On what basis do you claim this, other than your own idle speculation? Considering that Christians have been willing to run with sillier premises over the past 2000 years, I think we need some solid evidence for your claim rather than just taking it as a default. Do you have any?
Especially since the verses repeatedly use the phrase, "to the third and fourth generation," which suggests we're likely dealing with an idiom or some other figure of speech that's been pulled from culture, translated, and printed into text.
I'm going off what the text itself says. I've checked, and there are a lot more verses that states or implies inherited sin.
Attributed to god:
No one born of a forbidden marriage nor any of their descendants may enter the assembly of the Lord, not even in the tenth generation.
1 Kings 21:29
Have you noticed how Ahab has humbled himself before me? Because he has humbled himself, I will not bring this disaster in his day, but I will bring it on his house in the days of his son.
When you tell these people all this and they ask you, ‘Why has the Lord decreed such a great disaster against us? What wrong have we done? What sin have we committed against the Lord our God?’ then say to them, ‘It is because your ancestors forsook me,’ declares the Lord, ‘and followed other gods and served and worshiped them. They forsook me and did not keep my law.
this is what the Lord says: I will surely punish Shemaiah the Nehelamite and his descendants. He will have no one left among this people, nor will he see the good things I will do for my people, declares the Lord, because he has preached rebellion against me.’
Attributed to other people:
1 Kings 2:32-33
The Lord will repay him for the blood he shed, because without my father David knowing it he attacked two men and killed them with the sword. Both of them—Abner son of Ner, commander of Israel’s army, and Amasa son of Jether, commander of Judah’s army—were better men and more upright than he. May the guilt of their blood rest on the head of Joab and his descendants forever. But on David and his descendants, his house and his throne, may there be the Lord’s peace forever.”
Prepare a place to slaughter his children for the sins of their ancestors; they are not to rise to inherit the land and cover the earth with their cities.
There are others, but this is enough to show that "inherited sin" is very much a part of the bible, and something that god didn't have a problem with; at least not in old testament times.
As in what the original author meant? It is and it isn't. First, as I mentioned above, the way the verses are written suggest that there's some figurative language going on that's likely lost to translation. So right away we're at a handicap in understanding the original author's true intent.
In light of the above, I think this part of the conversation is moot. Even without that repeated line, there's still plenty of verses to support this "inherited sin" idea.
However, ignoring that, the verses are more of a historical point for Christians than a modern belief. Certain aspects of the ancient Jewish faith evolved over time, such as henotheism into monotheism and the idea of an afterlife. Earlier on, it's likely that the Jews did indeed believe that suffering in life was payment for sin, and that sin could be inherited to successive generations. As I pointed out in an earlier post, this theme died down in Judaism with books like Job that argued against this theology, and instead paved the way for the notion of personal accountability for one's sins in the afterlife.
Well, I won't argue that theology changed over time, but now you have to account for a god that agreed with the old, and now agree with the new. At what point did god change his mind about it? (seems like he changed it at the same time everyone else did)
It's voiced by God, penned by a human. Again, I'm not a Bible literalist.
I take the bible's words for it? If god voiced it, surely he conveyed his exact meaning into the text.
Christians believe that there are eternal truths about God, the universe, etc. However, our understanding of those truths has changed over time.
Lots of things in the bible, we ignore because our understanding have changed over time, such as slavery, selling your daughter, or branding people. At one point, god had no problems with any of those. Yet, once people started changing their minds about those things, so did god.
No, it is not. Original sin is simply the first sin, and is therefore notable as the point where sin entered the world.
Well, according to jdawg70, some sects of christianity do teach that Original Sin is something inherited.
Where did I say that we need an idea of sin? I don't believe that sin nor suffering are particularly needed; I do believe that both exist.
Actually, your theology does
require the idea of sin. The centerpiece of christainty is Jesus dying on the cross for our sins (some say that Jesus had to suffer
for our sins). Without sin, that centerpiece would not exist.