"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 #493]

Do these hundreds of hundreds of theologians even want to hear his voice?

What in the world would this have to do with it? Does Christ need our permission to speak to us? Do we have to believe in Christ before He can speak to us? Does one have to believe that Christ "is alive, truly alive" before Christ can speak to them? Does one have to "want to hear His voice" before Christ can speak? Is Christ somehow prevented from speaking to those who do not want to hear His voice? You see, you want to complain about those of us who do not claim to have a direct line to Christ and want to insist that we have placed Christ in a box. However, as we can see, you are now placing Christ in a box by suggesting that Christ either cannot speak to those who do not want to hear Him, or Christ simply places Himself in the box by not speaking to those who do not want to hear from Him.

The point is those of us who do not claim to have a direct line to Christ, are not insisting that Christ is dead and cannot speak, but rather that He has spoken, and has decided to speak through the ordained means He has supplied, which would include the public witness to us all in the scripture which was given to us by those He left in authority in His stead. You on the other hand, want to insist Christ speaks to you directly, but Christ is either prevented from speaking to those who do not want to hear Him, or has decided to place Himself in a box by not speaking to those who do not want to hear Him. Either way, you are now suggesting that Christ either cannot speak or has decided to not speak. So then, while I insist that Christ has decided not to speak to us directly, you insist I am placing Christ in a box, while at the same time you seem to want to insist that Christ has placed Himself in a box by either not being able to speak to those who do not want to hear Him, or He has decided not to speak to them.

However, as we turn our attention to the public witness to us all, which is the scripture, we are able to determine this is not how it works. Because you see, Paul certainly did not want to hear the voice of Christ, because Paul was convinced that Jesus was not the Christ and was dead, and therefore could not speak. This alone demonstrates that Christ is not prevented, and or has not prevented Himself from speaking to those who do not want to hear Him.

Or do they teach that He does not speak?

It is that God has spoken to us all through Christ and His resurrection which is revealed to the whole world through the public witness, and He continues to speak through the means He has ordained which does not include each of us having our own private communication. In other words, we are not left to determine which of us is truly hearing from Christ, because we all hear from Christ together, as we read the word revealed to us all, and hear this same word preached, and taught to us, through the pastors, teachers, and elders Christ has supplied to His Church "for the building up of the saints." What this means is, we are all on the same footing as we do not have those who have some sort of private communication.

Do they teach that seeking to listen to His voice is 'dangerous and reckless'?

It is indeed dangerous, and reckless to teach, and attempt to experience Christ outside the means He has supplied. This should be easy for you to see, as you and the others here in this conversation continue to insist you all hear from Christ directly, and cannot agree with each other over who it is who is truly hearing from Him. You see, you want to insist that you hear from Christ directly and claim the gauge you use to determine that it is indeed Christ whom you are hearing is to hold all things up to Christ. How in the world can you make this make sense? You cannot suggest that you hold what you think you are hearing against scripture, because you are on record as saying the scripture is not to be our guide, but rather Christ. So then, in order to determine if the voice you think you are hearing is indeed Christ, you must hold it up to the voice you think you are hearing. Insanity comes to mind here. You have no external gauge, because all you have is internal.

[Realworldjack]

[Replying to tam in post #499]

Was Ananais terrified when Christ spoke to him? (Acts 9)

Was Phillip terrified when Christ spoke to him? (Acts 8)

Some were terrified (depending on the context.) Others were not.

So this is not a valid reason for you to reject the truth that Christ speaks.

First, you continue to refer to Ananias and Phillip, and the question you continue to avoid is, what is it in these passages which causes you to believe you should have the same experience? Next, why is it that when you read of these folks having the experience of Christ speaking to them you insist this applies to you, but when you read elsewhere of others who are performing things such as signs, wonders, and miracles, these sorts of things do not apply to you? Again, what causes you to come to the conclusion that only the experiences you read in scripture which describes folks hearing from Jesus directly includes you, as opposed to what causes you to come to the conclusion that when you read of other experiences they may have had would not include you?

As we move on, you have no idea if either Ananias, or Phillip were terrified or not. Simply because it was not recorded does not mean they were not. However, when we read of others who had this sort of experience, we see that they were indeed terrified. One thing we all know for certain is, we never read in the scripture where Christ is reading bedtime stories to these folks, and the annunciation of the words Christ used were described.

