"Take my word for it, or his, or this book"

[Zzyzx]

Most of us probably know better than to believe everything said or written. If someone tells us they can fly by flapping their arms, our response is likely disbelief and a request that they ‘show me’. If they refuse to demonstrate or fail in flapping, we regard their claim as false. Agreed?

If a person claims to have come back to life after being dead for days none of us are likely to believe the claim unless it could be verified. Right?

If someone writes that fifty years ago a long-dead person came back to life and flew away into the sky, what would be your / our likely reaction? Would we be convinced if they say ‘many saw him’?

What would it take to convince us that the tale was true?

[Realworldjack]

[Replying to tam in post #0]

A lifeless wooden or steel gate, of course not.

Of course! However, when it comes to Him talking about hearing the voice of Jesus directly, this is to be taken literally and all of us should be walking around with our spiritual antennas in the air attempting to hear the voice of Jesus, when we have the words of Jesus.

But He is the entrance or way through whom we must pass to enter into Life, or to come to the Father.

Correct, but we agree that Jesus is not claiming to be a literal door, but we are to take literally that we are all to hear the very voice of Jesus outside the prophetic word.

Not a physical voice in the physical ears - my Lord is spirit, and He speaks as the Spirit. We hear Him within us. But this is still His voice - as the Spirit - speaking to us.

Wait??? Hold on a minute! We agree that Jesus was not talking about being a literal door, but he does say that we will hear his voice, but now you are saying that Jesus was not at all talking about hearing his voice in a literal since, but rather we are to be able to interpret in our spirit that Jesus is speaking to us, but not in an actual voice? GOOD GRIEF!

Certainly possible to ignore (or dismiss or attribute to something else) if you don't want to hear Him.

It has nothing to do with those of us who do not want to hear Jesus. Rather, it is the fact that many of us know the heart is a deceitful thing and who can understand it, and therefore we choose to listen to the revealed word given outside of us.

My Lord has spoken to me since childhood (perhaps even sooner.) But I did not always know it was Him.

Oh really? Well, all of us as humans have thoughts in our heads from childhood, and we are aware of our consciousness, but most of us do not attribute this sort of thing as the voice of Jesus, and when we encounter those who confused this as being the voice of Jesus in their head, we attempt to get them some sort of help.

Why do you think that is dangerous? Just because there are liars and lying spirits? That is why John also told us to 'test the spirits/inspired expressions.' If there was nothing out there speaking and nothing to hear, why would he tell us to test anything? What would there be for us to test?

What you seem to be forgetting is the fact that what John wrote was not addressed to you. Rather, it was addressed to an audience at the time, and the main thing you need to understand is, the cannon was not complete at the time, and so there was a need at the time to hear outside the word which was not complete. Now, some 2000 years later, when we have the perfect completed word, there is no need in folks coming to the conclusion that the voice they hear in their head is the voice of Jesus. This is exactly why it is so dangerous, because you are attempting to claim to hear from Jesus directly, which would mean that what you are hearing is on par with the prophetic word. Is this what you believe? Are you under the impression that what you hear inside yourself is equal to scripture?

How many lying preachers are out there? How many people have been misled by lying or ignorant preachers, false religions led by preachers? Do you not consider that to be dangerous?

Yes, they are dangerous, and you are one of them, and I do not need to hear the voice of Jesus inside myself to know this to be the case. Rather, I can determine this to be the case by paying attention to the perfect, prophetic word, outside of me.

Since Christ said that His sheep would listen to His voice, that He would even call them by name - and since there are examples of Him speaking to His sheep and them listening to His voice (after His death and resurrection and ascension)... it can hardly be a means we created ourselves.

Oh, but it can be and is created means. Please explain why you are under the impression that when you read these things occurring to folks in the Bible that this is supposed to be your experience as well? It's kind of like you are picking and choosing what it is that applies to you. I mean Paul says he had a "thorn in the flesh" but I do not hear you claiming that we all as Christians should have this experience, but Paul hears the voice of Jesus, and this somehow applies to you as well. Again, "in these last days God has spoken (past tense) to us through His Son" which means there is no more speaking.

Perhaps you might consider that the issue is on the other side: a lack of faith - in Him, and in Him truly being alive.

