Professor Rosaria Butterfield gives a powerful and brave speech to students.

[jeremyp]

Mankind deserves immediate judgment just because of sin

What every single person except Noah and his family - even the new born babies? Also, what did all the animals do to deserve being wiped out?

[Outrider]

Mankind deserves immediate judgment just because of sin, but God preserved a faithful remnant through whom his Son would eventually be born, who would overcome sin and save all those who repent.

What's 'sin'? A set of apparently arbitrary rules of conduct, devoid of any explicit justification even if there might be valid reasons for any individual rule. That's not morality, that's authoritarianism.

Breaches of these arbitrary rules is deemed to confer an hereditary guilt? Collective punishment, punishment for another's transgression, that's not morality or justice, that's barbarism.

If that's your foundation for your interpretation of Christianity, it's a hateful, despicable, morally unjustifiable stance.

O.

[Sriram]

We know through epigenetics that our lifestyle and behavior can have dramatic effects on the life and health of future generations.  Our good and responsible behavior rewards our offspring and our irresponsible life style can adversely affect our children up to 4 or 5 generations.

'I will bring the curse of a father's sins upon even the third and fourth generation of the children'.....

[Nearly Sane]

We know through epigenetics that our lifestyle and behavior can have dramatic effects on the life and health of future generations.  Our good and responsible behavior rewards our offspring and our irresponsible life style can adversely affect our children up to 4 or 5 generations.

'I will bring the curse of a father's sins upon even the third and fourth generation of the children'.....

So Aruntraveller has an irresponsible lifestyle? I suppose you were the one that implied he was diseased so can't say I'm surprised at your homophobia.

[Sriram]

Where did Aruntraveller come into this?!  I am talking of epigenetics.....

[Outrider]

Our good and responsible behavior rewards our offspring and our irresponsible life style can adversely affect our children up to 4 or 5 generations.

Yes and no. Our behaviours and activities can have epigenetic effects on our offspring, but it's not tied to just those. Stress, toxic exposures, physical labour, illnesses - these aren't 'activities' or 'behaviours', they are things that happen to us. Impugning people's moral standing by suggesting that they are responsible for deleterious epigenetic effects, even if they could be reliably predicted, is nonsense.
 

'I will bring the curse of a father's sins upon even the third and fourth generation of the children'.....

Which returns us to the pseudo-morality of 'sin' in relation to an identified biological effect that is, at best, only tangentially tied to behaviour.

O.

[Sriram]

But its not wrong to say that a irresponsible lifestyle could adversely affect the health and life of the offspring up to 5 generations.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

But its not wrong to say that a irresponsible lifestyle could adversely affect the health and life of the offspring up to 5 generations.

Depends what you mean by "irresponsible", but in any case axiomatically there are no offspring from homosexual activity so what does this have to do with the Bible deeming it a "sin"?   

[Outrider]

But its not wrong to say that a irresponsible lifestyle could adversely affect the health and life of the offspring up to 5 generations.

It's disingenuous, at best. Any lifestyle choice could adversely affect the health and life of the offspring - whether any particular group does or doesn't consider it to be 'irresponsible' isn't the deciding factor. Eating a diet high in red meat has been linked to epigenetic effects, but so has eating a diet high in plant-based protein - there isn't any practical way to avoid epigenetic effects. Our research (perhaps understandably) focusses on what we consider to be deleterious effects, but it's equally plausible that some - or all - of these lifestyle choices will have beneficial effects as well.

And, at the same time, the overwhelming majority of epigenetic effects that we've identified are tied to environmental factors, not lifestyle choices - atmospheric pollution, water quality, childhood nutrition, radon exposure, the list goes on.

So the implications of the 'your lifestyle can have an epigenetic effect on your great-great-grandchildren' are misleading, if not technically inaccurate. And then to tie it in to religious bullshit like 'sin' is just to compound the problem.

O.

[Nearly Sane]

But its not wrong to say that a irresponsible lifestyle could adversely affect the health and life of the offspring up to 5 generations.

Are you saying Aruntraveller's lifestyle id 'irresponsible'?

[Aruntraveller]

So Aruntraveller has an irresponsible lifestyle?

Oh, I so do.

Only the other day I had 3 rather than my usual 2 chocolate biscuits.

And I crossed the road before the little green man came on.

Worst of all I watched 2 minutes of GB news (the batteries had gone in the remote).

[Outrider]

Worst of all I watched 2 minutes of GB news (the batteries had gone in the remote).