As we look at Ananias, he lived at a time in which the NT was not even being recorded as of yet, and we are reading of the activity which was causing the NT to be recorded. Ananias was used for whatever reason, to assist Paul after his experience on the Damascus Road. Paul goes on to be an apostle of Christ and is responsible for the majority of the NT and in one of Paul's writings he says to Timothy, "the scriptures are able to make the man of God complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work." So then, Ananias is used to bring in an apostle who was the greatest missionary for the Gospel in history, and again the question is, what is it about reading of the story of Ananias which causes you to believe that this sort of thing should apply to you?

As we turn our attention to Phillip, we are again reading of the activity which caused us to have the public witness to us all. Moreover, we also know that Phillip was commissioned by the apostles by the laying on of hands. Next, Phillip is not said to have heard directly from Christ Himself but was rather directed by "an angel of the Lord." However, as we read about the life of Phillip, we not only read of "an angel of the Lord" directing him, but we also read of where Phillip performed miracles. Again, I have questions for you here,

1. What is it about reading of Phillip hearing from an angel of the Lord which causes you to be under the impression that you should have the same sort of experience?

2. What is it about these events concerning the life of Phillip which causes you to believe that a direct communication applies to you, but when you read of the miracles Phillip performed that this would not apply to you?

Both Ananias, and Phillip were used of God in a time in which the Gospel was being spread, and the activities they were involved with were contributing factors to what we now have in the public witness to us all. Ananias was used to bring Paul in as an apostle with authority from Christ, and at the close of what we have contained in the public witness to us all, we have Paul, with authority from Christ telling Timothy that, "the scripture is able to make the man of God complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work," and never tells Timothy to seek to hear from Christ directly. Moreover, we have Peter with authority from Christ telling his audience that the letters of Paul are indeed scripture.

Tammy, we know you are not hearing from Christ directly for a good number of reasons. One is the fact that this is the only message you are really attempting to get across which is the false claim that you have such communication. Your message to us all is, "I hear from Christ directly" and you are claiming to point others to Christ, but you insist that the external witness to us all, authored by those with authority from Christ Himself is not to be our guide. Rather, you point us to Christ, which is an internal voice inside your head, and if you doubt that this internal voice inside your head is indeed Christ, then you simply hold what is said up to Christ, which is an internal voice inside your head. And around, and around we go.

[Realworldjack]

[Replying to tam in post #499]

No, you go even further than insisting that He cannot speak. You claim that He CAN speak - but that He chooses not to speak. Not even to His sheep. Why would He not - when He is capable of doing so?

Allow me to demonstrate the absurdity above. You are insisting that if I agree that Christ can speak, then this is evidence that He continues to speak, and the question is, if He has the ability to speak then why would He not speak? Okay, well we know from the recorded public witness to us all, that after the resurrection Jesus showed His real physical body to the disciples, and not just apostles, and He showed the wounds in His body from the crucifixion. Christ even sat down and ate meals with folks after the crucifixion. This demonstrates beyond any doubt that Christ has the ability to show Himself, in His real physical body after the crucifixion to human beings.

The obvious question here is if Christ has the ability to show Himself to us with His real physical body wounds and all, then why in the world would He not do so? In your own words the question would be, "Why would He not - when He is capable of doing so?" Is Christ capable of showing Himself to you now physically? Does He come to your house for dinner in His real physical body and show you the wounds? Does He sit there and eat dinner with you? You see, there are things we all know Christ is capable of doing, but you would not dare to say that He is now doing those things, and yet since we all know that Christ is capable speaking you want to insist that it would make no sense for Him not to speak, when you do not use that same thinking when it comes to other things we know Christ is capable of.

[tam]

Peace to you,

[Replying to tam in post #493]

Do these hundreds of hundreds of theologians even want to hear his voice?

What in the world would this have to do with it?

Is that a 'no' then?

Does Christ need our permission to speak to us? Do we have to believe in Christ before He can speak to us? Does one have to believe that Christ "is alive, truly alive" before Christ can speak to them? Does one have to "want to hear His voice" before Christ can speak? Is Christ somehow prevented from speaking to those who do not want to hear His voice?

To all of your questions, no.

Our desire does not affect His ability to speak.

It does, however, affect our listening.

If people do not want to hear something (like truth), people can and do ignore it, dismiss it, turn away from it. If one does not know that Christ speaks, one may also misattribute what one has heard as a mere random thought, or as one's own voice, etc.

For example, the spirit has reminded me of when God called Samuel in the middle of the night, Samuel went to the priest Eli - mistakenly thinking that Eli had called his name. It wasn't until the third time that Eli realized what was happening and told Samuel who was calling him. 1 Samuel 3

Imagine now if Eli had told Samuel, 'go back to sleep, no one is calling you, you're just dreaming.'

