Can someone explain this contradiciton?

[TommySoda]

I've literally had nobody that was properly able to answer this.


In Ezekiel 18:20 it is quoted " The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them."

2 Samuel 12:10 however God directly kills David's son for his adultery and David's other children "Now, therefore, the sword will never depart from your house, because you despised me and took the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your own." and 2 Samuel 12:14 "But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the LORD, the son born to you will die."

 

[Greengardener]

I'm curious what you think when you try to make sense of it.

My stab at an answer, no pun intended, is to consider how God's favor keeps a lot of awful things at bay. Look how many times He intervened for David! By David's behavior of utter contempt for all that God had done for him, likely all it took for the child to die was God stepping back and just letting the natural course of things happen. Another thought - in doing this, God spared the child from the drama of that awful situation, since indeed it was not the child's fault, and I suggest that in light of what happened among David's other children. I certainly can't assure that this is a satisfactory answer, but it's what comes to mind as I read it.

 

[TommySoda]

I'm curious what you think when you try to make sense of it.

My stab at an answer, no pun intended, is to consider how God's favor keeps a lot of awful things at bay. Look how many times He intervened for David! By David's behavior of utter contempt for all that God had done for him, likely all it took for the child to die was God stepping back and just letting the natural course of things happen. Another thought - in doing this, God spared the child from the drama of that awful situation, since indeed it was not the child's fault, and I suggest that in light of what happened among David's other children. I certainly can't assure that this is a satisfactory answer, but it's what comes to mind as I read it.

Honestly I can't make sense of it. I don't see why Ezekiel would say anything like when stories prior contradicted the entire thing. I'm sure this is just me simply not understanding it but I've read these verses countless times and there's definitely a problem. One doesn't validate the other

 

[JackRT]

I see it as yet another clear contradiction.

 

[Aussie Pete]

I've literally had nobody that was properly able to answer this.


In Ezekiel 18:20 it is quoted " The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them."

2 Samuel 12:10 however God directly kills David's son for his adultery and David's other children "Now, therefore, the sword will never depart from your house, because you despised me and took the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your own." and 2 Samuel 12:14 "But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the LORD, the son born to you will die."

Sinful behaviour has consequences. David did not discipline his children. It's difficult to have much moral authority when you are a murdering adulterer. God removed His protection from David up to a point. David could easily have been assassinated and Absalom made King. God prevented that but Absalom paid the price for his rebellion.

Solomon was strong on parental discipline. No doubt he watched the family disintegrate and the Lord showed him why.

Ezekiel was a prophet in an entirely different era. God does not change, but He does change the way He deals with people. The sins of the fathers being visited on the children was pronounced in the desert, to Moses, who sought to know God's ways. (Exodus 34:7). God was introducing a new way of dealing with Israel, based on Israel's complete failure to abide by God's covenant.

 

[Chesterton]

I've literally had nobody that was properly able to answer this.


In Ezekiel 18:20 it is quoted " The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them."

2 Samuel 12:10 however God directly kills David's son for his adultery and David's other children "Now, therefore, the sword will never depart from your house, because you despised me and took the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your own." and 2 Samuel 12:14 "But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the LORD, the son born to you will die."

The passage in Samuel does not say David's son is sharing the guilt of the parent.

 

[TommySoda]

Sinful behaviour has consequences. David did not discipline his children. It's difficult to have much moral authority when you are a murdering adulterer. God removed His protection from David up to a point. David could easily have been assassinated and Absalom made King. God prevented that but Absalom paid the price for his rebellion.

Solomon was strong on parental discipline. No doubt he watched the family disintegrate and the Lord showed him why.

Ezekiel was a prophet in an entirely different era. God does not change, but He does change the way He deals with people. The sins of the fathers being visited on the children was pronounced in the desert, to Moses, who sought to know God's ways. (Exodus 34:7). God was introducing a new way of dealing with Israel, based on Israel's complete failure to abide by God's covenant.

Except this is mans idea of what happens. God said "the sword will never leave your house" implying that because of David's sin all the bad that happens after is because God caused it. Wouldn't that be God changing? The Bible claims that God doesn't change but you're implying he he's finding new ways to punish people; which is him changing.

 

[HTacianas]

I've literally had nobody that was properly able to answer this.


In Ezekiel 18:20 it is quoted " The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them."

2 Samuel 12:10 however God directly kills David's son for his adultery and David's other children "Now, therefore, the sword will never depart from your house, because you despised me and took the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your own." and 2 Samuel 12:14 "But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the LORD, the son born to you will die."

