Does Christ speak and how?

[tam]

May you have peace!

A question that continues to be posed to me is with regard to my bearing witness to a living and speaking Christ. How does He speak? What does that mean? How can we test that?

I imagine that one reason the questions are continually posed to me is because I cannot provide the proof that some are asking me to provide. I can only provide evidence in the form of:

a) Personal testimony from having heard Christ
b) The written testimony of or about others who have heard Christ
c) What Christ Himself is written to have said on the matter


If none of the above are acceptable to someone, then I am not sure what more that person and I would have to talk about on this particular matter. We could hopefully discuss respectfully from a point of love, reason, logic. For those who are interested...


Christ said that His sheep would hear His voice.

My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me." John 10:27

"I am the good shepherd, and I know My own and My own know Me, even as the Father knows Me and I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep. "I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will hear My voice; and they will become one flock with one shepherd.…" John 10:14-16



Written testimony about/from others who heard His voice, confirming the truth of what He said:

The Spirit told Philip, "Go to that chariot and stay near it." Acts 8:29

**
In Damascus, there was a disciple named Ananias. The Lord called to him in a vision, "Ananias!"

"Yes Lord," he answered.

The Lord told him, "Go to the house of Judas on Straight Street and ask for a man from Tarsus named Saul, for he is praying. In a vision he has seen a man named Ananias come and place his hands on him to restore his sight." (Acts 9:10,11... and it continues)

**
There is Peter's vision telling him that he should eat foods that he considered unclean, and then after his vision:

While Peter was still thinking about the vision, the Spirit (Christ) said to him, "Simon, three men are looking for you. So get up and go downstairs. Do not hesitate to go with them, for I have sent them." (Acts 10: 9-20)

**
There are of course multiple examples from Paul. The entire book of Revelation is from Christ to John. There is a warning against hardening our hearts if we hear His voice.

As has just been said: "Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as you did in the rebellion." Hebrews 3:15

Then of course there are the examples of Abraham, who heard, Noah, who heard, the prophets, who heard, Joseph, who heard, Daniel, who heard, etc, etc. Their faith is based upon the evidence of what they heard.



My own personal testimony


I did not always know that Christ spoke, and I did not always recognize that voice within me as being His. But someone else bore witness to a living speaking Christ, and it bothered me, lol. I had just ended a two year bible study with a certain denomination, and I did not want to get misled by man ever gain. But here was this person claiming that Christ spoke. If I believed this person, that they were from God, then what was wrong with me that I allowed myself to get misled yet again. On the other hand, what was wrong with me if this person did hear Christ, and I rejected them?

But soon into my dilemma (and my asking how I might know, even though I thought I was just asking myself) I heard:

Test WHAT this person is saying. Test the message. Do not pay attention to the person. Test to see if what this person is saying is true, or not. Then you will know who this person is from.


I still did not know this was Christ speaking to me. I just thought, "Oh, of course... that is what I will do."

So that is what I did. Along the way, I saw all these verses and examples and testimony that Christ does indeed speak, that God spoke also, though now speaks through Christ. In dreams, in visions, in direct words, in reminders, in opening eyes and ears to a truth that one might read, see, or hear. Once I realized that Christ is supposed to speak, I asked for ears to hear as well. Even though I did hear Him; I just did not know I heard Him. I needed to learn His voice and recognize Him.

**

I was asked how does He speak

He speaks in words. He speaks in visions (I have never had a vision that I am aware of). He speaks in dreams. He can also bring to mind something learned, read, or experienced in the past to help me see the truth in something He is teaching me. He has opened my eyes to something that is written, if I am reading the bible. He can and has read to me something that He is written to have said, so that I hear it in His voice. That was enlightening.

Sometimes when I am responding to something that someone else has asked, He will give me the words to say, or reveal something to me (as in open my heart and ears to understanding something) that I had not previously understood.


The language that He speaks is truth. He has never spoken anything to me that was not true, and that was not from love. And everything He teaches me deepens my understanding of love: His love and the love of His Father.



(As for testing the inspired expression... anything that is in conflict with what Christ teaches cannot be true. Also Christ (truth) comes from love (God), so nothing that He says will be in conflict with love. Especially since the law that is written upon our hearts in the new covenant is the law of love.)


**

I do not expect anyone to take my word for these things. I do not take the word of others for what they claim came from Christ. I explained above what I did, what I heard from Christ TO do.

If I have shared anything that helps anyone, then great. If not, then no problem. I am not the one people should be listening to if they are following or desiring to follow Christ... I can only point TO that One: Christ Jaheshua, the Holy One of Israel and Holy Spirit, the Chosen One of Jah. Christ, who is Himself, the faithful and true witness of His Father, Jah.



If one wants to know the truth of this matter themselves... then ask Christ. That is how one can confirm for themselves. Ask for ears to hear, and in the meantime DO what He has said to do, so that you prove yourself to Him. He does not have to prove Himself to us.

"If anyone loves me, they will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come and make our home with (in) them."


(Please note that He says that they will obey HIS teaching. Not man's teaching. Not religion or religious leaders, not Paul, not the law, or anyone or anything else over Him. If we love HIM... we will obey HIM. If we love someone or something else more, then we will listen to and obey that one/thing. Including if we love our religion more than Him, although we might not realize it at the time. Including if we think the bible is the Word of God, especially when even that book states that Christ is the Word of God; and Christ himself said, "You diligently search the scriptures because you think that by them you have eternal life. These are the scriptures that testify about ME, yet you refuse to come to me to have life.")



May anyone who wishes them be given ears to hear, to get a sense of these things, and to hear as the Spirit (Christ) and the bride SAY to you, "Come... take the free gift of the water of life."


Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[KenRU]

[Replying to post 16 by tam]

Tam,

Thanks for taking the time to reply.

It seems to me that what you are saying is: in order to believe that Christ speaks to me, I have to believe that he exists. But in order for me to believe he exists, I would need a reason (a very good one) to believe he exists, such as prayer working or him speaking to me. So, how do I (or anyone for that matter) escape the circular logic?

I do not speak for Tam but to point out that many Christians believe that they were compelled by the grace of GOD to come to belief while is a state of rejection and resistance...

Support for this is found in the story of the Saul to Paul conversion and in my own experience in which I could only recognize the work of GOD for me and the words of GOD in my thoughts in hindsight after I gave up resisting.

I do not share your belief in the biblical accuracy of pre-conception sin. So, if I were to believe that god compels us to believe, than I must wonder why I and many others weren't compelled?

And wouldn't this violate free will?

[H.sapiens]

[Replying to post 16 by tam]

Tam,

Thanks for taking the time to reply.

It seems to me that what you are saying is: in order to believe that Christ speaks to me, I have to believe that he exists. But in order for me to believe he exists, I would need a reason (a very good one) to believe he exists, such as prayer working or him speaking to me. So, how do I (or anyone for that matter) escape the circular logic?

I do not speak for Tam but to point out that many Christians believe that they were compelled by the grace of GOD to come to belief while is a state of rejection and resistance...

Support for this is found in the story of the Saul to Paul conversion and in my own experience in which I could only recognize the work of GOD for me and the words of GOD in my thoughts in hindsight after I gave up resisting.

This is true, but could as reasonably (I suspect more reasonably) be interpreted as a common way in which people attempt to recover from mental perturbations, it may even be genetically coded for, across a continuum of course.

[Clownboat]

Clownboat, you quoted the part of this thread in which I responded to Kenru asking how he could hear Christ.

That question did not refer to whether or not Christs speaks... but how one would hear Him (assuming that He is alive and does speak).

If you are referring to an A-C list that is not in the OP, then I'm afraid I don't recall such a list.

Now there is something that you have said, that some other atheists have said, which I have always found quite odd.

I'm an atheists now?

Are you not?

Nope, never have been either.

Clownboat said: You on the other hand seem OK with just picking concepts to decide to believe in without first doing your due diligence (is the thing real?).

TAm said: What makes you think a person of faith has not done 'due diligence'? Because they have come to a different conclusion than you have? Because they cannot prove it to you?

Clownboat said: Because after having been a born again, spirit filled, street evangelizing Christian for over 2 decades, my experiences tell me that.

How does that make you an expert on anyone other than you?

When it comes to my born again experience that went on for over 2 decades, Tam, there is no better expert than myself. Remember please that I was talking about 'my experience' as a born again Christian.

I am not what you once were, no matter how much you seem to want to place me in that category.

Tam, when I talk about my experiences, I'm not talking about you. And as far as you not being what I once was, I only ever remember referencing how I use to and you still do shy away from the word 'religion'. You now, and my previous self preferred different words, like 'relationship'. This in no way is an attempt to place you in a category.

And according to your own words, you were never spirit filled, because, again according to your own words, there is no spirit that exists to have filled you.

I was born again, spirit filled, drunk in the Holy Ghost, missionary and street evangelizing Christian.
Semantics cannot change this fact.

I'm also aware, as should you that most people have religious beliefs based off of geography. Do you honestly think you would be a Christian if you were born and lived in Iran? I'm an odds guy, so I believe you would be a Muslim. If religious believers did their due diligence, then geography would not be the deciding factor for most.

I am not an 'odds' guy. Even so, 'odds' would be that there IS a God or spiritual realm of some sort, that inspired people of all cultures and all times to seek out the spiritual. Rather than it just be some random thing that all cultures in all times have just happened to believe in.

You certainly just evidenced that you are not an odds guy. Trust me, I believe you.

You see, you would have a point if people of all cultures had a similar idea of what a god is. The fact that they don't, does not increase the odds of there being a god behind all the differing gods, it does the opposite and also points to there being a motive behind them being invented.

There are Christians in other parts of the world. There are also people who grow up in one religion and switch it later to a different religion after doing 'due diligence' (or for some other reason); and there are some who just get out of religion altogether but who have faith; and there are some who grow up religious and become atheists.

I'm not ignoring these things, but you failed to address the actual geography argument that what religion you belong to generally stems from your geographic location on this planet. There are exceptions to every rule obviously.

So while it may be rare, people can and do reject what they were born into and/or what is popular.

It is rare, and yes, there are exceptions.

But just because you happened to be born into a place where Christ is believed upon, does not mean that is a valid reason that you should reject that belief.

You get me wrong. You see Tam, I don't need to disprove any religion. They need to be shown true first. Geography is not a reason to reject a god concept. It does affect which one people choose though ironically.

I might be a muslim (if only on the surface) if I were born into a Muslim county that did not allow one TO choose, or give one an opportunity to freely learn other faiths as well. But then, that same thing would apply to you.

This applies to everyone. It is why the geography argument is sound.

The fact is, you are convinced that your specific god concept is true. Will you be intellectually honest and now believe in alien visits or Big Foot because others have chosen to believe that they are truly real? I assume you will not believe in alien visits or Big Foot until you are fist shown that they are real to begin with.

I do not have a god concept; and I don't know how you can read this thread, or even this page and not realize what - or rather who - I say my faith is based upon.

Is your god concept not the Christ that you claim speaks to you? This question is rhetorical by the way.

My God is the Father of Christ. My Lord is Christ.

Therefore, the Father of Christ is your god concept. You can't say you don't have a god concept and then go on to explain who your god concept is and hope to be taken seriously.