Because that is what the world, theologians, and many religious leaders are telling you today (about Christ - and also God.) "Go back to sleep, no one is speaking, you're dreaming/crazy/deluded."


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

[Realworldjack]

[Replying to tam in post #0]

Is that a 'no' then?

I cannot imagine any Christian who would say they refuse and would not want to hear from Christ. However, I can imagine those who want to take a short cut from the means Christ has ordained. Christ gives us these ordained means for our protection, in order that we do not have to attempt to determine what voices are playing in our heads. Rather, as Peter says, we are to heed the external word outside of us. In other words, it is the external word outside of us revealed to us all, as opposed to some sort of personal internal voice. It is the external revelation to us all, verses internal private revelation.

To all of your questions, no.

Our desire does not affect His ability to speak.

It does, however, affect our listening.

So then, Christ can speak to us, but His goal of communication to us can be affected by our refusal to listen? Really? So then, what you are saying is, Christ is speaking to me internally, but because I refuse to listen to that voice inside my head, Christ is prevented from getting His message across to me?

If people do not want to hear something (like truth), people can and do ignore it, dismiss it, turn away from it.

Agreed. But the above does not demonstrate Christ is communicating to us internally and there are those of us who refuse to listen. Just like if I were to point to the fact that there are those who want to hear something from Christ so desperately, and because they want to hear this something from Christ, they will attribute a verse coming to their mind as the voice of Christ.

If one does not know that Christ speaks, one may also misattribute what one has heard as a mere random thought, or as one's own voice, etc.

You really cannot be serious! So then, Christ really, truly wants to communicate to me directly, and He is trying with all His might, but He is prevented from doing so because I do not know He speaks today? Are you suggesting that Christ cannot cause me to come to know that it is He that is speaking?

Well, how about this? Is it possible that there may be those who want to be the main character in the show, which means they desperately desire to hear the voice of Christ, and because they have this desperate desire, they attribute "random thoughts, and or their own voice," and or when a verse comes to mind to the voice they so desperately want to hear. Would this be possible? Why is it that it must and has to be those opposed to you who do not want to hear the voice of Christ, or those who refuse to listen to Christ, or it has to be that they ignore the voice of Christ, or they dismiss the voice of Christ, who are the ones who have to, and must be in error? Has it ever occurred to you that it maybe you who is the one in error? Could it be that you were correct when you did not claim to have a direct line to Christ, and that you were led astray by a man-made belief? Because, we have already determined that you did not come up with the idea that Christ speaks to you on your own. Rather, by your own admission you were taught this by another. At any rate, allow me to give you a real true to life story which will determine the difference between you and I, and also the difference between one who loves the truth, as opposed to one who wants to be the main character in the movie with Christ being the co-star.

Decades ago, I went to the Christian bookstore looking for something to read. I found this Christian book authored by a Christian pastor and took it home and began to read. However, as I continued to read this book, I began to struggle with what was being said. I would love to explain the struggle here but that would take up too much space so suffice it to say that I was struggling with the contents so much so I could not continue reading and placed the book in my library as I continued to read the scripture, and other Christian material and I had forgotten all about the book. A couple of years later I was at home one day and had fallen asleep on the couch, and for whatever reason I had a dream about that very same book that I had not thought about in years. When I awoke and begin to remember the dream, it was almost as though the dream was daring me to go find the book and begin to read. Although I resisted at first, I could no longer shake it and went and grabbed the book and began to read immediately. To make a long story short, I continued to read, and I finished the book in just two days, and never had the first struggle.

Now, I share this true story to demonstrate that I have no doubt in my mind that you, and folks like you would automatically attribute the dream to God. This is not what I did. Because you see, I do indeed love the truth and therefore I stick to what I know to be the truth. What I know is,

1. I read a book which caused me to struggle so much that I could no longer read it.
2. I forgot about the book for over 2 years.
3. I had a dream about the book I had forgotten.
4. I went and got the book, read it from cover to cover without the first struggle.

These are the facts I know to be true. What I do not know is why I had the dream and it would be a false claim to insist to know the dream came from God. Could the dream have come from God? I am sure it could have, but I would have no way to know this and to claim to know this would be a lie, and it would add only one thing to the events, and that would be myself. In other words, I can stick to the facts as I know them and leave it at that, or I can add God into the equation as the source of the dream which is really only adding myself into the equation as one whom God saw fit to interact with.

