From: jgoldber@alchemy.chem.utoronto.ca (Joel Goldberg)
Subject: Re: a little confused...
Organization: University of Toronto Chemistry Department
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 05:08:33 GMT

In article <1992Apr13.020624.25935@midway.uchicago.edu> rivk@midway.uchicago.edu writes:
>In article <adams.702740375@spssig> adams@spss.com (Steve Adams) writes:
>>jwindley%asylum.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Jay Windley) writes:
>>
>>>dove@elaine9.Stanford.EDU (Dav Somebody) writes:
>>
>>>>---
>>>>I the Lord thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the
>>>>fathers upon the children... Exod 20:5
>>>>
>>>>The son shall not bear the iniquities of the father... Ezek 18:20
>>>>---
>>
>>>Along with the ones I deleted at the top, I have no answer for this
>>>one on textual grounds.  Any takers?
>>
>>I can try this one, with help from the NIV editors.  Basically, starting
>>with the prophecy of Jerimiah (31:29 et seq.), we see God promising to
>>repeal the application of blood corruption.  Plus, the whole passage of
>>Ezekiel needs to be read (18:1-32).  Ezekiel took the people to task for
>>continuing to apply this proverb.
>>
>>Anybody got anything to add?
>
>I do. This analysis may work in your religion, but it doesn't help
>with mine. The Law says that nothing in the Law -- for practical
>purposes, law is considered anything in the Torah that looks vaguely
>like an order -- may be overridden by anything else, even if the
>something else comes directly from G-d. This is part of why Jews
>have problems with Jesus' new covenant in the first place -- even
>if he *is* G-d, we're forbidden to listen to him if he's trying to
>wipe some of the old commandments or get us to break them. So saying
>that Exodus is repealed by Jeremiah and Ezekiel, pleasant though it
>might be, doesn't stick: Torah can't be repealed by prophets. I
>don't have a good alternative explanation, though.
>	-Nora
>Oseh shalom b'imromav, hu ya'aseh shalom aleinu v'al kol yisrael.

  Well, the root of the reason is that the word translated as visiting
  in Exodus 20:5 should properly be translated as remembering,
  as in Genesis 21:1, "and God remembered Sarah as he had said..."
  (Those who have access to a Hebrew text can compare the twelfth word
  of Ex. 20:5 to the second word of Gen. 21:1.

  Ibn Ezra, commenting on Ex. 20:5 notes this and goes on to say
  so what about Ezekiel? The answer, he says, is that Ezekiel is talking
  about a son who does not follow in his father's steps and does not
  perform the same sins as his father. (See all of Ezekiel 18, as
  suggested above.) Conversely, Exodus is saying that
  God will defer his anger of the wicked, perhaps he will repent of the
  sin he sinned and sire a son who is better than he. And if he did
  follow in his father's path, then perhaps the third generation,
  likewise the fourth.  God will not defer to the fourth, if they were
  like that through four generations then all are hated by God. With
  him [the fourth] will be lost the memory of all, because God will
  _remember_ what the father did, and the son, and the son's son etc.
  and so God will not defer his anger from the fourth generation.

  Ramban (Nachmonedes) also cites this and adds that this is what
  all the previous commentators have said.

  Also, Nora, as you note, Torah does not get repealed. The Malbim
  on Jeremiah points out that he is comparing the original situation
  that was conditioned on Israel following the laws to a new situation
  where it will be impossible to sin [not follow the laws.] This is
  what is meant in Jer. 31:33 everyone will "know" God---the laws will
  seem as the only possible way to behave, as much as the laws of
  nature.