How is Yahweh not immoral?

[Drich]

With His death comes freedom from the Law as the only way to obtain righteousness.

That is not what your dickhead of a god said, old bean. Or perhaps you are simply a very poor follower.

King James Bible (Cambridge Ed.)
For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled.

BECAUSE ALL OF IT STILL APPLIES! Otherwise if it passed away you all would be saved as well, and Christ would not have needed to die!

Because it did not pass away (all of it) we are all in sin. Sin requires a sacerfice. Christ Is That Sacerfice. (for those who accept what He has done for them.)

---

So how many neighbors have you stoned to death for working on a Sunday?

Sin and attonement was the purpose of the Law. In the OT God identified sin and established the high price of sin. Sin has since been redeemed. Sin does not change nor did the price of sin change.

Consult a dictionary. Righteousness means morality. Thus god's standard is his morality - and its nowhere near perfect.

Consult a lexicon. When establishing the terms and defination of a forgein language understand not every word directly translates into the second language. Righteousness is seperate from man's morality, because it is an attribute of God not shared by man.
http://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexi...6666&t=KJV

Nope, I'm saying that the logic you pointed to as faulty was not - in fact - faulty. Which is why you chose to put it as "fallacy of logic" instead of naming it. It is your ignorance of logic and your laziness to correct it that are being indicated by that phrase.

What a d-bag. I very carfully identified all of the elements that make this a deductive fallacy, but unless it is a strawman or a red herring your lost.
From the link I provided to you last post:

Deductive fallacy

Main articles: Deductive fallacy and formal fallacy

In philosophy, the term logical fallacy properly refers to a formal fallacy: a flaw in the structure of a deductive argument which renders the argument invalid.

However, the same terms are used in informal discourse to mean an argument which is problematic for any reason.

A logical form such as A and B is independent of any particular conjunction of meaningful propositions. Logical form alone can guarantee that given true premises, a true conclusion must follow. However, formal logic makes no such guarantee if any premise is false, the conclusion can be either true or false. Any formal mistake or logical fallacy similarly invalidates the deductive guarantee. The so-called fallacy fallacy is a failure to understand that all bets are off unless the argument is formally flawless and all premises are true.

The creator would not have automatic authority over his creation./Again being a creator does not give one the right over his creation. Especially if the creation is a sentient, rational and self-aware being.

Who says? You??? Why? Because You say so? Great arguement.