Oh, I am absolutely convinced that Jesus is alive, and guess what? I do not need to hear His voice internally in order to be convinced this is the case. So then, who is it who lacks faith? Is it the one who must have and internal voice speak to them in order to have faith? Or is it the one who believes on the word spoken? I do not need to hear the voice of Jesus to know He is alive.

Living Beings speak.

Not all living beings speak to you.

How could it possibly make sense that the Living Word of God does not speak?

If by "the Living Word of God" you are referring to what we have in scripture, then I agree that it does speak. Simply because I am insisting that Jesus is not speaking to us today, does not mean that Jesus is not active. It simply means that Jesus is not speaking to you and me in the same way He has spoken to others in the past. There was a time and need for Jesus to communicate in this way in the past, before we had the prophetic word complete. Now that the prophetic word is complete, there is nothing left to communicate. Exactly what else do we need to hear from Jesus as far as salvation is concerned?

Holy spirit is not ever called a dove. The holy spirit is described as descending like a dove. It is a simile, and it is not holy spirit that is being compared, but rather how holy spirit descended (like a dove.)

Either way I think you get the drift. What Martin Luther was saying is, folks like you seem to believe you have "swallowed the Holy Spirit feathers and all" no matter if the Holy Spirit was called a dove, or descended as a dove, the point is the same. The point is, there are those of us who are satisfied with what God has supplied, while there are others who demand more from God. That my friend, is the point Luther was making.

I did not say 'in our ears.'

This is SO, SO, FUNNY! Jesus uses an analogy of sheep hearing the voice of the shepherd, and I can only imagine the sheep were hearing with their ears, but we are not to take hearing with our ears literally, but we somehow know that hearing the voice of Jesus is to be taken literally, but not through the ears? I mean, you cannot make this stuff up. Okay, so we know from scripture that we are to hear the voice of God, correct? Exactly what scripture are you using to determine that we will not hear this voice with our ears? And you wonder why I am saying this sort of theology is reckless, and dangerous?

Tell you what, lets match your hearing from God, with my knowledge of scripture. Exactly what did Paul mean when he told the Corinthians, "We take every thought captive?" I am certain this will tell the tale.

I will leave it at this for the moment and will work on the rest but let us see whether the voice of God you have can tell us what Paul's meaning was above, as compared to someone who actually pays attention to the prophetic word spoken. As I said, this will tell the tale.

[tam]

Peace to you Realworldjack,

I will wait to respond to most of this until after you finish responding to the rest my post. Otherwise you are missing more than half (which may give you something to think about - or better yet, something to bring to Christ and ask about).

There are just a couple of points that I would like to clarify if I may:

[Replying to tam in post #0]

Not a physical voice in the physical ears - my Lord is spirit, and He speaks as the Spirit. We hear Him within us. But this is still His voice - as the Spirit - speaking to us.

Wait??? Hold on a minute! We agree that Jesus was not talking about being a literal door, but he does say that we will hear his voice, but now you are saying that Jesus was not at all talking about hearing his voice in a literal since, but rather we are to be able to interpret in our spirit that Jesus is speaking to us, but not in an actual voice? GOOD GRIEF!

Not quite.

I did not say 'not a literal voice'. I said 'not a physical voice.'

There is a difference.

Christ is the Spirit. He is a spiritual being. He speaks as a spiritual being speaks.

We are also spirit and must learn to listen with spiritual ears.

Why do you think that is dangerous? Just because there are liars and lying spirits? That is why John also told us to 'test the spirits/inspired expressions.' If there was nothing out there speaking and nothing to hear, why would he tell us to test anything? What would there be for us to test?

What you seem to be forgetting is the fact that what John wrote was not addressed to you. Rather, it was addressed to an audience at the time, and the main thing you need to understand is, the cannon was not complete at the time, and so there was a need at the time to hear outside the word which was not complete. Now, some 2000 years later, when we have the perfect completed word,

Ah... and who taught you this?

Because the bible does not state this. This is a doctrine of men - men who interpreted this from the bible. Men who CANNOT have learned that interpretation from Christ or God - because according to you and them, Christ does not speak. And so they MUST have interpreted this based on their OWN reasoning (including their own biases, their own 'deceitful hearts' - what do you think influences you when you are relying upon yourself and your own interpretations/knowledge?)

