistic philosophy (e.g. “I can’t help being this way, because grandpa was the same.”) The teaching, by providing an excuse for sinfulness, may actually result in yielding to the domination of the flesh (the sin nature), instead of bringing victory over it.
+Even supposing the generational sins/curses teaching to be true (though I don’t believe it is), there are practical problems with taking the steps proponents require. We may be unaware of the sins of our ancestors, or any curses placed upon them. We may even be unable to discover who our ancestors are (as in the case of adopted children). This unbiblical notion places those who believe it at the mercy of a lot of subjective guesswork! Thank the Lord we have no need to go through this strange process!
+Guilt is Personal
+Guilt for sin is a personal thing. Yes, we’ve all been affected by what happened in Eden, because of being “in Adam” when he sinned. And God placed a curse on creation to remind us of the terrible effects of the fall (Gen. 3:17-19). But over and over the Bible’s emphasis is on the individual’s responsibility before God.
+When David sinned with Bathsheba, Nathan the prophet pointed a rhetorical finger and said, “You are the man!” (II Sam. 12:7). And David in his confession declared, “I acknowledge my transgressions, and my sin is always before me” (Ps. 51:3, italics mine). He got the point! We need not concern ourselves with the myth of bondage to what grandpa and grandma did. “Each of us shall give account of himself [or herself] to God” (Rom. 14:12, italics mine).
+Passages such as Exodus 20:5 must not be made to say that the judgment of God is inherited by succeeding generations. They simply warn of a proneness to learn from and copy the beliefs and behaviour of those who’ve come before. And if the pattern of sin continues, so will the judgment of God.
+Notice two key things about the above text. First, the Lord does not say to Israel that He will “visit the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generations [period].” It is “to the third and fourth generations of those who hate [who defiantly reject] Me” (italics mine). That is an important qualification. The judgment does not automatically encompass four generations. It is incurred by those in each generation who “hate” God–which means it warns of an individual, not a generational condemnation.
+Second, ask yourself why it is that the third and fourth generation are specified and no more. Why not “to the sixth and seventh generation”? (And each of the cross references mentioned at the beginning is exactly the same in this.) Think about it. With normal lifespans, four generations are about the limit of those who can be alive at the same time. That is, it is possible for great grandparents to live to see their great grandchildren. But that’s about it. Thus we have great grandparents living to have some direct influence upon the fourth generation, and to witness the effects of their sins upon their great grandchildren.
+The generational folks are wrong. Rather than focusing on what happened in the past, many Scripture passages refer to our personal and present culpability for our own sins. “Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor shall the children be put to death for their fathers; a person shall be put to death for his own sin” (Deut. 24:16; cf. Jer. 31:29-30; Ezek. 18:20).
+When the Lord Jesus forgave a man’s sins, He said to him, “Your sins are forgiven you” (Matt. 9:2). It was not, “Your sins and the sins of your great grandparents…” It was a personal and individual forgiveness. Similarly we, as Christians, are told to confess our sins (our own sins) to God, in order to enjoy full cleansing and forgiveness (I Jn. 1:9). We are never commanded to confess the sins of our fathers. Nor are we ever told to deal with curses put on our ancestors.
+And consider John 9:1-3. “As Jesus passed by, He saw a man who was blind from birth. And His disciples asked Him, saying, ‘Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?’ Jesus answered, ‘Neither this man nor his parents sinned.'” Now, the Lord was not saying the three people were sinlessly perfect. He is stating that the sins of the man and his parents were irrelevant, as far as his physical condition was concerned.
+But the deliverance people insist that we must research our family skeletons, and cast off these sins and curses, exorcising them by some kind of ritualistic prayer. Frankly, this is nonsense. As someone has put it, these notions “stem from pop psychology with a veneer of misapplied Bible verses.”
+Can You Be Cursed?
+What does the Bible say about what happens when a believer is cursed by another person? Several things are made clear about that.
+First, a curse that is undeserved will have no effect. “An unfair curse will not land on its intended victim” (Prov. 26:2, NLT). And second, no one can curse another who does not have the authority to do so (specifically, authority from God, Num. 23:8, 20). And though it is an argument from silence, it us surely significant that the Bible never tells us to ask God to cancel or reverse curses made against us. We are told instead: “Bless those who curse you, and pray for those who spitefully use you” (Lk. 6:28, italics mine).
+And incidentally, the passages supposedly proof-texting generational curses have nothing to do with individuals invoking demons or the devil to curse others. They’re usually about God’s dealings with Israel, and His warnings of coming judgment if they disobey.
+Nor does Satan need to be “bound” for people today to be set free from sin or the effects of some demonic curse. Christ provided for victory over Satan at the cross (Col. 2:15; cf. Jn. 16:11; Heb. 2:14). Now we are exhorted to put on the spiritual armour the Lord has supplied to be protected from him (Eph. 6:10-18). Wielding the sword of the Spirit (God’s truth) we are to “resist [Satan’s lies] steadfast in the faith” (I Pet. 5:8-9). “He who is in you [the Spirit of God] is greater than he who is in the world [Satan]” (I Jn. 4:4).
