Thomas Kelly guessed

ACG52, No, I'm not trolling. Maybe you said all that because you wanted to hide that you can't overcome the challenges. I don't see any benefit in speaking to you if you continue like that.

ACG52, Can you explain each sentence of all the literature to prove your claim ? Will you then do it so we can see you know what you're talking about ?

ACG52, I never told you what I believed. There is a topic in this forum about the Old Testament containing contradictions to test people. I have reasoned other ancient texts of Christianity and Judaism may have a similar system. The sentence starts with the word 'If' which shows the rest of the wording is in doubt. Do you reason the word 'atom' may be a mistranslation ? If the parts of the world were separate at one time and then put together how did the parts come together in an order without the parts being mixed in disorder. ?

seriously disabled, You may find a topic in this forum about The Old Testament containing contradictions in it to test peoples judgement.

dimreepr, A book is a thing, a thing is evidence.

insane_alien Maybe not maybe. Where did you get the word untestable from ? If you find it will you post a reference of the word 'untestable' to this topic ? Maybe some people struggle in reading the New Testament and in part tests their abilities. Appears true to me. That doesn't prove to me that the New Testament may not be used for a good purpose. Thanks. Did you mean wholly or in part of shades of grey ?

insane_alien, I gave two options in the question, that wasn't a reason to believe that the person who asked didn't know there were other possibilities like believing.

swansont, Thanks. No one knows how the world was put together and I've not seen the answer from you of how it didn't collapse whilst in construction. I thought I may add some more thoughts to the question so you may read the quote below. "And this also I ask: If this expanse of heaven which we see was constructed by the gradual concurrence of atoms, how did it not collapse while it was in construction," If the parts of the world were separate at one time and then put together how did the parts come together in an order without the parts being mixed in disorder. ?

Continued from the Topic Title and see if they were wrong ? And should this be compared to what is written in the New Testament ?

swansont, In this forum you may find a topic about parts of the bible containing truths and falsities to test people. Maybe Christian and Jewish ancient literature has a similar system. You may find some reasons why in the topic. You may read part of post #1 below. "And this also I ask: If this expanse of heaven which we see was constructed by the gradual concurrence of atoms, how did it not collapse while it was in construction," Can you answer the question in that part ?

dimreepr, Have you looked at the evidence of another topic in this forum about the bible containing truths and falsities to test people ?

studiot, Maybe I should say that appears partly false to me. Maybe I should say have you looked at standard dictionary definitions ? I may have told you about that more than once. Maybe I should say that in post #1 in this topic you may read the words "True or False ?" above the evidence presented, so that's one question. Maybe I should say that I have given you truthful answers. I have answered questions in this post to benefit all who may look in this topic. I haven't trusted you from the start and I still don't and now some people may see that I have answered you in this post like I did because I reasoned of your relatively unpredictable character. I may stop posting to you.

swansont, I thought it might be beneficial to us all so I was happy to.

Klaynos, If I ever need to, I might. Some kinds of balls have little weight and the wind can blow them like a balloon. So your comparison appears to be false. Have you looked in the topic about it in this forum ? You may learn of its use there. Maybe it was a system to stop dangerous people claiming to have the authority of God. You may have knowledge of what people have done saying its because of God. You may find a different topic in this forum about false philosophers and prophets. That doesn't disprove that the Old Testament has contradictions in to test people. Is that really a way of proving in science ? Is that how real scientists discuss ? Some Israelites knew the truth about it, maybe there was a time the gentiles didn't. You may read more about this in a topic of this forum. Humans need literature so what you said doesn't disprove there is an all knowing God. Have you ever taken a test to get a qualification or for a job with a list of answers to choose from ? I'm glad it hasn't been proven humans made the world after all errors and harm people may done, including some believed to be religious people and scientists. What is perfection ? If a government reports a hurricane coming towards people and its not in sight, should the people accept that it might be true or leave it in doubt and see if they were wrong ? May be you'll start a topic of this in this forum or I might. Will you prove that by defining each word and explaining any error you believe you see so we may see you really understood what you were talking about. You may look through a list of definitions, I reason the word 'weight' may be for 'heavy object'. This may be similar to what is known as metaphorical sense. I reason it may be a spiritual sense. We may reason of weight to be invisible to us like wind so then you may see how something reasoned of as invisible may be shown in a metaphorical sense or spiritual sense. For example the man's breath moved it like the breeze or God is like a father. So you may see how a spirit may be reasoned of as like the wind because they are reasoned of as being similar and both invisible. And from that you may understand that is how the bible may be partly understood. If you've not remembered, no one has disproved that the Old Testament may have had Contradictions in to test people. May be some statements are part right and part wrong or part true and part false. Maybe a statement might show somethings to be right and wrong at the same time. For example 'it is right that it is wrong' and a statement may show somethings to be false and true at the same time. For example 'it is true that it is false. Do people still not use ancient knowledge of maths and other things ? If they do some things have remained the same as hundreds of years ago. I could look at ancient knowledge of maths or any other subject in a book printed last year without other knowledge of history included. You didn't need to put that. You didn't know I was able to see an occurence of the same reasoning to one of your answers. Can you see the wind ? If you can't, does that show the wind does not exist ? It appears you didn't understand what I put. You may see below. "Like I put above this The Old Testament may be composed to test anyone's knowledge of reality. May be you passed or may be you believe everything you are told or read of scientists, I don't know because I haven't investigated." So far I reason you do believe what you read and are told by scientists and some of your knowledge is not from experience. Its similar to what some people call having faith or trust, check the dictionary definitions if you believe I'm wrong. Some people may be trusted and some people shouldn't be trusted, may be some scientists have have a kind of knowledge and wisdom and you may agree there are some scientists who's claims have been proven false or have caused harm to people. Was the drug thalidomide as a result of a kind of scientific work ? Did the drug cause babies to have deformed bodies ? Did the creators of it claim to be Christian or not ? I don't know. Some people aren't Christians, they are false. May I find any work of science from which people have been injured or killed ?