How could it possibly make sense that the Living Word of God does not speak?

If by "the Living Word of God" you are referring to what we have in scripture, then I agree that it does speak.

I am most certainly not referring to the Bible. I am referring to Christ Himself. He is the Word of God. That is even written in the book you claim to be relying upon, that you claim is 'enough'.

So let me get this straight:

The actual living being whom you know CAN speak - the living being who is truly the Word of God (and therefore the LIVING Word of God) - you claim He doesn't speak.

But an object that is not alive - that is made of dead things (dead trees for paper, non-living things for ink, dead animals if it possesses a leather binding) - you claim that object can speak?

Maybe stop and think for a moment about what you are saying here.


Peace again.

[Realworldjack]

[Replying to Realworldjack in post #21]

However, if you don't believe that Christ meant what He said

Again, sort of funny since you do not believe Jesus meant what He said when He said He was a gate, or a door.

or the examples showing that He did indeed mean that His sheep would listen to His voice - what would you suggest 'His voice' is a metaphor or simile of?

Again, just like the metaphor of the door, Jesus is not claiming to be an actual door, and He is not claiming that you will hear His actual voice (which btw you are not claiming to hear) rather, like sheep we are easily led astray, and Jesus is saying that those who hear Him in His Word, would not be led astray by the voices in their head.

Suggesting what? That Satan can speak, but the Living Word of God cannot?

"The Living Word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart." What is the author to the Hebrews referring to here? Is the author referring to the voice you are hearing from Jesus with your ears? OH? My bad. I forgot, even though Jesus refers to Himself as a door, He is not claiming to be a door. Also, when Jesus says you will hear His voice, He is not really talking about a voice you can hear with your ears. However, when he says "the sheep will hear is voice" you take that to be literal, and yet you do not even claim to actually hear a voice. Again, you cannot make this stuff up. It is like you are picking and choosing what it is you want to take literally and then insisting that since you are not really hearing the voice of Jesus in the same way as the sheep Jesus is using in the example, then this is not to be literal.

Or is the author referring to the written Word outside of us which "is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart?" It is the written Word the author is referring to, which is outside of us. Moreover, the word sword in the passage is more like a scapple. In other words, The Word of God is said to be so powerful that it performs surgery, and it penetrates. My friend, that is some kind of powerful, and you are settling for a voice (again, my bad because you agree it is not a voice) inside your head that you cannot even describe.

Next, when Luther is referring to those who attempt to ascend the ladder of God, and then find Satan, he does not say a word concerning Satan speaking at all. What Luther is actually referring too, is those who want to see God in the nude. In other words, God hides Himself from us for our protection. When there are those who are not satisfied with the hidden God, they will create their own means of experiencing God, such as hearing His voice (again, my bad, I continue to forget you are not claiming to hear the actual voice of Jesus) when the fact of the matter is, the word we have in scripture is said to be living, active, and able to perform with surgical precision, and you seem to be satisfied with a voice (GOOD GRIEF I apologize I know it is really not a voice) inside your head.

The last point here is the fact that I have in no way suggested that Jesus "cannot speak." There is a tremendous difference between claiming someone cannot speak, as opposed to claiming that someone has spoken, and is no longer speaking to us in the same way they have spoken. This gets us back to the naked God. God has spoken, and you should be satisfied with the means God has created, but you are not satisfied with the God who is hidden and want to experience God in all His Glory. As Luther put it, you want to see God in the nude.

I will continue to work on the rest.

[tam]

Peace to you,

I realize you are working on the rest, and I know it is a lot. But here are a couple clarifications in the meantime:

[Replying to Realworldjack in post #21]

However, if you don't believe that Christ meant what He said

Again, sort of funny since you do not believe Jesus meant what He said when He said He was a gate, or a door.

He is the gate and the door (aka - the ENTRANCE, the WAY) to eternal life, to God.

He is not a piece of non-living wood or metal.

or the examples showing that He did indeed mean that His sheep would listen to His voice - what would you suggest 'His voice' is a metaphor or simile of?

...like sheep we are easily led astray, and Jesus is saying that those who hear Him in His Word, would not be led astray by the voices in their head.

Okay, thank you for answering.