God did not kill David's son for what David had done. He took away David's son to punish David for what he had done. You might consider that to be hair splitting, but that is in fact what happened.

As to Ezekiel, he spells out a general rule. But the old testament is filled with exceptions to that general rule.

 

[TommySoda]

God did not kill David's son for what David had done. He took away David's son to punish David for what he had done. You might consider that to be hair splitting, but that is in fact what happened.

As to Ezekiel, he spells out a general rule. But the old testament is filled with exceptions to that general rule.

The definition of punish is to inflict penalty for an offense. I would say the child is punished; If punishment to David was the true reason... why not just kill him? Ezekiel never said it was a general rule but rather a universal thing. He literally told them to stop saying that because God doesn't punish children for the parents sins but it's happened before.

 

[Aussie Pete]

Except this is mans idea of what happens. God said "the sword will never leave your house" implying that because of David's sin all the bad that happens after is because God caused it. Wouldn't that be God changing? The Bible claims that God doesn't change but you're implying he he's finding new ways to punish people; which is him changing.

Declaring that something will happen does not make you responsible. God warned Adam that he would die if he ate from the Tree of Knowledge. David could count himself blessed that he did not suffer the full consequences of his sin. He should have been stoned to death. You can't pigeonhole God so easily. He will have mercy on who he has mercy. God's law of sowing and reaping has never been repealed. Try driving on the wrong side of the road at a hundred miles an hour. God will forgive you. The cops will not. A few months without a licence (if you survive) may convince you that it was a bad idea.

God's dealings are not only for the individual. It's a warning to others also. Some Christians abused the Lord's Supper. Some got sick and some died. You can imagine that other Christians may take it more seriously as a result. Ananias and Sapphira? They died because they lied to the Holy Spirit. Pretty drastic. It had the intended result. People started taking God more seriously. King David's suffering no doubt influenced Solomon.

 

[TommySoda]

Declaring that something will happen does not make you responsible. God warned Adam that he would die if he ate from the Tree of Knowledge. David could count himself blessed that he did not suffer the full consequences of his sin. He should have been stoned to death. You can't pigeonhole God so easily. He will have mercy on who he has mercy. God's law of sowing and reaping has never been repealed. Try driving on the wrong side of the road at a hundred miles an hour. God will forgive you. The cops will not. A few months without a licence (if you survive) may convince you that it was a bad idea.

God's dealings are not only for the individual. It's a warning to others also. Some Christians abused the Lord's Supper. Some got sick and some died. You can imagine that other Christians may take it more seriously as a result. Ananias and Sapphira? They died because they lied to the Holy Spirit. Pretty drastic. It had the intended result. People started taking God more seriously. King David's suffering no doubt influenced Solomon.

As to Ezekiel, he spells out a general rule. But the old testament is filled with exceptions to that general rule.[/QUOTE]

2 Samuel 12:15 "After Nathan had gone home, the LORD struck the child that Uriah's wife had borne to David, and he became ill."

"This is what the LORD says: 'Out of your own household I am going to bring calamity on you. Before your very eyes I will take your wives and give them to one who is close to you, and he will sleep with your wives in broad daylight." 2 Samuel 12:11

God literally said he did those things.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

I've literally had nobody that was properly able to answer this.


In Ezekiel 18:20 it is quoted " The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them."

2 Samuel 12:10 however God directly kills David's son for his adultery and David's other children "Now, therefore, the sword will never depart from your house, because you despised me and took the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your own." and 2 Samuel 12:14 "But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the LORD, the son born to you will die."

David's son didn't "Share the guilt" of his father he was completely innocent, and Dying young as an innocent isn't a "punishment", it's an instant promotion to a better place. However David DIDN'T WANT his son to die, so the punishment FOR HIM was very difficult to bear, and was ONLY THE BEGINNING of his sorrows. Despising God isn't a real bright career move.

Note - Solomon, was another child that resulted from David's Adulterous/Murderous relationship.

 

[TommySoda]

David's son didn't "Share the guilt" of his father he was completely innocent, and Dying young as an innocent isn't a "punishment", it's an instant promotion to a better place. However David DIDN'T WANT his son to die, so the punishment FOR HIM was very difficult to bear, and was ONLY THE BEGINNING of his sorrows. Despising God isn't a real bright career move.

Note - Solomon, was another child that resulted from David's Adulterous/Murderous relationship.

