Some Parts of the Old Testament Written to Try Us. Try = Test.

[Thomas Kelly guessed]

True or false maybe ?

 

"Chapter XX.—Some Parts of the Old Testament Written to Try Us

 

Wherefore every man who wishes to be saved must become, as the Teacher said, a judge of the books written to try us. For thus He spake: 'Become experienced bankers.' Now the need of bankers arises from the circumstance that the spurious is mixed up with the genuine."

Source (link removed by moderator, please see SFN forum rule 2.7 to see why)

Edited May 30, 2012 by CaptainPanic

[Moontanman]

True or false maybe ?

 

"Chapter XX.—Some Parts of the Old Testament Written to Try Us

 

Wherefore every man who wishes to be saved must become, as the Teacher said, a judge of the books written to try us. For thus He spake: 'Become experienced bankers.' Now the need of bankers arises from the circumstance that the spurious is mixed up with the genuine."

Source (link removed by moderator, please see SFN forum rule 2.7 to see why)

 

 

How about it's just bronze age mythology?

[the asinine cretin]

"Some Parts of the Old Testament Written to Try Us."

 

That's an interesting question. I recall a friend, who is a devout believer, complaining about the discrepancies and confusing passages in the New Testament and wondering why God chose to make it that way. To me this is a very strange concept. Why would God want to "test" people's credulity in the first place? Is there really merit in believing things in spite of evidence to the contrary? How is this sincere? Wouldn't sincere disbelief be preferable to insincere self-delusion? I'm curious to know what the explanation of this might be.

 

Thanks.

[hypervalent_iodine]

!

Moderator Note

In light of the recent post by the asinine cretin, I am leaving this thread open for now (pending a more thorough staff review) in the hopes that members will be able to draw discussion from it.

But be warned, Thomas Kelly. We won't tolerate preaching and if you try, this will be closed (see here for more)

As a side comment, if you had hoped to convert people here, I fear your attempts are in vain.

[Thomas Kelly guessed]

asinine cretin

 

 

"Some Parts of the Old Testament Written to Try Us."

 

That's an interesting question. I recall a friend, who is a devout believer, complaining about the discrepancies and confusing passages in the New Testament and wondering why God chose to make it that way. To me this is a very strange concept. Why would God want to "test" people's credulity in the first place?

 

Speaking of the Old Testament, the Israelites had it before the gentiles, I don't know how false things got in to it, may be it was to protect the religion from being claimed by outsiders if the books were ever in their hands and if that ever did happen the Israelites were able to prove they are the ones with the right knowledge so they may be trusted.

 

God doesn't need a book to test people, he knows everyones thoughts and his memory is perfect. The system is useful to religious people as I explained earlier, useful to God aswell.

 

You may want to study The Clementine Homilies or The Recognitions of Clement for the debate between St Peter and Simon Magus who spoke this subject and others similar. They are of written works which are ancient.

 

Speaking of the New Testament, it may have been worded skillfully to show heretics wrong if they used it and it may not have had any false things in it. In the present time translations of the New Testament may mislead people, this may be by ignorant error. Look at one of my other posts which may be in the forum to see how.

 

 

Is there really merit in believing things in spite of evidence to the contrary?

 

It may appear there is evidence which disproves the bible, the only way to know the truth is by using the advice given, I may need to warn you, if false things are in the bible you may need to reason carefully of what is lawful. I'm restricting my speech because of the warnings in this forum.

 

 

How is this sincere?

 

Its similar to any human job interview or exam, people must show who they are and what they know in some circumstances so a person may be trusted.

 

Wouldn't sincere disbelief be preferable to insincere self-delusion?

 

God wants people to be honest and an ignorant person may be convinced that they are convinced and know and in reality they aren't, it only appears and because the bible contains much skillful use of words it happens and people are misled by others who appear to show knowledge and wisdom that is greater.

 

In order to know the bible as it was desired to be known God doesn't approve of being mastered by vanity or a desire to win a competition.

 

I'm curious to know what the explanation of this might be

 

I may be able to answer any other questions.

 

Thanks.

 

So be it.

Edited May 30, 2012 by Thomas Kelly guessed

[studiot]

It may appear there is evidence which disproves the bible, the only way to know the truth is by using the advice given, I may need to warn you, if false things are in the bible you may need to reason carefully of what is lawful. I'm restricting my speech because of the warnings in this forum.

 

 

I have no idea what the deleted reference in your original post was but your original post does not make sense at this time.

 

Was your original quotation from the Bible?

 

If so, which Bible?

 

I am also having trouble following some of your English, is this not your first language?

Edited May 30, 2012 by studiot

[Thomas Kelly guessed]

studiot,

 

I have no idea what the deleted reference in your original post was but your original post does not make sense at this time.

 

May be it will after more investigation.