That seems like quite the leap ('read the bible/scripture so you don't get led astray by voices in your head.') That sounds like something you believe, but it does not sound at all like what He said.

So how did you come to this interpretation?

"The Living Word of God is alive and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart." What is the author to the Hebrews referring to here?

Not a what. A whom.

Hebrews 4:12

For the Word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and of spirit, of joints and of marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart.

The Word of God is Christ (John 1:14; Revelation 19:3; 1John 1:1).
Christ is alive.
Christ is active.
Out of His mouth proceeds a double edged sword.
And for the rest:

“Behold, this Child is appointed to cause the rise and fall of many in Israel, and to be a sign that will be spoken against, so that the thoughts of many hearts will be revealed— and a sword will pierce your soul as well.”

**

The last point here is the fact that I have in no way suggested that Jesus "cannot speak."

I am aware of that.

You acknowledge that He can speak - you simply claim that He chooses not to speak. Not even to those whom He loves.

He can speak as the Spirit.

He certainly did speak as the Spirit. (we have examples of this very thing in what is written)

But you (and many others who do not hear Him) claim that He does not speak to anyone anymore.

You didn't hear that from Him though (you could not have). You also didn't read that in the bible.

So whose understanding are you relying upon to make such a claim?


Peace still to you.

[historia]

Most of us probably know better than to believe everything said or written.

True, although people are often quick to uncritically accept things they read that align with their prior beliefs.

For example:

Tales of 'resurrection' are a common theme in ancient mythology and religions. Are they all true? Some but not others? Just a favorite one? HOW to choose which to believe?

List of Gods that are claimed to have died and resurrected.
1 . Krishna of India.
2. Buddha of India.
3. Salivahana of Bermuda.
4. Osiris and Horus, of Egypt.
5. Odin of the Scandinavians.
6. Crite of Chaldea.
7. Zoroaster and Mithra of Persia.
8. Baal and Taut, "the only Begotten of God," of Phenicia.
9. Indra of Thibet.
10. Bali of Afghanistan.
1 1 . Jao of Nepaul.
12. Wittoba of the Bilingonese.
13. Thammuz of Syria.
14. Atys of Phrygia.
15. Xaniolxis of Thrace.
16. Zoar of the Bonzes.
17. Adad of Assyria.
18. Deva Tat, and Sammonocadam of Siam.
19. Alcides of Thebes.
20. Mikado of the Sintoos.
21. Beddru of Japan.
22. Hesus or Eros, and Bremrillah, of the Druids.
23. Thor, son of Odin, of the Gauls.
24. Cadmus of Greece.
25. Hil and Feta of the Mandaites.
26. Gentaut and Quexalcote of Mexico.
27. Universal Monarch of the Sibyls.
28. Ischy of the Island of Formosa.
29. Divine Teacher of Plato.
30. HolyOneofXaca.
31 . Fohi and Tien of China.
32. Adonis, son of the virgin lo of Greece.
33. IxiOn and Quirinus of Rome.
34. Prometheus of Caucasus.

You read this somewhere (probably on the Internet) and then presented it here as if it were a factual statement.

However, this list is, from start to finish, riddled with errors. None of these figures were considered to be resurrected by ancient peoples, as 'resurrection' denotes a return to physical life here on earth. A few, like Zoroaster, are not "gods." And some of the names on this list are just completely fabricated!

Lists like this originated in the fevered imaginations of 18th- and 19th-Century writers who had no expertise in history whatsoever. That this kind of 'slop' still gets passed around on Internet message boards in the year of our Lord 2026 is sad -- although, to see it in a thread about not believing everything you read is admittedly a little funny.

[Clownboat]

[Replying to Realworldjack in post #15]

How about the fact that God has spoken (past tense)

Yes, it’s a fact!

and there is no more need of speaking, because what God has supplied to us is sufficient, meaning it is enough, all we need?

Never in any part of the bible did God say this narrative, verbatim, did God? God is real and forever living, and He is not the bible for us to know what our souls need to attain salvation. God speaks with mankind across all generations, but many ignore Him because of the bible today.

Is what God has supplied in Scripture enough?

No!

Or do we need more?

Jesus Himself is what and who we need for the salvation of our souls.