+Israel and the Church
+Have you noticed that most of the passages used by the “generational” folks come from the Old Testament, and relate to the nation of Israel? Note the verses about “visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generation” referenced at the beginning. All the texts are part of the Mosaic Law (Exod. 20:5; 34:6-7; Num. 14:18; Deut. 5:9).
+These warnings are based on the unique covenant relationship God had (and has) with Israel as a nation. No such statements are made in the New Testament. Even supposing the notion to have validity, if we, on this side of the cross, understand the full scope of salvation in Christ, it will leave no room for generational sins or curses. “[We] are not under law but under grace” (Rom. 6:14). And “Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us” (Gal. 3:13).
+Those who teach the false generational concepts fail to recognize the distinction between Old Testament and New, and between Israel and the church. They take warnings and promises specifically given to Israel, and apply them to the church of Jesus Christ. But the two are quite different. Israel is God’s earthly people, a nation, with a God-given earthly land, and an earthly throne. The church, on the other hand, is a heavenly people (Phil. 3:20), made up of all nations, a spiritual body, with no geographical territory of its own, and under the headship of Christ in heaven (Eph. 1:22-23).
+The people of Israel descended from Abraham. But for the Christian, such a blood relationship is irrelevant. “For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body––whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free” (I Cor. 12:13). Today, we are children of God through the regenerating work of the Spirit of God, and have been made a part of Christ’s spiritual body by that same Spirit.
+Because Israel is an earthly nation, the Old Testament promises and judgments related to them tended to be earthly and temporal in nature. They were often associated with the enjoyment of the blessings of the Promised Land. That is, if the people served the Lord faithfully, He would bless them with good crops, long life, and material prosperity in the land. If they disobeyed, the opposite would occur (Deut. 28:1-68).
+But it is a fallacy to take such things and apply them to the church. I’m not saying that the chastisements of God cannot affect Christians in a material and physical way. Sometimes they do (cf. I Cor. 11:27-30). But our relationship with the Lord is quite different, and God’s promises to us focus more on the spiritual and the eternal (Eph. 1:3; Col. 3:1-2; II Pet. 1:2-3).
+God’s Great Salvation
+One assumes we’re speaking of Christians with regard to these issues, born again children of God. The theory that believers carry the crippling burden of past generations fails to comprehend the power of the grace of God, and the scope of that great umbrella word, salvation. (The Bible describes about three dozen blessings that are instantly ours, the moment we’re saved.)
+First Peter 1:18-19, quoted above, reminds us we are redeemed and set free from the follies that plagued previous generations, redeemed by the blood of the Lamb.
+“He [God] has delivered us from the power of darkness and conveyed us into the kingdom of the Son of His love” (Col. 1:13). The Saviour fully satisfied the just demands of a righteous God on the cross (I Jn. 2:1-2). When we trust in the efficacy of His shed blood, the slate is wiped clean. God has reckoned all our sins to Christ’s account, and applied His righteousness to our account (II Cor. 5:21; cf. Eph. 1:7; Col. 2:13-15; I Jn. 1:7, 9). That settles it!
+When we’re saved, we become new creations in Christ (II Cor. 5:17). “Those who become Christians become new persons. They are not the same anymore, for the old life is gone. A new life has begun!” (NLT). “[We] have put off the old man with his deeds, and have put on the new man who is renewed in knowledge according to the image of Him who created him” (Col. 3:9-10). And listen to Paul: “Forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forward to those things which are ahead, I press toward the goal for the prize of the upward call of God in Christ Jesus” (Phil. 3:13-14, italics mine).
+The Bottom Line
+Christians have no need to fear the past. “There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus, who do not walk [characteristically] according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made us free from the law of sin and death” (Rom. 8:1-2). We are delivered from the past, in Christ. Why turn back to it? “Reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord….Present yourselves to God as being alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God” (Rom. 6:11, 13).
+Yes, children can be impacted in some ways by the sins of their parents. Our parents and others can have an influence on our lives by their example, or the ideas they communicate to us. But again, influence is not the same as being the direct cause of something. Believers are not slaves to their past in this way. “The Lord is faithful, who will establish [us] and guard [us] from the evil one” (II Thess. 3:3). “The Lord will deliver [us] from every evil work and preserve [us] for His heavenly kingdom” (II Tim. 4:18).
+“Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ” (Col. 2:8). “Guard what was committed to your trust, avoiding the profane and idle babblings and contradictions of what is falsely called knowledge–by professing it some have strayed concerning the faith” (I Tim. 6:20-21).
+The power of the indwelling Holy Spirit is far greater than any influence or error passed down from grandpa! Christians should steer clear of those who talk about generational sins and curses, and other psychological or occult notions that are contrary to the inspired Word of God.

