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.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________ People, Evidence to consider. Maybe another way to look at the book of Genesis from The Works of Philo Judaeus. ALLEGORICAL INTERPRETATION, I{*}{**Yonge's title, The First Book of the Treatise on The Allegories of the Sacred Laws, after the Work of the Six Days of Creation.} I. (1) "And the heaven and the earth and all their world was Completed."{1}{#ge 2:1.} Having previously related the creation of the mind and of sense, Moses now proceeds to describe the perfection which was brought about by them both. And he says that neither the indivisible mind nor the particular sensations received perfection, but only ideas, one the idea of the mind, the other of sensation. And, speaking symbolically, he calls the mind heaven, since the natures which can only be comprehended by the intellect are in heaven. And sensation he calls earth, because it is sensation which has obtained a corporeal and some what earthy constitution. The ornaments of the mind are all the incorporeal things, which are perceptible only by the intellect. Those of sensation are the corporeal things, and everything in short which is perceptible by the external senses. http://www.earlychri...onge/book2.html Contents page link below. http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/yonge/

Klaynos, Maybe maybe not, I've not seen them. You may need to know that there is another topic in this forum about the Old Testament having contradictions in to test peoples judgement. What if many other texts of Christianity and Judaism are like that ? I'm not convinced everything is revealed in a short period of time in one chapter and what did you mean by almost meaningless ? 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. Discussion in progress. I have been waiting for posts and questions. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________ More of. Chapter XVIII.—The Concourse of Atoms Could Not Make the World. For as those who build circular domes, unless they bind the fastening of the central top, the whole falls at once; so also the circle of the world, which we see to be brought together in so graceful a form, if it was not made at once, and under the influence of a single forth-putting of divine energy by the power of a Creator, but by atoms gradually concurring and constructing it, not as reason demanded, but as a fortuitous issue befell, how did it not fall down and crumble to pieces before it could be brought together and fastened? http://www.ccel.org/...ii.x.xviii.html

People, Evidence to consider. If you want to change background to white on web page then look to top right hand corner of web page for small mechanical symbol and click on it and choose. Look to the other side for the small contents symbol to navigate through the books. Chapter X.—Creation Implies Providence. Then the old man said: "You are following it out exceedingly well." Then Niceta: "Now, then, we must inquire concerning the method of the world; of which the first inquiry is divided into two parts. For it is asked whether it has been made or not? And if it has not been made, itself must be that Unbegotten from which all things are. But if it has been made, concerning this again the question is divided into two parts, whether it was made by itself, or by another. Source. http://www.ccel.org/...vi.iii.x.x.html

People, Evidence to consider. If you want to change background to white on web page then look to top right hand corner of web page for small mechanical symbol and click on it and choose. Look to the other side for the small contents symbol to navigate through the books. Part of. Chapter XVIII.—The Concourse of Atoms Could Not Make the World. "Then, in the next place, if they are ceaselessly borne about, and always coming, and being added to things whose measure is already complete, how can the universe stand, when new weights are always being heaped upon so vast weights? 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 indeed the yawning top of the structure was not propped and bound by any stays? http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/anf08.vi.iii.x.xviii.html

Moontanman, Maybe maybe not. The context is Existence of Evil and Contradictions in the Bible as evidence (or not) of God. So what I and you have posted is all part of a broken person and contradictions in the bible. I may explain more after the next quote. Faith is a part of your being and you make decisions about reality because of it. You believe in somethings with no evidence. Your words in this topic have shown that and maybe you will look at one of the definitions of the word faith. One example from bottom of topic. So the bible is not proof of "full of things that either could not possibly have happened and things that paint a picture of a horrible god that does and demands horrific things" as you put it ? The contradictions in the bible are made of true and false stories of harmful things and beings and so is the world which surrounds the suffering, unaware, broken people. I'm not certain of that. God like knowledge exists in the early church fathers literature. The world might end and stop a scientist from proving the existence of God. A person is not right to call themself atheist and scientist, no evidence has disproved God and there is no evidence He ever will be disproved. If a person doubts the existence of God they may be a scientist also. If a person doubts the existence of God they may be called agnostic. Not seeing evidence of God's existence is not evidence of God not existing I didn't put that. I have more knowledge and wisdom than you. These words are part of an assertion of something as evidence and correct. I simply claim these are words of asserting as something as evidence and true. So is that. Does God not exist ? In this post near the bottom you put "The bible is not proof of anything" so does that disprove the mythology ? In this post near the bottom you put "The bible is not proof of anything" So is it not proof of the fiction ? Have you ever proven the contradictions in the Old Testament were not and are not used to test ? I'm defending its not all false. And some have neither of an all knowing wise God. I can't. The bibles are more than one version and that is true. So the bible is not proof of "full of things that either could not possibly have happened and things that paint a picture of a horrible god that does and demands horrific things" as you put it ? You didn't win and its not wise to want to. I never reasoned of you as credible and I may stop posting to you.

doG, I don't believe scholars are superior to everyone else, they may have and may make errors in judging the truth of things. Some works of the early church fathers, many pages, are supporting evidence of many parts of the bible. Still untrustworthy.

doG, Have you got evidence of anything to prove that ? Is the bible evidence ? "You could say" is not certain. Possible answers are Yes, the bible is evidence, no the bible is not evidence, I'm not sure the bible is evidence or some other answer. Some claim it is, so far I'm not convinced you're trustworthy. That doesn't prove biblical text was not caused by God or that He doesn't exist. Sometime in the future I may stop replying to you.

Moontanman, Evidence is all that exists. There is no evidence to disprove that.

studiot, I posted more to someone else, it was relatively long. The moderators weren't sure if I was spamming, they chose to tell me not to post like I did. It seems I have permission now. He may be known as Clement of Rome. Why did you give me those claims ? Anyone may study the early church fathers to judge what may have happened. People have bought commentaries to learn about the bible. I advise starting with ancient commentaries. I don't have complete knowledge of the history of the bible, I'm not convinced by any claims you've put. People have made errors in the past. Many copies of manuscripts were made. None of what you've put proves the Old Testament is not mixed with truths and falsities to test. 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. Letter LVII. To Pammachius on the Best Method of Translating. Let these word fanciers and nice critics of all composition tell us where they have read the words; and if they cannot, let me tell them that they are in Isaiah.1689For in the place where we read and translate, "There shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a branch shall grow out of his roots,"1690 in the Hebrew idiom it is written thus, "There shall come forth a rod out of the root of Jesse and a Nazarene shall grow from his root." How can the Septuagint leave out the word 'Nazarene,' if it is unlawful to substitute one word for another? It is sacrilege either to conceal or to set at naught a mystery. http://www.ccel.org/...206.v.LVII.html __________________________________________________________________________________________ doG, Are they evidence of fables ?

doG, You did not post all the definitions of the word "Evidence" in letters in this forum. Are the gospels evidence of hearsay ? Some people have claimed they are not hearsay, people may be wise to study all the evidence for themselves. Why should anyone trust you are right ? There's plenty to study of the gospels, including the early church father commentaries of ancient time, lots of pages to gain maximum knowledge. I've posted part of them in the forum. I have asked some questions about the bible, a thing and evidence, You have answered partly, I'm waiting for the others.