If we grant the starting premise — that society considers hearing divine voices normal and we’re not talking about extreme or delusional claims — then the real issue becomes how we decide what to believe.

Equal Treatment Principle
If a Christian, Muslim, and Hindu all claim:
They hear internal guidance.
They attribute it to their God.
The experiences are similar.

Then, from a neutral standpoint, we have three options:
Believe all of them.
Believe none of them.
Suspend judgment because private internal experiences are not independently verifiable.

So I ask you, which option should be employed?

[Clownboat]

You read this somewhere (probably on the Internet) and then presented it here as if it were a factual statement.

However, this list is, from start to finish, riddled with errors. None of these figures were considered to be resurrected by ancient peoples, as 'resurrection' denotes a return to physical life here on earth. A few, like Zoroaster, are not "gods." And some of the names on this list are just completely fabricated!

Lists like this originated in the fevered imaginations of 18th- and 19th-Century writers who had no expertise in history whatsoever. That this kind of 'slop' still gets passed around on Internet message boards in the year of our Lord 2026 is sad -- although, to see it in a thread about not believing everything you read is admittedly a little funny.

Me thinks you doth protest too much.
"Tales of 'resurrection' are a common theme in ancient mythology and religions. Are they all true? Some but not others? Just a favorite one? HOW to choose which to believe?" - Zzyzx

Do you actually disagree that tales of resurrections were a fairly common thing or are you arguing that they were not common when compared to today? You seem to be dodging this statement.
Do you find the valid (please ignore any you feel are completely fabricated) ancient resurrection tales to be all true, some true or likely that none of these claims are true? If at least one is true, how do we choose which to believe? Thanks for clarifying.

[historia]

Do you actually disagree that tales of resurrections were a fairly common thing or are you arguing that they were not common when compared to today?

The former. Specifically, we were told that "resurrection" was a common theme in ancient mythology and religions, and then given 34 examples to demonstrate that point.

None of the names mentioned in that list are examples of ancient figures who were thought to be "resurrected." A few of the names on the list are not even ancient figures, and were just invented out of whole cloth by whoever originally put together that list. This is not a serious source we are dealing with.

Would you like to examine the figures on the list? We can start with Zoroaster, since I already mentioned him: What historical evidence is there that Zoroastrians considered him to be a "God" who died and was "resurrected" as was claimed above?

[Realworldjack]

[Replying to Clownboat in post #26]

If we grant the starting premise — that society considers hearing divine voices normal and we’re not talking about extreme or delusional claims — then the real issue becomes how we decide what to believe.

The question is not whether "society considers hearing divine voices normal." The question is, is there some sort of divine being communicating with folks today? Or are their folks who have deceived themselves into thinking a divine voice is communicating with them?

Then, from a neutral standpoint, we have three options:
Believe all of them.
Believe none of them.
Suspend judgment because private internal experiences are not independently verifiable.

This would depend on what you are talking about believing. If you are talking about whether we should believe they are truly hearing the voice of a divine being, then no we should not simply accept this to be the case, because these folks who are claiming such communication cannot demonstrate this to be the case. In fact, whether they would like to admit it or not, they cannot even demonstrate this to themselves. With this being the case, it is really useless for those who claim to communicate with any sort of divine being to even allow this to be known to others, since they have no way to demonstrate this to others, or themselves. It is completely useless to even mention it.

On the other hand, if you are talking about, should we simply accept the religion these folks adhere to, this would be a negative as well. Whatever religion these folks adhere to stands or falls on the facts and evidence and has nothing whatsoever to do with whether these folks are truly hearing from a divine being or are delusional. As an example, Tam claims to communicate with Jesus, but she surely cannot demonstrate this to be the case but either way, what she is claiming has no bearing whatsoever upon the truth or falsehood of the resurrection. In other words, we all know there are a whole lot of lunatic Christians in the world, and we know there are those who preach for profit. Moreover, it is a fact that most Christians really do not know what they believe, nor why they believe it, but again this would have no bearing upon the resurrection occurring or not.