There are plenty of times that death is used as a punishment (plagues, being struck etc). So I double death was this celebrated thing in the OT. Heaven was not open to people before Jesus died so where exactly did the son go?

 

[royal priest]

I've literally had nobody that was properly able to answer this.


In Ezekiel 18:20 it is quoted " The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them."

2 Samuel 12:10 however God directly kills David's son for his adultery and David's other children "Now, therefore, the sword will never depart from your house, because you despised me and took the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your own." and 2 Samuel 12:14 "But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the LORD, the son born to you will die."

In Ezekiel, the Lord is addressing the people's despair of repenting of ther sin.
They think it is useless. Our parents eat the grapes (commit the sin) but our teeth are set on edge (suffer the bitter consequence of captivity).
The Lord encourages them to repentance by promising them eternal life.
The type of deliverance the Lord is promising is from spiritual death to spiritual life. He isn't saying the soul that turns from sin will not die physically.

 

[Bob Carabbio]

There are plenty of times that death is used as a punishment (plagues, being struck etc). So I double death was this celebrated thing in the OT. Heaven was not open to people before Jesus died so where exactly did the son go?

What makes you think it wasn't open to "Innocents"??? Or have you bought into the "Original SIN" fantasy??

 

[TommySoda]

What makes you think it wasn't open to "Innocents"??? Or have you bought into the "Original SIN" fantasy??

I believe in the original sin.

 

[Charlie24]

I've literally had nobody that was properly able to answer this.


In Ezekiel 18:20 it is quoted " The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them."

2 Samuel 12:10 however God directly kills David's son for his adultery and David's other children "Now, therefore, the sword will never depart from your house, because you despised me and took the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your own." and 2 Samuel 12:14 "But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the LORD, the son born to you will die."

The days of David were cruel and ruthless times. Entire families could be wiped out and depending on the reason, sometimes accepted by the people. We cannot image life in those days.

If the child had lived, more than likely he would have been murdered. David had committed a terrible sin and the people would have looked at the child with hatred and disgust.

I believe God chose to take the child to be with Him. I think God did him a favor.

 

[blackribbon]

To say that the child was punished means that you see death as a punishment. It is actually the bridge that allows us to leave this sin filled world and cross into Heaven assuming that one is saved. Death is a gift from God. If we were allowed to eat from the tree of life along with the tree of good and evil, we would have lived in this sinful state for eternity, with no hope for salvation or freedom from sin.

And trust me, the person who loses someone they love dearly to death is the one who suffers...it has to be more than the one who is in Jesus' arms.

 

[Aussie Pete]

There are plenty of times that death is used as a punishment (plagues, being struck etc). So I double death was this celebrated thing in the OT. Heaven was not open to people before Jesus died so where exactly did the son go?

Paradise, like all believers prior to Jesus dying (as Jesus told the thief on the cross adjacent)

 

[Al Touthentop]

I've literally had nobody that was properly able to answer this.


In Ezekiel 18:20 it is quoted " The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them."

2 Samuel 12:10 however God directly kills David's son for his adultery and David's other children "Now, therefore, the sword will never depart from your house, because you despised me and took the wife of Uriah the Hittite to be your own." and 2 Samuel 12:14 "But because by doing this you have shown utter contempt for the LORD, the son born to you will die."

In Ezekiel, what God is talking about is sin and eternal consequences. And the sin of the father does not affect the son's relationship with God. No son is sent to hell for the disobedience of the father. It is his own sin that any man bears.

David sinned in murdering Uriah and in sleeping with Bathsheba. And God forgave him for that sin but he had to send a prophet to prick his conscience before David felt any remorse for it.

The son wasn't being punished, David was. The boy went to heaven as David later suggests.

And he said, “While the child was alive, I fasted and wept; for I said, ‘Who can tell whether the Lord will be gracious to me, that the child may live?’ 23 But now he is dead; why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.”

One thing that strikes me when I read this is that this boy was conceived in adultery. He also is going to have another son by Bathsheba after they are married - Solomon. But he makes it clear that it isn't just the adultery that is the problem, it is the opportunity for Israel's enemies to blaspheme God.

And Nathan said to David, “The Lord also has put away your sin; you shall not die. 14 However, because by this deed you have given great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme, the child also who is born to you shall surely die.” 15 Then Nathan departed to his house.

Not sure why the translation in the NKJV is so different than the one you quoted but it seems as if God is, by taking the child, fixing a longer term problem with the king's reputation. God visited earthly consequences on David though, not eternal. The child was not sent to hell because of what David did, he was sent to heaven.