 

Was your original quotation from the Bible?

 

Depends what you mean by the bible, look for the Clementine Homilies or The Recognitions of Clement.

 

I am also having trouble following some of your English, is this not your first language?

 

 

No it is my first language and I'm not sure you have enough knowledge or wisdom to judge use of language.

Edited May 30, 2012 by Thomas Kelly guessed

[CaptainPanic]

!

Moderator Note

studiot,
The link that was removed went to a part of the Bible (I think).

Unfortunately, the member Thomas Kelly guessed linked to that site for every reference (we removed multiple links in multiple threads).
He created multiple posts that were something along the lines:

What do you think about:
(some text from the Bible)
Link to religious website

We call that spam. He should consider himself lucky that he wasn't banned. If it had been a commercial link, he would have been banned on sight.

On behalf of all the mods, we're sorry that the removal of a source obstructs the discussion, but this forum is not a place where you can advertise your own websites. It is explained also in our rules (rule 2.7 specifically).

[studiot]

Sure thing Capt' I understand.

 

I would just like to know the reference so that I can look up the context.

 

Wherefore every man who wishes to be saved must become, as the Teacher said, a judge of the books written to try us. For thus He spake: 'Become experienced bankers.'

 

Although, considering the smart-alec responses to my genuine questions I may not bother.

 

I was, after all, only trying to help and to understand what had been said.

Edited May 30, 2012 by studiot

[Thomas Kelly guessed]

studiot

 

 

Sure thing Capt' I understand.

 

I would just like to know the reference so that I can look up the context.

 

 

 

Although, considering the smart-alec responses to my genuine questions I may not bother.

 

I was, after all, only trying to help and to understand what had been said.

 

 

Use this ANF08 clementine homilly schaff in a search engine.

 

Look for Homily XVIII

 

Chapter heading Chapter XX.—Some Parts of the Old Testament Written to Try Us. about 4th from bottom.

Edited May 30, 2012 by Thomas Kelly guessed

[studiot]

So it wasn't a reference from the Bible (any Bible) then.

 

What's the problem with making that clear?

[Thomas Kelly guessed]

studiot

 

 

So it wasn't a reference from the Bible (any Bible) then.

 

What's the problem with making that clear?

 

The word bible has more than one definition so I needed more information from you.

 

 

More added.

 

By one of the definitions of the word bible The Clementine Homilies and The Recognitions of Clement, ANF08, may be thought of in that name.

Edited May 30, 2012 by Thomas Kelly guessed

[studiot]

Well I meant the Christian Bible, of which there is more than one version.

 

That Bible is not really a single book but a collection of documents from different times ands places.

Different denominations of Christian include different sets of documents in their collection.

 

I had not heard of your reference being dubbed a Bible before.

 

Further by picking out your response in my post#6 was about the fact that there are some books in the Old Testament with differing accounts of the same events, because these books were written in different places.

 

It was also a good example of my comment that I did not follow your statement beyond the first clause. I wondered if the second highlighted sentence had any relevence.

Edited May 30, 2012 by studiot

[Thomas Kelly guessed]

studiot,

 

WellI meant the Christian Bible, of which there is more than one version.

 

That Bible is not really a single book but a collection of documents from different times ands places.

 

After reasoning of the history of the collection of materials for the bible, old and modern word definitions, and how books have chapters, this is difficult to explain.

 

Different denominations of Christian include different sets of documents in their collection.

 

The documents of the early church fathers contains information of different sets of collected documents so may show anyone a history of documents used.

 

I had not heard of your reference being dubbed a Bible before.

 

Both The Clementine Homilies and The Recognitions of Clement may be called bibles by definition of any standard dictionary. So the use of the word dubbed may be incorrect.

 

Further by picking out your response in my post#6 was about the fact that thereare some books in the Old Testament with differing accounts of the same events, because these books were written in different places.

 

My knowledge of these things is incomplete so I can't acknowledge what you say. One example may be the different ages of some persons when they became kings.

 

It was also a good example of my comment that I did not follow your statement beyond the first clause. I wondered if the second highlighted sentence had any relevence.

 

I'm too tired to confirm this. As you may have some knowledge of, posts are edited and sometimes wording of sentences are not enough to be sure of what was meant and people have not known of errors they have made. So may be not, or may be in my position.

Edited May 31, 2012 by Thomas Kelly guessed

[studiot]

OK, well a nice discussion but it does not take me any closer understanding what you are trying to say.

 

 

[Thomas Kelly guessed]

studiot,

 

 

OK, well a nice discussion but it does not take me any closer understanding what you are trying to say.

 

 

 

Thanks, I may only do a limited amount to increase your knowledge of language and the documents posted about.

Edited May 31, 2012 by Thomas Kelly guessed

[John Cuthber]

 

Thanks, I may only do a limited amount to increase your knowledge of language and the documents posted about.