One more thing here. As I said, Tam has convinced herself that she is hearing the voice of Jesus, because she is a Christian, but Mohammad claimed to hear the voice of Allah. I will have to assume that Tam is convinced that Mahammad did not hear any sort of divine voice, since I would have to assume she believes Islam to be a false religion. This would mean that Tam is going to have to insist that she is the one truly hearing from the divine being (when she cannot demonstrate this to be the case) while the Muslims will insist that it was Mohammad, which goes on to make both of the claims to be irrelevant. The only thing which really matters is the historical evidence these religions are based upon, and when one understands they cannot win the argument based on the real facts and evidence, they resort to an argument they cannot lose.

In the end, all Tam is doing, is to allow all others in all the religions to claim to have the same experience, when we as Christians can explain that God has spoken through His Son in these last days, and anyone who is claiming to have direct communication with a divine being is a false prophet.

So I ask you, which option should be employed?

Again, if we are talking about whether there are folks who are truly hearing a divine voice today, we can simply ignore the claims since it has no bearing whatsoever on what it is they claim to believe as far as the religion they adhere to. Moreover, and again, none of these folks can demonstrate this to be the case, and so their claims of communicating with a divine being is irrelevant.

If you would like to know what it is I happen to believe on the matter, it is that these folks could not possibly defend what it is they believe based on the actual facts and evidence we have, and so they resort to something that cannot be argued with, since there is no way to demonstrate such a thing either way. With this being the case, they can hide behind the unfalsifiable claim argument, while being able to feel good about themselves thinking they are special enough to have the creator of the universe communicate with them personally since they are so special.

The fact of the matter is, I am thinking that if these folks really had an encounter with the Almighty, they would not come away from such an experience talking about how wonderful and great it is. Rather, I am thinking they would come away terrified, just like is recorded in what we call the Bible.

[Realworldjack]

[Replying to tam in post #0]

"Christianity" is in decline because more and more people are seeing the falsehood in religion

Is Christianity a religion?

and the lies and hypocrisies of the religious leaders.

I am not talking about the decline of religion. I am talking about the decline of Christianity, and I will agree that this decline can be attributed to Christian leaders, who on the one hand are more concerned about the behavior of those outside the Church, that they are neglecting those inside the Church, many of whom are convinced they experience the naked God.

At least some are hearing the call to "Come out of her, my people!"

And because of many of the Christian leaders who are more concerned with the behavior of those outside the Church, they are allowing their own flock to attempt to experience God in the nude, who will end up finding Satan. Not saying Satan is speaking, but I hope we can agree that Satan is active in attempting to have Christians neglect the Living powerful Word of God outside of us, in order to experience God in the nude.

But you think that is more dangerous than the lying preacher, the false religions, all misleading people?

My friend, back in the 1990's I stood on the floor of a statewide conference of the denomination I was a member of, after it was brought to the floor that we should send a letter of protest to Disney World, concerning their decision to cover same sex partners, and I asked the question on the floor, "what do we have to do with Disney World?" I went on to say, "Disney World does not name the Name of Christ" but there are many, many, Christian organizations who do name the Name of Christ, and they are preaching a false Gospel. I would be more than happy to send a letter of protest to these Christians, but I do not see what we have to do with Disney World."

The point is, whether it is lying preachers, false religions, or those who are claiming to hear a voice inside their head, they are all reckless, and dangerous, and I do not attempt to determine which is the most, as opposed to the least dangerous, since anything which leads us away from the Christ in scripture leads to death.

Either by causing them to give up their faith (perhaps because their faith had actually been put in men and religion - and when those men and that religion prove false, they think the whole thing mus be false)... or by keeping them captive to the religion, and preventing them from coming to Christ and to His Father.

You know..... I can walk and chew gum at the same time meaning, I can be against all what you are saying, and also be against those who believe they are hearing from God outside the revealed scripture. All of these are reckless, and dangerous theologies which lead folks astray.

And there are religions that teach people that there is nowhere else to go - never teaching them that it is not a 'where' but rather a 'whom'.