input/generational_sin/sources/06-what-are-generational-curses-bible-truths-about-ca.txt

@@ -0,0 +1,27 @@
+What Is a Generational Curse?
+A generational curse is believed to be passed down from one generation to another due to rebellion against God. If your family line is marked by divorce, incest, poverty, anger or other ungodly patterns, you're likely under a generational curse. The Bible says that these curses are tied to choices. Deuteronomy 30:19 says we can either choose life and blessing or death and cursing.
+Our families have the greatest influence on our development, including the development of our patterns of sin. Some people even assert that family or generational curses are passed down along generational lines. This belief comes from Old Testament passages which say that God “punishes the children and their children for the sins of the fathers to the third and fourth generation” (Exodus 34:7).
+Whether or not families inherit spiritual curses, it is obvious that patterns of sin are passed down through families. Everyone sins; but just as culture, ethnicity, and gender steer our patterns of sin in particular directions, so do our families.
+We inherit many traits and preferences from our parents that aren't always a positive influence on ourselves or others. When we acquire a sinful habit or belief that negatively affects our lives or those around us, this is known as a generational curse. It is the shadow side of behavior passed down through the generations but is it possible to break this cycle of suffering?
+Generational Curses in the Bible
+Based on texts taken out of context and used as pretexts, it has become increasingly common for Christians to suppose that they are victims of generational curses. As such, they suppose they have inherited demons ranging from anger to alcoholism, from laziness to lust. Closer examination, however, demonstrates this notion to be seriously flawed.
+Scripture clearly communicates that consequences - not curses - are passed on through the generations.
+In this sense, the Bible says that children are punished for the sins of their fathers “to the third and fourth generation” (Exodus 20:5). The children of alcoholic fathers frequently suffer neglect and abuse as a direct consequence of their father’s sinful behavior. Moreover, the descendants of those who hate God are likely to follow in the footsteps of their forefathers.
+Scripture explicitly tells us that “the son will not share the guilt of the father, nor will the father share the guilt of the son.” (Ezekiel 18:20).
+Indeed, when ancient Israel quoted the proverb, “The fathers eat sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge” (Ezekiel 18:2), God responded in no uncertain terms: “As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign Lord, you will no longer quote this proverb in Israel….The soul who sins is the one who will die” (vv.3–4).
+Finally, While the notion of generational curses is foreign to Scripture, there is a sense in which the curse of sin has been passed on from generation to generation. Through the first Adam, “all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God” (Romans 3:23). Through the second Adam—Jesus Christ—atonement is offered to all. Says Paul, “Just as the result of one trespass was condemnation for all men, so also the result of one act of righteousness was justification that brings life for all men” (Romans 5:18). Through no act of our own we are condemned; likewise, through no act of our own, we are saved (Romans 5:12–21).
+— Hank Hanegraaff
+Breaking the Generational Curse
+Maybe you've inherited a family curse, or maybe the curse has begun with you. Either way, God has a plan for your freedom that will shatter the chains of that cycle forever! It will stop it in your life and stop it from passing on to your children!
+"The word of the Lord came to me again, saying, 'What do you mean when you use this proverb concerning the land of Israel, saying: 'The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge'? 'As I live,' says the LORD GOD, 'you shall no longer use this proverb in Israel. Behold, all souls are mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is mine'" (Ezekiel 18:1-4).
+You can be free! John 8:31-36 reminds us that as we abide in Jesus Christ, we receive His freedom. Not only has Jesus set us free from our sins, He has set us free from the penalty, the moral liability, and the ongoing curse of that sin! Jesus Christ is the Anointed One. That means He is the burden-removing, yoke-destroying power of God in our lives.
+There's going to come a time when the fathers may eat sour grapes, but the children's teeth will not be set on edge when the curse will not be passed down from generation to generation. It doesn't have to be "like father like son." Through the shed blood of Jesus Christ, we have a new and better covenant with God the Father. Through Jesus' blood, He forgives us our sin and delivers us from iniquity.
+God has redeemed us from the curses being passed on from one generation to the next. This redemption comes as we understand that the root of our problems is in the spiritual realm. As we apply God's Word and power to our lives, and we choose to walk in righteousness and obedience to God, the chains of bondage will be broken. The freedom we have longed for can become reality!
+This article first appeared in the Ask Hank column of the Christian Research Journal, volume31, number3. For further information or to subscribe to the Christian Research Journal go to https://www.equip.org
+This article has adopted portions of a Newsletter from Larry Huch from Crosswalk.com
+Read more about Generational Sins - What are they and how to stop them? at Crosswalk.com
+NOTES
+1. Excerpted from Hank Hanegraaff’s The Bible Answer Book, Volume 2 (Nashville: J. Countryman, 2006).
+2. All Scripture quotations are from the New International Version.
+3. For further study, see Hank Hanegraaff, The Covering: God’s Plan to Protect You from Evil (Nashville: W Publishing, 2002).
+Photo Credit: Thinkstock/Sasiistock