Neither of them are a concept.

Please provide evidence for this claim.

I understand that to you they are a concept, but why should I use the language of a person who does not know them, to describe them?

Because I fear I know them exactly as well as you know them, if you get my meaning.

So there is no intellectual dishonesty involved in not believing in Big Foot just because others believe in Big Foot. Nor am I telling any of you that you should believe just because I believe.

Please pay attention to your words:
"If you truly want to come to Christ,"

How can a person truly want to come to Christ, Big Foot or alien encounters if they are not first shown to be real?
If 'truly wanting' had anything to do with it, then what do you have to say to the people that believe in Big Foot? I assume they have a want to believe for some reason. How is having a want important for Christ, but not for Big Foot? It doesn't seem that you are being intellectually honest about this.

Perhaps it seems that way to you because you jumped into a conversation that was a specific response to a specific question asked. Which question was not... 'how do I know Christ is real'... but instead WAS... "how do I hear Christ'.

You just cannot answer the questions posed to you now can you? I now see you resorting to placing the blame on me. Either way, to first believe something is real before finding out if something is real is to put the cart before the horse.

CB wrote: I truly believe that if you lived in Iran and you asked Allah to give you ears to hear, you would be claiming to speak to Mohammed right now.

Notice how even if I truly wanted to believe that this above was true, that it doesn't/wouldn't affect whether it really is true or not.

Tam wrote: Of course not. But who is saying if someone truly believes something, that something must be true?

CB wrote: No one that I'm aware of, even though you have now alluded to it twice. What you did say was: "If you truly want to come to Christ"
So I ask you, what does truly wanting something have to do with anything? I can truly want Big Foot to be real. I can also truly want to come to Christ. What I cannot do is figure out why you invented this "you must truly want Christ" first idea, nor why such an idea would have any merit.

You are equating truly wanting someone to be real - to - truly wanting to come to someone. Truly wanting to come to someone assumes at least the possibility that this someone is real.

Please explain how it is even possible to truly want to come to someone when you are not convinced that said someone is real.
I'm asking 'please'. No need to just write me off as an atheist or blame me for a lack of understanding. Just answer the question if you can.

If you do not truly want something, why would you ask for it?

I'm not sure. Who suggest that you should ask for things that you don't want?

If you don't really want what you have asked for, the Spirit will know because you will resist Him. You might still receive what you have asked for, but it might be wise to be sure that you want what it is you are asking for.

I had Christ and I had (have technically) the Holy Spirit. I served Christ and the Christian god for over 2 decades. What you say above has no meaning for me.

Note that the second part of the a,b,c (as to the question Ken asked) was for you to prove yourself... if you truly want to know Christ and God, to hear Christ, then you will do what they have said to do. And if you are not willing to do that, then did you truly want to know them? If you are not willing to do what they have said to do in order to receive what you have asked for, why should you receive what you have asked for?

I'm sorry Tam, but this is more bad logic.
You just said that if you want to know Christ and to hear Christ, then you will do what they have said to do.
How can we know what is being told when we cannot yet hear? This seems to be more cart before the horse.

With few exceptions that I know of(Paul/Saul), if you do not truly want to hear Him, and that means if you do not truly want to know Truth, then you will not. My Lord does not force Himself upon people. He comes to those who seek Him. Hence, seek, knock, ask.

This is not very convincing Tam. You are basically saying, that what you say is true except for when it is not.

Also, if I was the type of person that was prone to anger, I would probably me a bit miffed by your insinuation that I didn't want Christ, or that I didn't knock and ask. The begging and pleading and sincere tears while praying for god to make himself real for years really happened.
What you say is said out of ignorance.

If you really heard from Christ, why are your arguments not convincing (what you say is true except for when it is not) and why are they made out of ignorance (I'm an atheists and wasn't sincere)?

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 33 by Clownboat]

Also, if I was the type of person that was prone to anger, I would probably me a bit miffed by your insinuation that I didn't want Christ, or that I didn't knock and ask. The begging and pleading and sincere tears while praying for god to make himself real for years really happened.
What you say is said out of ignorance.

Second this. I remember as a child having a framed picture of Jesus Christ (the one with the firey bleeding heart, it looked 99% like this one



and crying and praying to Jesus a lot. Especially a few times after I stopped believing at 12. Not once did I get a response like what tam describes. I might as well have prayed to my bedroom wall for all the good it did.

[tam]

[Replying to post 16 by tam]

Tam,

Thanks for taking the time to reply.

It seems to me that what you are saying is: in order to believe that Christ speaks to me, I have to believe that he exists. But in order for me to believe he exists, I would need a reason (a very good one) to believe he exists, such as prayer working or him speaking to me. So, how do I (or anyone for that matter) escape the circular logic?

As Riku said earlier, I'd like the find the truth first.

It makes no sense to me to just believe something because someone says so to. In fact, I'd suggest that doing so is a very bad idea.

all the best

Did I misquote your question then? I did not realize you were asking how you could believe that Christ speaks to you.

I thought you asked how you could hear Christ.

That is the question that I answered.



**

Quite honestly, and this is not specifically for you Ken, but for anyone: all that I can do is bear witness to Christ, share as I have learned and continue to learn from Him, and so also answer what questions I am able. I can reason with some of you; engage in discussion. You asked how you could hear Christ, I answered that question.

But what any of you do with any of this is entirely up to you; and I am aware that faith is not the possession of every man.


If what some of you are looking for first is a sign of some sort, then I cannot help you with that. I did not look for a sign. I would not have known what to trust as a sign, and what to realize is a coincidence. I just followed the truth, including that which I heard in what Christ taught and spoke and did. I loved Him, I heard truth in Him and in His words, and I wanted to know Him, follow Him, obey Him. Even that love was a shadow of the love I have for Him now that I know Him and have heard His voice.



Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[ttruscott]

I do not share your belief in the biblical accuracy of pre-conception sin. So, if I were to believe that god compels us to believe, than I must wonder why I and many others weren't compelled?

Sure, no problem...
In my theology some chose to make themselves eternally sinful by rejecting HIS deity and HIS promise of salvation, wanting nothing to do with HIM and others accepted HIS deity and HIS promise of salvation from sin, becoming the elect, but then idolized the eternally sinful over GOD making themselves to be sinners in HIS sight.

So, for those sinners who asked for and who put themselves under HIS promise of salvation from sin, HE goes against their rebellious sin nature and brings them to repentance to fulfill that promise. This sometimes takes till the end of a long life.

And wouldn't this violate free will?

It would be axiomatic that if HE gave us free will HE also gave us the promise, overtly or implied, that HE would not violate our free will, yes. For the sinful elect, HE is not going against their free will but against their sinful enslaved will to bring them back to their first free will decision. But for the eternally elect, since they rejected any and all interference in their choice from HIM, HE is indeed obliged to ignore their plight and so will not compel them to repent.

It is the truth that compels the unbelieving sinful elect to then believe. The eternally evil have a deep commitment to their own lies, they will never accept the truth in a way that changes their natures again. Even when they cannot escape the truth, they repress it from their minds so as to go on with their sin.

That is why they are called eternally sinful. There are other layers to their inability to be saved but since you only asked about free will, I will end here.

[ttruscott]

I was born again, spirit filled, drunk in the Holy Ghost, missionary and street evangelizing Christian.
Semantics cannot change this fact.

I too find this a little disturbing and must believe you have something wrong...
Would You characterize yourself as one of the people of the parable of the seeds: Matt 13:20 The seed falling on rocky ground refers to someone who hears the word and at once receives it with joy. 21 But since they have no root, they last only a short time. When trouble or persecution comes because of the word, they quickly fall away. 22 The seed falling among the thorns refers to someone who hears the word, but the worries of this life and the deceitfulness of wealth choke the word, making it unfruitful. who fell away due to troubles or worries or wealth?

There is much debate of course about whether these seeds were indeed spirit filled. While I do not share a common filling with the Pentecostal manner I'm curious - are you also willing to share what this filling felt like and how it was expressed as different from being an ordinary believer?

I'm also aware, as should you that most people have religious beliefs based off of geography. Do you honestly think you would be a Christian if you were born and lived in Iran? ... the actual geography argument that what religion you belong to generally stems from your geographic location on this planet.

The idea that GOD puts HIS elect people into Jewish (OT) and Western (NT) cultures geographically would also be an answer to the geographical problem against the suggestion that people only believe a certain way because of the culture they are born into. IF in fact we chose our 'religion' before earthly life, I see no problem with HIM putting all those with a Hindu bent together and all those with an animist bent together etc.

Of course it is harder for those who believe our creation is our conception and that the sinful elect (those who will become believers) are randomly scattered on earth...

[tam]

Clownboat, you quoted the part of this thread in which I responded to Kenru asking how he could hear Christ.

That question did not refer to whether or not Christs speaks... but how one would hear Him (assuming that He is alive and does speak).

If you are referring to an A-C list that is not in the OP, then I'm afraid I don't recall such a list.

My apologies. The OP lists an a,b,c. But the recent discussion going on, which you quoted part of a response to, was post 16, and I wrote that out as first, second, third.

So hopefully that is cleared up.

If you have questions specifically about the OP, then go ahead and ask them.

Now there is something that you have said, that some other atheists have said, which I have always found quite odd.

I'm an atheists now?

Are you not?

Nope, never have been either.

Okay then. What you have said, which I have heard also from atheists, is something that I find quite odd.

Clownboat said: You on the other hand seem OK with just picking concepts to decide to believe in without first doing your due diligence (is the thing real?).

TAm said: What makes you think a person of faith has not done 'due diligence'? Because they have come to a different conclusion than you have? Because they cannot prove it to you?

Clownboat said: Because after having been a born again, spirit filled, street evangelizing Christian for over 2 decades, my experiences tell me that.

How does that make you an expert on anyone other than you?

When it comes to my born again experience that went on for over 2 decades, Tam, there is no better expert than myself. Remember please that I was talking about 'my experience' as a born again Christian.

Sure. But you were using your experience on expertise on YOU, to imply that "I" did not do 'due diligence'.

I am not what you once were, no matter how much you seem to want to place me in that category.

Tam, when I talk about my experiences, I'm not talking about you. And as far as you not being what I once was, I only ever remember referencing how I use to and you still do shy away from the word 'religion'.

I do not shy away from the word religion. I shy away from religion. Which I qualify with you for the sake of staying on track, with the word organized.

You now, and my previous self preferred different words, like 'relationship'. This in no way is an attempt to place you in a category.

Sure, but again, you were using your experience and knowledge to make a statement about me.

And according to your own words, you were never spirit filled, because, again according to your own words, there is no spirit that exists to have filled you.

I was born again, spirit filled, drunk in the Holy Ghost, missionary and street evangelizing Christian.
Semantics cannot change this fact.

It is not semantics.

But lets start with me asking you some questions.

Do you believe there is holy spirit, for a person to be filled with?

I'm also aware, as should you that most people have religious beliefs based off of geography. Do you honestly think you would be a Christian if you were born and lived in Iran? I'm an odds guy, so I believe you would be a Muslim. If religious believers did their due diligence, then geography would not be the deciding factor for most.

