Two babies discussion.

[Lek]

Which is all very convenient, but again, do you have any actual evidence that the biblical authors meant that what they wrote be taken in a way that's precisely opposite to what the words mean?

Here's some evidence.

Romans 3:19-20New International Version (NIV)
19 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, so that every mouth may be silenced and the whole world held accountable to God. 20 Therefore no one will be declared righteous in God’s sight by the works of the law; rather, through the law we become conscious of our sin.

Romans 3:21-22New International Version (NIV)
21 But now apart from the law the righteousness of God has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify. 22 This righteousness is given through faith in Jesus Christ to all who believe. There is no difference between Jew and Gentile,

Galatians 3:23-25New International Version (NIV)
23 Before the coming of this faith, we were held in custody under the law, locked up until the faith that was to come would be revealed. 24 So the law was our guardian until Christ came that we might be justified by faith. 25 Now that this faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian.

Jesus did not say that we are still under the law.

Luke 16:16-17New International Version (NIV)
16 “The Law and the Prophets were proclaimed until John. Since that time, the good news of the kingdom of God is being preached, and everyone is forcing their way into it. 17 It is easier for heaven and earth to disappear than for the least stroke of a pen to drop out of the Law.

He said that he came to fulfill the law.

Matthew 5:17New International Version (NIV)
17 “Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them.

---

And you don't see how this is absurb.

No. Why is it absurd? Jesus is God who experienced life on earth directly as a person. Why wouldn't he be the one we would go to?