studiot, Thanks, it appears that has revealed more about you so I may have some more knowledge of who I have been working with. Thanks, I had some knowledge of that and it appears true and you've increased my knowledge of you. Thanks, I may have some for you. Thanks, it appears I have more knowledge of your motivations and reasoning now. I reason we should test the reasoning of the original post, seems a quick way to learn the truth of what has been presented. I'm not sure exactly what you meant and I put "He may be known as Clement of Rome." I used the word 'may' and that shows doubt of the knowledge of the person. I'm not convinced thats true. You may look at some evidence below from The Recognitions of Clement and it may be judged if the writer was great. Part of. Chapter I.—Clement's Early History; Doubts. I Clement, who was born in the city of Rome,534 was from my earliest age a lover of chastity; while the bent of my mind held me bound as with chains of anxiety and sorrow. For a thought that was in me—whence originating, I cannot tell—constantly led me to think of my condition of mortality, and to discuss such questions as these: Whether there be for me any life after death, or whether I am to be wholly annihilated: whether I did not exist before I was born, and whether there shall be no remembrance of this life after death, and so the boundlessness of time shall consign all things to oblivion and silence; so that not only we shall cease to be, but there shall be no remembrance that we have ever been. http://www.ccel.org/....iii.iii.i.html I heard the wikipedia website is not completely reliable and I think it may contain some useful knowledge apart from any errors. You may compare the wikipedia website to the reasoning of the Old Testament containing truths and falsities to test peoples judgement. I don't know if wikipedia is mixed with truths and falsities. It seems I have looked at the works of Clement of Alexandria before and I reason that some benefit may be gained by reading them. What do you reason of the judgement of a mans work, should it be judged by quantity or quality ? I have copies of the works of Clement of Alexandria and don't have a complete judgement of them and I looked at the article of Clement of Alexandria of your wikipedia link and saw this "As his three major works demonstrate, Clement was influenced by Hellenistic philosophy to a greater extent than any other Christian thinker of his time, and in particular by Plato and the Stoics." I'm not sure what they meant by that so I'm not sure its true. I haven't looked at all the article and the word "influenced" is not enough to show how Clement of Alexandria was influenced in the knowledge of the part I quoted of wikipedia. I have reasoned it may be a suitable example of judging evidence presented. Maybe maybe not. I'm not sure what you meant exactly by that, it has more than one explanation to me. In the post, Post 27 for the benefit of anyone you looks at this, a quotation of one of your posts may be read. The quotation is below. "3) Various versions of the Old Testament I was referring to have big differences for instance the Pentateuch includes only the first five books. The Septuagint book of Jeremiah has a significant different order of events from the same book in the Mazaretic version. The (hebrew)Mazaretic is the version usually used in Western Bibles and was created about a hundred years before Clement. The (Greek)Septuagint predates it by some four to five hundred years." I did put before the my quotation of "Letter LVII. To Pammachius on the Best Method of Translating." what you may look at below. "As an example of the knowledge in translating which may be involved and translations which may be used you may read part of evidence of an early church father work below if you have not before." So you may agree you spoke of different copies of scriptures and the differences of them and this topic is partly about translation of scripture because to judge what is true and what is false in the the Old Testament and may be the New Testament because of quotations of the Old Testament and gaining knowledge of the New Testament of which in copies of translations, verses may have been added and some verses may occur in some copies and not in others. So now you may have some knowledge of why I quoted and I reason I put enough for people with enough knowledge and wisdom which serves them to see my reasoning. You may agree the evidence of "Letter LVII. To Pammachius on the Best Method of Translating." is part of all this. Maybe maybe not in judgement of the dating. The topic is of investigating the reasoning of the original post with the history so documents of any period may be used for the reasoning. I have made and posted points that can be discussed, anyone may read them in earlier posts of this topic. It appears you have been making errors. Maybe there will be less errors as we discuss more together.