I am not an 'odds' guy. Even so, 'odds' would be that there IS a God or spiritual realm of some sort, that inspired people of all cultures and all times to seek out the spiritual. Rather than it just be some random thing that all cultures in all times have just happened to believe in.

You certainly just evidenced that you are not an odds guy. Trust me, I believe you.

Okay.

You see, you would have a point if people of all cultures had a similar idea of what a god is. The fact that they don't, does not increase the odds of there being a god behind all the differing gods, it does the opposite and also points to there being a motive behind them being invented.

I see it differently. I see it as all of them starting out in one place with one God... and throughout time and history, etc, different god concepts developed and emerged, based upon what people wanted to be true. Some would have exploited that and so created religions.

A de-evolution, so to speak, until Christ came to reveal the Truth from the beginning. Nations before Israel worshiped God Most High until they too went astray. There are similar themes maintained in all religions, as all of them carry some truth (from the beginning even).

Chinese temple has two dragons standing guard. Seraphs (angels) are dragons (fiery, flying serpents) and it is angels/seraphs/dragons that guard the way back to the tree of Life.

Abraham was called out of the East.

The Egyptians buried their dead under the pyramids (altars), expecting a resurrection of the dead; hence preservation of bodies; possessions being buried with them as well.

Just a couple of examples.



For an example that everyone should be able to get a sense of with regard to how new religions and 'god concepts' can be developed from just one:

Christianity started with Christ - whether you believe he was just an itinerant preacher or the Son of God. From that starting point, over just two thousand years, how many different versions do we have today? How many different "Jesus'" are 'known' today? How many sects; how many denominations? This is what happens when people do not remain in the Truth, but instead start adding to or taking away from.

There are Christians in other parts of the world. There are also people who grow up in one religion and switch it later to a different religion after doing 'due diligence' (or for some other reason); and there are some who just get out of religion altogether but who have faith; and there are some who grow up religious and become atheists.

I'm not ignoring these things, but you failed to address the actual geography argument that what religion you belong to generally stems from your geographic location on this planet. There are exceptions to every rule obviously.

But I don't disagree with you that what religion you belong to generally stems from your geographic location on the planet.

So while it may be rare, people can and do reject what they were born into and/or what is popular.

It is rare, and yes, there are exceptions.

So we are agreed on this point. Therefore, to assume that I have not done due diligence was perhaps a bit presumptuous on your behalf?

But just because you happened to be born into a place where Christ is believed upon, does not mean that is a valid reason that you should reject that belief.

You get me wrong. You see Tam, I don't need to disprove any religion. They need to be shown true first. Geography is not a reason to reject a god concept. It does affect which one people choose though ironically.

I was speaking in general. Being born into a place that is predominantly Christian (or Muslim or Hindu) is not a valid reason to accept it as truth, nor a valid reason to reject it as truth.

It should stand or fall on its own merits.

I might be a muslim (if only on the surface) if I were born into a Muslim county that did not allow one TO choose, or give one an opportunity to freely learn other faiths as well. But then, that same thing would apply to you.

This applies to everyone. It is why the geography argument is sound.

The fact is, you are convinced that your specific god concept is true. Will you be intellectually honest and now believe in alien visits or Big Foot because others have chosen to believe that they are truly real? I assume you will not believe in alien visits or Big Foot until you are fist shown that they are real to begin with.

I do not have a god concept; and I don't know how you can read this thread, or even this page and not realize what - or rather who - I say my faith is based upon.

Is your god concept not the Christ that you claim speaks to you? This question is rhetorical by the way.

My God is the Father of Christ. My Lord is Christ.

Therefore, the Father of Christ is your god concept. You can't say you don't have a god concept and then go on to explain who your god concept is and hope to be taken seriously.

Please define concept how you are using it.

Neither of them are a concept.

Please provide evidence for this claim.

I have provided evidence I have (been given). I accept that god is a concept to you (depending upon how you are defining this word, concept,), but not to me.

I understand that to you they are a concept, but why should I use the language of a person who does not know them, to describe them?

Because I fear I know them exactly as well as you know them, if you get my meaning.

I get your meaning. So you should be able to understand why I have a hard time with your claim of having once been filled with holy spirit, which would have been given to you by Christ.

So there is no intellectual dishonesty involved in not believing in Big Foot just because others believe in Big Foot. Nor am I telling any of you that you should believe just because I believe.

Please pay attention to your words:
"If you truly want to come to Christ,"

How can a person truly want to come to Christ, Big Foot or alien encounters if they are not first shown to be real?
If 'truly wanting' had anything to do with it, then what do you have to say to the people that believe in Big Foot? I assume they have a want to believe for some reason. How is having a want important for Christ, but not for Big Foot? It doesn't seem that you are being intellectually honest about this.

Perhaps it seems that way to you because you jumped into a conversation that was a specific response to a specific question asked. Which question was not... 'how do I know Christ is real'... but instead WAS... "how do I hear Christ'.

You just cannot answer the questions posed to you now can you? I now see you resorting to placing the blame on me. Either way, to first believe something is real before finding out if something is real is to put the cart before the horse.

Because faith is something you have or do not have, a gift from God. It is not something I can give to you.

So I don't have an answer for your questions, other than to say that if you want to know Christ, if you want to be drawn to Him, to be given faith, then ask.

CB wrote: I truly believe that if you lived in Iran and you asked Allah to give you ears to hear, you would be claiming to speak to Mohammed right now.

Notice how even if I truly wanted to believe that this above was true, that it doesn't/wouldn't affect whether it really is true or not.

Tam wrote: Of course not. But who is saying if someone truly believes something, that something must be true?

