"No bastard shall enter the assembly of the Lord; even to the tenth generation none of his descendants shall enter the assembly of the Lord" (Deuteronomy 23:2 RSV).

Question:

This verse has been bothering me for a while now, and on the surface, it doesn’t seem fair to hold a child and its progeny to the 10th generation liable for a transgression of its parents. This is important to me; please let me know if there is another way to look at the "bastard."

Comment:

Some interpretations argue that the word translated as "bastard" referred only to children born out of incestuous unions, not to all children born out of wedlock. Still, that rather ignores your basic question about holding divine resentments through 10 generations. I think this is a case in which our growing spiritual awareness allows—indeed, requires—us to expand our ability to express the infinite Love of the Divine. Jesus was frequently chastized for 'disobeying' the Law of Moses by, for example, healing someone on the Sabbath. His reply was always, basically, 'that was then, this is now.' "You have heard it said ... but I say to you ... " In other words, our spiritual purpose requires us to grow in understanding so that what once seemed to be reasonable rules—against bastards, against women, against slaves—can be understood from a higher spiritual awareness to be unnecessary and unloving restrictions against important elements of divine creation. The fact that a rule seemed appropriate at the time does not mean that it remains appropriate as we expand our ability to express divine Love. Otherwise, we'd still be justifying slavery and the subjugation of women, both of which were once strongly defended by reference to the Bible.

Blessings!

Rev. Ed



Más como este

Satan

Question:I am not sure exactly where Satan is in the Bible, but my question is: If Satan is supposed to