At least your lifestyle appears to have resulted in a certain fortitude, I'm not sure I could stomach that much GB News in one sitting without needing a prolonged convalescence!

O.

[Aruntraveller]

But its not wrong to say that a irresponsible lifestyle could adversely affect the health and life of the offspring up to 5 generations.

As I have no children I'd say I'm in the clear on the whole "irresponsible lifestyle affecting offspring" thing. Phew, that's a relief.

I didn't know it was a thing. Every day is a school day.

(I mean I know smoking in pregnancy is a bad thing and could affect offspring obvs.)

[bluehillside Retd.]

Arun,

Oh, I so do.

Only the other day I had 3 rather than my usual 2 chocolate biscuits.

And I crossed the road before the little green man came on.

Worst of all I watched 2 minutes of GB news (the batteries had gone in the remote).

I bet you put the loo roll the wrong way round on the holder too. Heretic!   

[jeremyp]

We know through epigenetics that our lifestyle and behavior can have dramatic effects on the life and health of future generations.

You are massively overstating the effect of epigenetics. The effect usually disappears after a couple of generations.

  Our good and responsible behavior rewards our offspring and our irresponsible life style can adversely affect our children up to 4 or 5 generations.

'I will bring the curse of a father's sins upon even the third and fourth generation of the children'.....

Nonsense.

[jeremyp]

But its not wrong to say that a irresponsible lifestyle could adversely affect the health and life of the offspring up to 5 generations.

Yes it is.

[Dicky Underpants]

Oh, I so do.

Only the other day I had 3 rather than my usual 2 chocolate biscuits.

And I crossed the road before the little green man came on.

Worst of all I watched 2 minutes of GB news (the batteries had gone in the remote).

I have friends who watch that occasionally. Since their politics are the antithesis of those promoted there, I think they must have masochistic tendencies.

[Dicky Underpants]

I have friends who watch that occasionally. Since their politics are the antithesis of those promoted there, I think they must have masochistic tendencies.

Or perhaps they just like to laugh at Nadine Dorries. "Thick as mince."

[Dicky Underpants]

Mankind deserves immediate judgment just because of sin, but God preserved a faithful remnant through whom his Son would eventually be born, who would overcome sin and save all those who repent.

St Paul said something different, contradictory, and equally repugnant and quite loopy:
" For God has bound everyone over to disobedience so that he may have mercy on them all."
Romans 11:32 NRSV

[Sriram]

Sin could be seen as the human interpretation of anything that goes against natural order....survival, reproduction, parenting.....and social cohesion.

[Nearly Sane]

Sin could be seen as the human interpretation of anything that goes against natural order....survival, reproduction, parenting.....and social cohesion.

So do you think Aruntraveller's lifestyle is irresponsible?

[torridon]

Sin could be seen as the human interpretation of anything that goes against natural order....survival, reproduction, parenting.....and social cohesion.

That hinges on a narrow, rather anthropocentric concept of what constitutes a 'natural order'.  If we look to the wider natural world, we find things are far more complex and nuanced than that.

[Gordon]

Sin could be seen as the human interpretation of anything that goes against natural order....survival, reproduction, parenting.....and social cohesion.

That rather depends surely on which humans are doing the interpreting and on what other humans think of certain interpretations.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sriram,

Sin could be seen as the human interpretation of anything that goes against natural order....survival, reproduction, parenting.....and social cohesion.

"Homo"sexual activity is seen across a wide range of species:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexual_behavior_in_animals

Presumably therefore you would consider it to be part of the "natural order" too. Why then, according to your definition, call it a "sin"? 

[Aruntraveller]

So do you think Aruntraveller's lifestyle is irresponsible?

I've no idea whether Sririam thinks that.

All I can say is that heterosexuality never seems to be subject to the same kind of blanket ignorance that is so often used by some about the "homosexual lifestyle"

Homosexuals like heterosexuals are not an homogenous group. The only thing that one homosexual definitely has in common with another is that they are attracted to the same sex. That is it.

Any use of pejorative terms applied to "homosexuals" based on a perceived lifestyle is a futile exercise. We are every bit as diverse as heterosexuals. As such a point of view about my lifestyle based on my being gay is not viable.

My homosexuality tells him next to nothing about my lifestyle except that I love men, and he is being stupid if he thinks it does. If he judges me on the fact that I love men then he is foolish because it is one of the less interesting facts about me. That goes for others on here who fail to use the brain cells they claim God has given them.

Sweet Jesus, I'm 67 and still explaining simple concepts to the hard of thinking.