CB wrote: No one that I'm aware of, even though you have now alluded to it twice. What you did say was: "If you truly want to come to Christ"
So I ask you, what does truly wanting something have to do with anything? I can truly want Big Foot to be real. I can also truly want to come to Christ. What I cannot do is figure out why you invented this "you must truly want Christ" first idea, nor why such an idea would have any merit.

You are equating truly wanting someone to be real - to - truly wanting to come to someone. Truly wanting to come to someone assumes at least the possibility that this someone is real.

Please explain how it is even possible to truly want to come to someone when you are not convinced that said someone is real.

I have no idea. I have never been in that position. But then, if yo do not want to come to someone, why would you be upset or bothered that you cannot come to them? (the 'you' is general here)

I'm asking 'please'. No need to just write me off as an atheist or blame me for a lack of understanding. Just answer the question if you can.

I have never written you off or said that you cannot understand. I have no control over those things. Why not ask these questions of Christ if you have holy spirit from Him? And if you do not believe He exists, then what do you care what I have to say as i learned from Him?

If you do not truly want something, why would you ask for it?

I'm not sure. Who suggest that you should ask for things that you don't want?

Are you not here calling me to task for prefacing my words to Ken with... "if you truly want to come to Christ, if you truly want to hear Him."

If you don't really want what you have asked for, the Spirit will know because you will resist Him. You might still receive what you have asked for, but it might be wise to be sure that you want what it is you are asking for.

I had Christ and I had (have technically) the Holy Spirit. I served Christ and the Christian god for over 2 decades. What you say above has no meaning for me.

Then you do believe that Christ and God exist, and that there is such thing as holy spirit?

Note that the second part of the a,b,c (as to the question Ken asked) was for you to prove yourself... if you truly want to know Christ and God, to hear Christ, then you will do what they have said to do. And if you are not willing to do that, then did you truly want to know them? If you are not willing to do what they have said to do in order to receive what you have asked for, why should you receive what you have asked for?

I'm sorry Tam, but this is more bad logic.
You just said that if you want to know Christ and to hear Christ, then you will do what they have said to do.
How can we know what is being told when we cannot yet hear? This seems to be more cart before the horse.

You can at least start with what Christ is written to have said and done.

With few exceptions that I know of(Paul/Saul), if you do not truly want to hear Him, and that means if you do not truly want to know Truth, then you will not. My Lord does not force Himself upon people. He comes to those who seek Him. Hence, seek, knock, ask.

This is not very convincing Tam. You are basically saying, that what you say is true except for when it is not.

I have no idea how you got that from what I said.

Also, if I was the type of person that was prone to anger, I would probably me a bit miffed by your insinuation that I didn't want Christ, or that I didn't knock and ask. The begging and pleading and sincere tears while praying for god to make himself real for years really happened.

I never said it did not.

I may question who it is you were actually asking and praying to, but that is no more than you questioning that I actually hear and know Christ.

Although if you were/are indeed filled with holy spirit as you say, then He did answer you long ago.

What you say is said out of ignorance.

Just trying to reason through your responses. Test whether or not you were/are false or true, because many false apostles have gone out into the world, and Christ warned about false Christ and false prophets. If there are false christs and false apostles, and there are those who follow them, then there are false Christians as well.

Not everyone who says they are a Christian IS a Christian.

Even Christ said he did not know, and in fact never knew, some who called him, "Lord, Lord."

Again, I am not expecting you to take my word for it; so surely you would not have a problem with me not simply taking your word for it.

If you really heard from Christ, why are your arguments not convincing (what you say is true except for when it is not) and why are they made out of ignorance (I'm an atheists and wasn't sincere)?

[/quote]

Christ Himself was rejected by more than those who accepted Him. Indeed, all but the twelve left Him at one point. A student is not greater than his/her master.


In addition to that, I am sometimes unclear in my wording.

But just on its own, someone not being convinced does not mean anything. Because even Christ was rejected, and He said that we would be as well.


I don't fall back on that as an excuse; I just state it because that is what He taught. Which as a former Christian, you would already know.


Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[puddleglum]

The key to knowing God's will is willingness to obey him. Jesus said that if we are willing to obey God we will know whether or not he speaks for him.

So Jesus answered them, “My teaching is not mine, but his who sent me. If anyone's will is to do God's will, he will know whether the teaching is from God or whether I am speaking on my own authority.
(John 7:16-17 ESV)

Some people may think they are willing to obey God when in fact they are not. That is why they don't know whether the words of Jesus are true.

[Clownboat]

Okay then. What you have said, which I have heard also from atheists, is something that I find quite odd.

What I find odd is this incessant need for so many religious folk to create 'us vs them'.
Christians vs Atheists.
Christians vs Muslims.
Christians vs Gays.
You have your religious beliefs and that is fine, but we are all humans sharing this planet. Can't we be on the same team?

Sure. But you were using your experience on expertise on YOU, to imply that "I" did not do 'due diligence'.

Tam, I don't know you nor do I know if you did your due diligence or not. I do however have over 2 decades of being a Christian where I witnessed no such due diligence. My friends all shared the belief that their parents had. ALL of them if I were to ask who wrote Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, ALL would say Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. (It has now become a small hobby to ask this and these types of questions. It sheds a lot of light on how they and I for a time just believed what we were told without first doing our due diligence).
Consider evolution, do you ever hear non religious people asking how a monkey gave birth to a man? Now ask a religious person that has not done their due diligence...
The examples of people not doing their due diligence were just to great for the 2 decades that I was a believer.

For all I know Tam, you have studied evolution and other religious options, but you are not included in my 2 decade sample size. Please stop trying to insert yourself.

I do not shy away from the word religion. I shy away from religion. Which I qualify with you for the sake of staying on track, with the word organized.

I think you just said enough. I don't believe I need to say more.