Indeed.

[doG]

Some Parts of the Old Testament Written to Try Us

I doubt it. Feel free to prove it if you can.

[Thomas Kelly guessed]

John Cuthber,

 

Indeed.

 

Why did you put that which I looked at in post 17 ?

 

__________________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

doG,

 

 

I doubt it. Feel free to prove it if you can.

 

I was free enough and I am still.

 

Because of complications, will you seek permission from the moderators of posting evidence of an ancient book from a website ? Or I may direct you to where to read if you want.

 

 

 

Edited May 31, 2012 by Thomas Kelly guessed

[Phi for All]

Because of complications, will you seek permission from the moderators of posting evidence of an ancient book from a website ? Or I may direct you to where to read if you want.

!

Moderator Note

Thomas Kelly guessed, if you have a relevant link to a specific webpage that supports a claim you have, you are allowed to post it. When you joined and began using links to the same site for each of your posts, you looked like you were spamming to promote that site. If we were over-zealous, it's because of the sheer amount of spammers a site like this attracts. It's not our intention to cut off your source of evidence.

[John Cuthber]

Did anyone else not understand my comment on Thomas's post (#17)?

[studiot]

Thanks, I may only do a limited amount to increase your knowledge of language and the documents posted about.

 

It is a shame you have chosen not to expand on your original post since it had the potential to be a good discussion.

 

1) I assume you are referring to Clement of Alexandria, not later Popes of that name.

 

2) The Epistles of Clement were written in the 2nd century AD, just too late to be included as one of the books of the New Testament. They were never a candidate for the Old Testament.

 

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.

Edited May 31, 2012 by studiot

[Thomas Kelly guessed]

Phi for All,

 

 

!

Moderator Note

Thomas Kelly guessed, if you have a relevant link to a specific webpage that supports a claim you have, you are allowed to post it. When you joined and began using links to the same site for each of your posts, you looked like you were spamming to promote that site. If we were over-zealous, it's because of the sheer amount of spammers a site like this attracts. It's not our intention to cut off your source of evidence.

 

Thanks, I may post parts of the worded evidence with links so people may examine.

 

 

 

__________________________________________________________________________________________

 

 

 

People,

 

Speaking of my questioning of things like post 17, you may need to know that not all questions are of ignorance, some come from knowledge.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

People,

Some evidence of the reasoning. If you use the website you may want to change to the background to white by looking towards the righthand corner of the web page and clicking on the machine part symbol and making your choice. Part of

Chapter XLIII.—A Priori Argument on the Divine Attributes.

For if He lies, then who speaks truth? Or that He makes experiments as in ignorance; for then who foreknows? And if He deliberates, and changes His purpose, who is perfect in understanding and permanent in design? If He envies, who is above rivalry? If He hardens hearts, who makes wise? If He makes blind and deaf, who has given sight and hearing? If He commits pilfering, who administers justice? If He mocks, who is sincere? If He is weak, who is omnipotent? If He is unjust, who is just? If He makes evil things, who shall make good things? If He does evil, who shall do good?

http://www.ccel.org/...iv.v.xliii.html

Edited May 31, 2012 by Thomas Kelly guessed

[studiot]

Is this preaching or discussing?

[Thomas Kelly guessed]

People,

Evidence.

 

Obeying Christ,¹²⁹⁸ we learn to know what is false from the Scriptures. Moreover, being furnished by our ancestors with the truths of the Scriptures, we know that there is only one who has made the heavens and the earth, the God of the Jews, and of all who choose to worship Him. Our fathers, with pious thought, setting down a fixed belief in Him as the true God, handed down this belief to us, that we may know that if any thing is said against God, it is a falsehood.

 

http://www.ccel.org/...iv.xix.xiv.html

 

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________

People,

Evidence from different part.

Chapter XLIV.—The Same Continued.

 

"But if He desires the fruitful hill,⁹⁵⁰ whose then are all things? If He is false, who then is true? If He dwells in a tabernacle, who is without bounds? If He is fond of fat, and sacrifices, and offerings, and drink-offerings, who then is without need, and who is holy, and pure, and perfect? If He is pleased with candles and candlesticks, who then placed the luminaries in heaven? If He dwells in shadow, and darkness, and storm, and smoke, who is the light that lightens the universe? If He comes with trumpets, and shoutings, and darts, and arrows, who is the looked-for tranquillity of all? If He loves war, who then wishes peace? If He makes evil things, who makes good things? If He is without affection, who is a lover of men? If He is not faithful to His promises, who shall be trusted? If He loves the wicked, and adulterers, and murderers, who shall be a just judge?

http://www.ccel.org/....iv.v.xliv.html

Edited May 31, 2012 by Thomas Kelly guessed