Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Beetle · 10-01-2004, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ZooMom

You are right. God claimed the life of the child as punishment for David's sin.

So far, so good.

Quote:

Yes, the Scriptures are clear. And I gave the Scriptures that say that each will be judged according to his own, not the sins of his father or son. So I am not incorrect.

Huh? Am I missing something? In the first sentence you're agreeing that God killed the child because of David's sin. Then you again assert that nobody would be punished for his father's sins. That seems a tad inconsistent.

ZooMom · 10-01-2004, 02:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beetle

So far, so good.

Huh? Am I missing something? In the first sentence you're agreeing that God killed the child because of David's sin. Then you again assert that nobody would be punished for his father's sins. That seems a tad inconsistent.

I make no claims to being a Bible scholar.

The verse is there in black and white that the first child of David and Bathsheba was 'struck by the Lord and became ill'. It is also in the Scriptures that each will be judged according to his own, and that a son will not die for his father's sins nor a father for his son's. I am not able to reconcile the apparent contradiction right now, but I have faith that there is an explanation. You can be sure that I will be asking some questions of my own to people that I know have a better grip on these things than I do, and that I will share what I find out with you here.

Peace be with you.

Sandy

GakuseiDon · 10-01-2004, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beetle

Huh? Am I missing something? In the first sentence you're agreeing that God killed the child because of David's sin. Then you again assert that nobody would be punished for his father's sins. That seems a tad inconsistent.

Actually, it isn't, at least from my understanding of the passages. There are 3 things going on here, and trying to treat them as the same would be wrong.

There is:
(1) God's specific punishment for specific sins (God killing David's son for what he did)
(2) God's generational punishments to people for transgressions "by those that hate God" carried out "unto the 3rd or 4th generation".
(3) God telling people that they can't put "fathers to death for their children, nor children to death for their fathers". But this seems to be a command to people.

Think of them like the Asimov's "3 laws of Robotics". (1) takes higher precedence over (2) and (3). God can pretty much punish anyone He wants, for any reason. (To the anti-fundies: Please don't get upset! I'm not endorsing these views, just explaining them)

If there is any contradiction, it is along the same lines as a speeding ambulance "contradicts" a speed limit. The "contradiction" is understood in terms of the cultural context that spawned it.

ZooMom · 10-01-2004, 07:16 PM

Thank you.

That makes sense to me.

Peace be with you!

Sandy

Vorkosigan · 10-01-2004, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blt to go

But don't worry. It all becomes clearer when you realize that Uriah was a Hittite, a race of people God had ordered to exterminate, so technically David didn't murder him, but rather granted Uriah the death sentence he was under. So why did God then punish David for doing what God ordered? THAT's a stumper.

LOL. :notworthy :notworthy

Angyson · 10-04-2004, 08:18 AM

Thanks for the interesting explanations.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

10-01-2004, 07:16 PM	#24
ZooMom Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: North Carolina Posts: 1,331	Thank you. That makes sense to me. Peace be with you! Sandy

10-04-2004, 08:18 AM	#26
Angyson Senior Member Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Ontario, Canada Posts: 983	Thanks for the interesting explanations.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.