You now, and my previous self preferred different words, like 'relationship'. This in no way is an attempt to place you in a category.

Sure, but again, you were using your experience and knowledge to make a statement about me.

Tam, claiming not to be religious but to be in a relationship is something I use to say as well. This is something we have in common. Something I have some very personal experience with (not wanting to be part of a religion).
Have you changed magically and now want to be part of a religion or something. If not, your complaints are miss aimed I believe. This would not be a category, it would be something we had/have in common.

It is not semantics.

But lets start with me asking you some questions.

Do you believe there is holy spirit, for a person to be filled with?

Yes I did. I can still speak in tongues mind you.
I'm now open to there being a holy spirit, but I will do my due diligence before just placing my faith in what people say about it or a Christ.

You see, you would have a point if people of all cultures had a similar idea of what a god is. The fact that they don't, does not increase the odds of there being a god behind all the differing gods, it does the opposite and also points to there being a motive behind them being invented.

I see it differently. I see it as all of them starting out in one place with one God... and throughout time and history, etc, different god concepts developed and emerged, based upon what people wanted to be true. Some would have exploited that and so created religions.

All these thousands of god concepts created by man about differing gods that cannot all exist (due to the claims made about them), and that for some reason points you to a singular god? I must ask, have you done your due diligence with old religions? How did the Mayans for example get from the Garden of Eden side of the world to South America and why did their gods vary so much from your god? Again, if what you said was true (they all stemmed from one original god), then we would see similarities with religious beliefs. What do we have in reality though.... gods vomiting up the earth and such.

A de-evolution, so to speak, until Christ came to reveal the Truth from the beginning. Nations before Israel worshiped God Most High until they too went astray. There are similar themes maintained in all religions, as all of them carry some truth (from the beginning even).

Quite the claim. You will need to do your due diligence before it can be believed though.

Chinese temple has two dragons standing guard. Seraphs (angels) are dragons (fiery, flying serpents) and it is angels/seraphs/dragons that guard the way back to the tree of Life.

Abraham was called out of the East.

The Egyptians buried their dead under the pyramids (altars), expecting a resurrection of the dead; hence preservation of bodies; possessions being buried with them as well.

Just a couple of examples.

How are these examples and not just Apophenia?
I trust that if I showed an example of how the Egyptian gods differed from your god that you would not find that significant. But here you link the resurrections between the two competing religions instead of identifying that people fear what they don't understand (like what happens to us when we die), and thus thousands of religions all around the world were invented to make these fears go away (they also provided power and control for the person/people making claims on behalf of the god).
For example, "god wants us to go to war".

Is it more likely that religions provide us with a place to go when they die to alleviate a human fear, or because they all stemmed from one god, and we should now expect them to be extremely different animals?

For an example that everyone should be able to get a sense of with regard to how new religions and 'god concepts' can be developed from just one:

Christianity started with Christ - whether you believe he was just an itinerant preacher or the Son of God. From that starting point, over just two thousand years, how many different versions do we have today? How many different "Jesus'" are 'known' today? How many sects; how many denominations? This is what happens when people do not remain in the Truth, but instead start adding to or taking away from.

Many different version, but what you are leaving out is the possibility that Christianity is just an adaptation from an even older religion itself.

Again, have you done your due diligence on the ancient Canaanite religion?
How about the Epic of Gilgamesh and other religions that are older than Christianity? Where was the Christian god before the Hebrews claimed that there was one? It doesn't seem like he was with the Mayans, Aztecs or American Indians. What about the ancient religions of Africa and Australia? How are they older and why are they older if the god of the Hebrews is the one true god?

I'm not ignoring these things, but you failed to address the actual geography argument that what religion you belong to generally stems from your geographic location on this planet. There are exceptions to every rule obviously.

But I don't disagree with you that what religion you belong to generally stems from your geographic location on the planet.

Great. I use this agreement to further my 'most don't seem to do their due diligence' thought that I noticed while growing up and have put forth in this thread.

So we are agreed on this point. Therefore, to assume that I have not done due diligence was perhaps a bit presumptuous on your behalf?

Please stop trying to make this about you.
When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. - Socrates
Tam, by your words here, I get an impression about your level of due diligence, but I do not claim to actually know. Now, my 2 decades of having a relationship with Christ, now that I do know about.

You get me wrong. You see Tam, I don't need to disprove any religion. They need to be shown true first. Geography is not a reason to reject a god concept. It does affect which one people choose though ironically.

I was speaking in general. Being born into a place that is predominantly Christian (or Muslim or Hindu) is not a valid reason to accept it as truth, nor a valid reason to reject it as truth.

It should stand or fall on its own merits.

Agreed. You can stop evidencing my lack of due diligence claim anytime now. It's appreciated though, but we seem to agree that people more often then not find their religion based off of their geography, not because they have done their due diligence and found the one true god. Tam, being unknown and not being commented on.

I might be a muslim (if only on the surface) if I were born into a Muslim county that did not allow one TO choose, or give one an opportunity to freely learn other faiths as well. But then, that same thing would apply to you.

This applies to everyone. It is why the geography argument is sound.

My God is the Father of Christ. My Lord is Christ.

Therefore, the Father of Christ is your god concept. You can't say you don't have a god concept and then go on to explain who your god concept is and hope to be taken seriously.

Please define concept how you are using it.

con·cept
noun
an abstract idea; a general notion.
- Muslims have a concept/idea (see definition above) of what the one true god is. His name is Allah and he had Mohammed as his prophet.
- Some Africans have a concept/idea of a god that creates storms, his name is Shango and was once a great warrior.
- The Aboriginals have a concept/idea of a god of fertility. Her name is Birrahgnooloo.
- Correct me if I'm wrong, but you have a god concept/idea that there is the one true god (you pick the Hebrew god), and he sent his son Christ to the world and this Christ speaks to you.

