1. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #13388 by ryuile on December 17, 2006 at 11:25 am

@Billy Sands in number 406-

>Besides all the arcaheological evidence to back this up, do you not think it was a bit strange that the law of moses was suddenly discovered upon the return to jerusalem, where it got its firsy public reading?<

Where do you find that? What about Joshua 8:30-35?

Joshua 8v35:
'There was not a word of all that Moses had commanded which Joshua did not read before all the assembly of Israel'

ps Billy, sorry for assuming you hadn't read your Bible earlier, my bad entirely. I made a mess of that, was just trying to say that I didn't want to comment on the evolution/science side of things but that I have read the Bible and understand at least some of it.

2. The God of the Bible is No Delusion!

Comment #11801 by ryuile on December 7, 2006 at 12:39 pm

Morning all. I'm no scientist so I won't even bother trying to get involved in that side of things, somebody is sure to fling a bunch of long words at me (or insults, like Mr. Godogit) However, I have been reading the Bible daily for about six years, longer than any of the atheists on here, and so although I am again no expert I'd really like to clear up a few things some folk are saying, wrongly, about it.

1) A few people have mentioned Luke as contradicting Matthew with regards to Jesus' family tree. They obviously haven't looked at it properly - Matthew gives us the line of his family through Joseph, the man who married Mary and helped bring up Jesus. Luke gives us it in the other direction, from Jesus back, and goes through the line of Mary. The bit you are misinterpreting is in Luke 3:23 -

"Jesus...being(as was supposed) the son of Joseph, the son of Heli"

This "son" of Heli is referring to the fact that Joseph was his son-in-law, essentially in those times another son, a member of the family. This makes perfect sense and has nothing to contradict the record in Matthew.

2) A quick one - Inquiring's post no. 232 talks about children being eternally tortured if they don't follow God's teachings. Again, you haven't read around. The Bible does not teach that wrong-doers will be perpetually punished.
The references to Hell, and fires burning forever, are referring to 'Gehenna,' the rubbish tip outside Jerusalem, where the fires were never extinguished. The things thrown on it (notably the bodies of criminals - this is where the parallel is drawn from) did not burn continually - they burnt until destroyed, but the fire kept burning. So we are not being threatened with sitting in a fire for the rest of eternity, we are being told that those who are judged unworthy will be totally destroyed, in the sense relevant to the people of that time, that of the Jerusalem rubbish heap, which was about as total as destruction got.

And 3) There have been several questions as to "Why God is such a poor communicator." Shaunyboy has replied to that, I'd just like to add a bit. In the chapter I was reading the other night, Micah 3, God tells us that there will be a long period when basically he will not communicate directly with us.

Micah 3:6 (NKJV)
"Therefore you shall have night without vision,
And you shall have darkness without divination;
The sun shall go down on the prophets, and the day shall be dark for them."
v7:
"So the seers shall be ashamed,
And the diviners abashed;
Indeed they shall all cover their lips;
For there is no answer from God."

This is clear evidence from the Bible that God hs told us in advance that he will not send prophets or visions or anything until the return of Jesus. Poor communicator? He's said he won't communicate directly and that's what he's doing. We have to use the Bible.
Of course, if you don't believe in the Bible that won't help you, but then you won't believe in God anyway so there's not a problem.

Got to go now so I'll stop there. Like I said, I am no expert on science and little bits of molucules mutating, although I have seen and heard enough evidence to convince me of Creation even when not factoring in the Bible. But hopefully I've pointed out some of the mistakes you made in taking passages out of context or misinterpreted.

Please don't just rip me apart because you disagree with me - I can understand logical debate but hurling insults gets nobody nowhere.

Thanks, Roy. Night night.