The backbreaker

[Nihilist Virus]

I've spoken with Christians who are OK with contradictions in the Bible, Christians who believe in the Big Bang and unguided evolution, and Christians who disregard the unsavory things in the Old Testament. But I have never seen a good response to my backbreaker here.  The Christian retreats behind the shield of faith, no longer even sure what that faith is in.

It's a simple question:
Is God above the law or not?

It would seem to me that the answer to this question is an obvious no. Jesus had to die because of the weight of the law. If God was above the law then he would just forgive everyone without sending his son to pay for the debts.

But then there is a problem. Deuteronomy 24:16 says,

The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.

This, presumably, is directly from God.

Then in 2 Samuel 12:13-20, David's son is killed by God because of sins committed by David.

So it looks like God actually is above the law.  Why, then, did Jesus die on the cross?  Surely it was not for his own amusement.  Ultimately there was no reason for it since God, being above the law, can wipe the slate clean with no need of a human sacrifice.

Therefore Christianity, a belief system based entirely on the "fact" that Jesus rose from a death that was necessary for our salvation, renders itself pointless.

silly atheist, apologetics are for theists!

The literal translation reads as follows:
The word for:
Father
Execute/slay
Son
Son
Execute/slay
Father
Man
Execute/slay
Sin
https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/deu/...onc_177016

Everything else in this passage:
The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.
was added based off Jewish traditions. In fact an honest person would have noted the bible notes that says this passage could also read "with" instead of the word for. Because we simply do not know, and to be honest does not matter much as their are no more OT Jews.

All of that aside, This is a command from God to His people concerning relatives dying for the sins of others in their family, we in our unsaved state are not Children of God so the law does not apply.

Jesus clearly explains this in the parable of the wheat and weeds, the sheep and goats, the wheat and chaff. He makes no bones about telling us that all of us were not placed here by God.

The literal translation reads as follows:
The word for:
Father
Execute/slay
Son
Son
Execute/slay
Father
Man
Execute/slay
Sin
https://www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/deu/...onc_177016

Everything else in this passage:
The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers: every man shall be put to death for his own sin.
was added based off Jewish traditions. In fact an honest person would have noted the bible notes that says this passage could also read "with" instead of the word for. Because we simply do not know, and to be honest does not matter much as their are no more OT Jews.

Once again you come at me with complete fabrications.  Read the site that you yourself linked us to.  Now, I don't know Hebrew, but they are breaking it down for us there and showing us, term by term, that all of those things you redacted in fact are in the passage.  I suppose in this case, after looking it over, that you are not lying but rather are just stupid.  It seems that you are looking at the direct translation of the root forms and then claiming that the text is written entirely in root form.  But there are 23 root form symbols on that chart and there are 54 symbols in the actual text:



Also - and I don't expect you to know this since Christians generally don't have an education on the Bible - but the King James Version, more or less, is as direct a translation as you can find, and whenever words are inserted for clarification they are italicized.  Common insertions are possessive pronouns and conjugations of "to be," presumably due to the structure of the Hebrew language.  Take a look at this:



See, nothing in verse 16 is in italics.  So nothing is being inserted.  It is as direct a translation as linguistically possible aside from where they alter poetic language to sound more poetic to seventeenth century Europeans.  Here is a link to my source for your convenience:
https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Deu...hapter-24/

So now I'm wondering just how far up your ass you had to reach to pull that shit out.


All of that aside, This is a command from God to His people concerning relatives dying for the sins of others in their family, we in our unsaved state are not Children of God so the law does not apply.

WTF are you talking about?  This was God's covenant with the Jews.  David was a Jew.  In fact, he was the king Jew.  God shows he is above the law by torturing and executing David's infant son for David's sins.


Jesus clearly explains this in the parable of the wheat and weeds, the sheep and goats, the wheat and chaff. He makes no bones about telling us that all of us were not placed here by God.

I don't know WTF you are talking about, or how you think it is relevant, and I certainly don't know how it is you think you've answered the question of whether or not God is above the law.  But there is one thing I do know:

---

---

---

Repeating 'you're wrong' in different ways does not demonstrate that you are a Christian with knowledge of the scriptures. People with real knowledge show their work. Mere assertions don't cut it.

Go read my first post to the OP.

GC

This is what we look like after reading your posts

---

This is an artist's interpretation of these arguments versus weak-ass apologetics:

http://youtu.be/6AAdrky5mKQ

Sooo... You idea of a proper response to the detailed exegesis I provided that includes a direct translation of the Hebrew to English, and an explanation that over turn the very premise that 'we are all God's children' therefore Jesus dying on the cross is in violation of some supposed rule, is to post a clip of the wrestling move of the same name as the thread title and call all apologetic efforts 'weak ass.'

Yeah.. I can see why you were voted king atheist, your turning out to be quite the challenger and one who makes the resident theist question the very fabric of their beliefs.

It is not my premise that 'we are all God's children' therefore Jesus dying on the cross is in violation of some supposed rule.  Re-read (presuming that "your" literate, which, after reading your posts, is a point in question).