These are all concepts/ideas about gods.

Because I fear I know them exactly as well as you know them, if you get my meaning.

I get your meaning. So you should be able to understand why I have a hard time with your claim of having once been filled with holy spirit, which would have been given to you by Christ.

Of course you have a hard time with it. It is uncomfortable knowing that there are genuine people that had very similar beliefs to your own that have later found them to not be true.

Perhaps it seems that way to you because you jumped into a conversation that was a specific response to a specific question asked. Which question was not... 'how do I know Christ is real'... but instead WAS... "how do I hear Christ'.

You just cannot answer the questions posed to you now can you? I now see you resorting to placing the blame on me. Either way, to first believe something is real before finding out if something is real is to put the cart before the horse.

Because faith is something you have or do not have, a gift from God. It is not something I can give to you.

Do you due diligence here please, and explain how any religion on this planet could be created and followed without 'faith' being involved.

Yes, you embrace faith as if it is something great like I once did. I now understand that a false religion MUST have faith and notice that if a religion was actually true, faith would not be a requirement.

So I don't have an answer for your questions, other than to say that if you want to know Christ, if you want to be drawn to Him, to be given faith, then ask.

I'm not sure how I can correct your ignorance here. You just do not know, nor understand what I went through trying to keep my beliefs. The prayers for faith and the tears for god to make himself known to me went on for years. I'm not alone here either, other people on this site had very similar experiences.

I have never written you off or said that you cannot understand. I have no control over those things. Why not ask these questions of Christ if you have holy spirit from Him?

Gah, you are literally asking my why I don't due things I literally did for years. I tell you I did, and you just seem to stick your head in the sand and tell me to do it again.

Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. - Albert Einstein

And if you do not believe He exists, then what do you care what I have to say as i learned from Him?

If we were not on a debate site debating, be sure that I would not care what you have to say.

If you do not truly want something, why would you ask for it?

I'm not sure. Who suggest that you should ask for things that you don't want?

Are you not here calling me to task for prefacing my words to Ken with... "if you truly want to come to Christ, if you truly want to hear Him."

No, I'm pointing out the futility of it.
Again, what difference would it make if I 'truly want Big Foot' to be true? Would it affect the real world.
What if I truly want alien visits to be real, would that affect the real world?
Now what if I truly want Christ to be real? Somehow that magically affects the real world?
I see it more like... you must first be convinced that you are sick (original sin) before I can sell you the medicine (Christ died for your sins). Convincing someone that they are sick and need medicine affects the real world. This is what 'you must first truly want Christ' reminds me of.

Then you do believe that Christ and God exist, and that there is such thing as holy spirit?

I did, more fervently then you will ever know.

I'm sorry Tam, but this is more bad logic.
You just said that if you want to know Christ and to hear Christ, then you will do what they have said to do.
How can we know what is being told when we cannot yet hear? This seems to be more cart before the horse.

You can at least start with what Christ is written to have said and done.

Why not the Quran or the Bhagavad Gita? The Gita is older after all.
You being convinced that you have it right is just not very good information for me to make a decision on. Besides, I've read the Bible from cover to cover, I went to Christian school and I went to church at least 6 times a week. I believe I have done my due diligence.

This is not very convincing Tam. You are basically saying, that what you say is true except for when it is not.

I have no idea how you got that from what I said.

That is strange. You said: " if you do not truly want to hear Him... then you will not". The go on to reference where Paul/Saul did not want to hear/know him, but then god made it happen anyway.

I may question who it is you were actually asking and praying to, but that is no more than you questioning that I actually hear and know Christ.

I prayed through Christ to my father in heaven.
To compare praying to a god to hearing voices is not an accurate comparison Tam.

Although if you were/are indeed filled with holy spirit as you say, then He did answer you long ago.

And if you could actually hear Christ, then you would know what the piece of paper on my desk says. It's still there and has been for well over a month.

What you say is said out of ignorance.

Just trying to reason through your responses. Test whether or not you were/are false or true, because many false apostles have gone out into the world, and Christ warned about false Christ and false prophets. If there are false christs and false apostles, and there are those who follow them, then there are false Christians as well.

Tam, you have zero choice in this matter. For you, I MUST have been a false Christian. Facts be damned.

Again, I am not expecting you to take my word for it; so surely you would not have a problem with me not simply taking your word for it.

This is silly.
You actually think claims like, 'I was a Christian for 2 decades' is equal to a claim that 'you hear the voice of a god speaking to you'? These are not equal claims Tam and you should know it.

If you really heard from Christ, why are your arguments not convincing (what you say is true except for when it is not) and why are they made out of ignorance (I'm an atheists and wasn't sincere)?

Christ Himself was rejected by more than those who accepted Him. Indeed, all but the twelve left Him at one point. A student is not greater than his/her master.

This does not explain why your arguments and reasoning fail here.
You claim to hear the voice of your great master, but it does not come through here.

In addition to that, I am sometimes unclear in my wording.

Just type what he says to you, word for word. Humans I expect to be unclear at times, all powerful god concepts, not so much.

But just on its own, someone not being convinced does not mean anything. Because even Christ was rejected, and He said that we would be as well.

This is some odd thinking IMO.
What it creates is an environment where people can make odd claims, have people doubt them, and that is justification to believe the said claim because, well... Christ was reject too.

I want to be Christ like. I'm made of cheese. Do you reject my claim?

I don't fall back on that as an excuse; I just state it because that is what He taught. Which as a former Christian, you would already know.

Correct. Do you believe I'm made of cheese, or am I like Christ?