The "whom" you are referring to is Jesus, and here is a fact for you. You would not know a thing in the world about Jesus, nor Christianity, nor would you even know to attribute that voice in your head to Jesus, if it were not for what is contained in the NT. What came first? Your knowledge of the Bible? Or your communicating with Jesus? You say "your Lord has been communicating with you since childhood, maybe even further." Did your Lord identify himself as Jesus? Did He tell you about His death on the cross? Did He explain to you His resurrection from the dead? No, none of that occurred. With this being a fact, it could have been Allah who was in communication with you. The point is you had no way to know to attribute that voice inside your head to Jesus, until you were exposed to the Bible. Otherwise, you would have had no way to attribute the voice to Jesus. I mean, you do not find that extremely strange? If you were being communicated to by Jesus, the creator of the universe, He certainly would have had the ability to communicate to you concerning who He is, and what His name is, His crucifixion and resurrection, but this did not occur and you had to wait until you were exposed to the Bible in order to determine who it was in communication with you, and the thing is, if you had been born in Iran, you would have attributed that voice to Allah.

"Lord to WHOM would we go? YOU have the words of eternal life."

This is unreal! What in the world does this passage have to do with Jesus communicating to you directly? We have a passage of scripture in which Jesus asks His disciples if they wish to leave Him, and they answer, "to whom shall we go" and you somehow are under the impression this has anything at all to do with whether you are hearing directly from Jesus? The most unreal thing here is the fact that you are appealing to scripture to defend the idea that Jesus communicates with you directly, and the fact is, you would not even know the name Jesus if it were not for scripture.

Allow me to ask you a question. Has Jesus revealed to you that all the Bible applies to you? If you are under the impression that all of the Bible applies to you, then I have some bad news because you need to "do your best to get to Paul quickly." You also need to get Mark and bring him with you." You also need to bring Paul his cloak that he left with Carpus at Troas. Along with his scrolls, especially the parchments.

This is one of the most unreal things I have ever heard. You are appealing to what is contained in the Bible to defend the idea that Jesus communicates with you, and you would have no idea about Jesus, nor Christianity without your exposure to the Bible, and you use a passage as if it applied to you, which would have nothing whatsoever to do with Jesus communicating to you directly. If you cannot see the problem here, then I am not the one who can help, because I can assure you that it is self-evident what the problem is. Is it any wonder why I continue to say, "you cannot make this stuff up?"

Jaheshua - meaning JAH saves/salvation of JAH.

What in the world does this have to do with you hearing the voice of Jesus?

And there are plenty of preachers who say different things and who all claim this is what the bible says.

Correct! But I can demonstrate the error in those who are claiming what the "Bible says." As an example, I have been in debate with a well-known pastor who happened to preach at the United States Pentagon yesterday, and I was able to demonstrate his error concerning his interpretation of what Paul meant when he told the Corinthians, "We take every thought captive." I am also waiting on you to reveal to us what Paul meant by this, and this should be easy for one who gets direct communication from Jesus.

On the other hand, when one is claiming to hear directly from Jesus, this means that what they are saying is on par with scripture, and since they are the ones receiving the revelation then I would guess their interpretation trumps all others. In fact, since they are the ones receiving the revelation, then I would think that theirs is the only interpretation which matters. So then, on the one hand we have the scripture we can all read and interpret, and go on to demonstrate where others are in error, and then on the other hand we have those who are so special that they not only receive direct communication with Jesus, but theirs is also the only interpretation which matters.

You don't take people's word for it. You test the inspired expression. You bring it to Christ.

OH? So, you do not bother with the revealed Word outside of us to determine this, rather you bring it to Jesus, and ask Jesus to reveal to you internally if what is said is true? In other words, the revealed scripture is not sufficient to determine this sort of thing, so we need to rely upon what each of us is determining what Jesus tells us in our spirit? If we all disagree as to what the answer is, what in the world do we do in this case?

You hold all things up to Him - listen to HIM, believe HIS words.

Which words? The Word revealed in scripture? Or the word in my head? Which wins out?

He is the Truth.

Okay, I will agree to this. So, what in the world would this have to do with Jesus communicating to you directly?

Test also against love - because God is love, and nothing that comes from Him will be against love.

So then, it was love when God said, "Jacob I have loved but Esau I have hated?"

My dear Lord taught me these things.

I have no doubt!

What is the point of John telling people to 'test the spirit/inspired expression' if we are instead supposed to reject every spirit/inspired expression?

What about the fact that John was communicating to an audience at the time who did not have the completed Word? We are now back to the fact that you are attempting to appeal to what has been revealed in scripture, to defend your direct communication to Jesus, assuming that all scripture applies to you, when I have demonstrated this is not the case in the least.

I will continue.