God kills a child for the sin of the father

[Theonewhoanswersyourquestions]

.. God is not vengeful but merciful and great,

.. how come you guys can straight up downgrade Christians without punishment? ..

What a non-answer! Of course your god was punishing David and others, that is obvious! The issue is the dickheadedness of punishing a completely innocent child in a horrid manner. Then presumably sending the kid to live in the fires of hell for all eternity for being sinful. Sucks to be that kid doesn't it?

Punishing the innocent is wrong, always! Why are christians so stubbornly stupid about this? If god has the omnipotence to punish in any imaginable way, why is he relegated to the barbarity of ancient middle easterners? Any of us could imagine better fitting punishments than killing an innocent kid. Only a stone age goat herder thinks that infanticide is a good idea.

You are a truly, deeply awful person if you think god was just in torturing this innocent child. I hope you are just using very strong cognitive dissonance in defending the evil god you worship.


As for downgrading christians, we don't sully them, they come here smelling like that, we just point out the obvious.

We'll now that child did not go to hell for his fathers sin, the kid is firmly sitting heaven with his father right now, but the death of the child was the fitting punishment for David's sin, sadly the child was forced to bear the fathers weight, but that's how life is today. If the father quits his job, how does that effect the child, the child is forced into hunger a the parents no longer have money to support the child, if they don't get another form Of income they would probably be kicked from their house

And no, we Christians come in with answers and kindness, then you treat us like this, that would be like me visiting your home, bringing good food, then you just beat me for it

[Minimalist]

it's the same thing,

No, it isn't.

And btw, it never happened, either. 10th century Judah was a miserable little shithole of wandering nomads and their goats. It could never have supported the population necessary.

[Theonewhoanswersyourquestions]

it's the same thing,

No, it isn't.

And btw, it never happened, either. 10th century Judah was a miserable little shithole of wandering nomads and their goats. It could never have supported the population necessary.

The kingdom of david was not 10th century, it was in the BC era, bafoon

[Jackalope]

No, it isn't.

And btw, it never happened, either. 10th century Judah was a miserable little shithole of wandering nomads and their goats. It could never have supported the population necessary.

The kingdom of david was not 10th century, it was in the BC era, bafoon

10th century BC.

Derp.

[ThePinsir]

The kingdom of david was not 10th century, it was in the BC era, bafoon

10th century bc brah.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Judah

(granted, this article says 9th, but whatever)

[Minimalist]

No, it isn't.

And btw, it never happened, either. 10th century Judah was a miserable little shithole of wandering nomads and their goats. It could never have supported the population necessary.

The kingdom of david was not 10th century, it was in the BC era, bafoon

You know, only a dickhead like you would require AD and BC for every date.

Thanks for confirming my opinion of you as just one more bible thumping shithead.

Go blow jesus out your ass, moron.

[Brakeman]

We'll now that child did not go to hell for his fathers sin, the kid is firmly sitting heaven with his father right now, but the death of the child was the fitting punishment for David's sin, sadly the child was forced to bear the fathers weight, but that's how life is today. If the father quits his job, how does that effect the child, the child is forced into hunger a the parents no longer have money to support the child, if they don't get another form Of income they would probably be kicked from their house..

Somebody once said, "David is the king of the land, his transgressions are the people's transgressions." That, along with the "original sin" doctrine, describes the child as sinful. The child didn't repent of his sins and was not a follower of jesus. Because the child held part of the transgressions against god, god was angered to address the sin. If the transgression was enough to warrant killing the child, there is no basis to assume that god's anger didn't warrant eternal damnation. According to christian theology, once you are dead, you don't get a chance to repent for some odd reason. If god hates sinners so much that he sends even the most oblivious to hell to burn forever, he would also hate a child that was part of a group that directly pissed him off in the bible story.

[Fidel_Castronaut]

No, it isn't.

And btw, it never happened, either. 10th century Judah was a miserable little shithole of wandering nomads and their goats. It could never have supported the population necessary.

The kingdom of david was not 10th century, it was in the BC era, bafoon

Feeling silly?

[Rampant.A.I.]

The kingdom of david was not 10th century, it was in the BC era, bafoon

Feeling silly? :roflol:

c. 1000 BC – King David captures Jerusalem and establishes it as the City of David and the capital of the United Kingdom of Israel.[9]
c. 970 BC – Solomon becomes king of the Israelites.[10]
c. 965 BC – David, king of the ancient Israelites, died.[citation needed]
c. 940 BC – The First Temple on Mount Moriah in Jerusalem is completed.[citation needed]
c. 931 BC – Solomon died in Jerusalem, and the Golden Age of Israel ends. As a result the kingdom splits into two kingdoms: Israel (including the cities of Shechem and Samaria) in the north and Judah (containing Jerusalem) in the south led by Rehoboam.[citation needed]
925 BC – Sack of Jerusalem (925 BC) - Pharaoh Sheshonk I of the Third Intermediate Period invades Canaan following the Battle of Bitter Lakes. Possibly the same as Shishak, the first Pharaoh mentioned in the Torah who captured and pillaged Jerusalem.[citation needed]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_..._Palestine

[Esquilax]

We'll now that child did not go to hell for his fathers sin, the kid is firmly sitting heaven with his father right now, but the death of the child was the fitting punishment for David's sin, sadly the child was forced to bear the fathers weight, but that's how life is today. If the father quits his job, how does that effect the child, the child is forced into hunger a the parents no longer have money to support the child, if they don't get another form Of income they would probably be kicked from their house

Uh, if the parents can't provide for their children then they can apply for government assistance. At no point is the situation as you describe, and even if the assistance program isn't perfect, this is again a scenario in which normal, everyday human behavior trumps the morality of god, because according to you god really would just let the kid starve.

And no, we Christians come in with answers and kindness, then you treat us like this, that would be like me visiting your home, bringing good food, then you just beat me for it

No, this is actually like you coming into our home, making a bunch of unfounded assertions in order to preach at us, and being rightly told that what you're saying makes no sense. The martyr card has no value here, christian soldier.