The above Tammy, is the difference between one who actually loves the truth, as opposed to one who wants to be the star of the show with Christ being the supporting actor, and the truth is not going to get in the way. This is the difference between one who understands that Christians have Bible verses which come to mind, as opposed to one who attributes a verse coming to mind as Christ reminding them of a verse. Think about what I am saying here. In our conversation, you have on more than one occasion, claimed that Christ has reminded you of a passage, in order to refute what I am saying. This alone demonstrates the falsehood of your claim, because if you have a direct line to Christ, and He is helping you to combat my arguments, He is not simply going to remind you of verses. Rather, He is going to supply you with an argument, which would blow my arguments off the map, and this argument would have been over from the start. As it stands, you have lost the argument, and the reason you have lost the argument is because the truth is not on your side.

For example, the spirit has reminded me of when God called Samuel in the middle of the night, Samuel went to the priest Eli - mistakenly thinking that Eli had called his name. It wasn't until the third time that Eli realized what was happening and told Samuel who was calling him. 1 Samuel 3

Imagine now if Eli had told Samuel, 'go back to sleep, no one is calling you, you're just dreaming.'

Because that is what the world, theologians, and many religious leaders are telling you today (about Christ - and also God.) "Go back to sleep, no one is speaking, you're dreaming/crazy/deluded."

And here is exactly what I was referring to above. You have now on several occasions claimed that Christ, or the Spirit of Christ has reminded you of a passage of scripture which is in response to our conversation. So, let us go through this carefully. You and I are having a debate, and on a number of occasions now you have insisted that Christ has reminded you of a passage of scripture to use in order to refute what I have said. This means, Christ must realize that you are struggling in the debate and is offering you help in order to refute what I have said. I am just going to tell you that I am extremely flattered that Christ thinks so much of my arguments that He feels the need to jump into the debate. I mean, this is exactly what you are saying! You are saying that you know you have a direct line to Christ, and Christ knows you have a direct line to Him, but you seem to need some help, and so Christ reminds you of a few passages.

Well, let us see exactly how well Christ did here? I want to start out with a question I have asked you over, and over, and over again which you continue to avoid. The question is, what is it in this passage concerning Samuel, which causes you to be under the impression that you are to have the same sort of experience as Samuel? We all know why you are avoiding this question, and it is because you know, I know, and Christ knows, that these events concerning the life of Samuel was not recorded for the purpose of the rest of us coming to the conclusion that we should, and would have the same sort of experience. Rather, these events concerning the life of Samuel was all about God, and what God has done throughout history to bring about redemption. It was God who used Samuel as the last Judge of Israel, to bring about the kingdom of Israel with David being the eventual King of Israel, and all of this pointed ahead to Christ.

In other words, the events recorded concerning Samuel had nothing whatsoever to do with any of us coming to the conclusion that we should have the same experience as Samuel. This was by no means the intended purpose. The intended purpose was to demonstrate what God has done on our behalf to bring about our redemption. What you have done is to make Samuel the star of the movie while Christ is the supporting actor. You then go on to replace Samuel with yourself, and it is now you who is the star of the show, with Christ as the supporting actor.

The point I am making is; there is no possible way Christ reminded you of this passage concerning Samuel in order to defend the idea that you have a direct line to Christ, because this passage has nothing whatsoever to do with you having a direct line to Christ. The bottom line here is, there is nothing in this passage concerning Samuel, which would cause anyone to believe this is something we should all expect to experience. The question I have asked over, and over, and over is, what is it about this passage which causes you to believe that you should have this experience, while not having all the experiences which Samuel had which would have included the working of miracles? There is no possible way you can insist that this passage concerning Samuel hearing directly from God applies to you, while at the same time insisting the passages in which Samuel performed signs, wonders, and miracles would not apply to you.

[tam]

Peace again to you,

[Replying to tam in post #499]

Was Ananais terrified when Christ spoke to him? (Acts 9)

Was Phillip terrified when Christ spoke to him? (Acts 8)

Some were terrified (depending on the context.) Others were not.

So this is not a valid reason for you to reject the truth that Christ speaks.

First, you continue to refer to Ananias and Phillip, and the question you continue to avoid is, what is it in these passages which causes you to believe you should have the same experience?

I have not avoided that question. I have addressed it on numerous occasions:

viewtopic.php?p=1184705#p1184705
viewtopic.php?p=1187019#p1187019
viewtopic.php?p=1184011#p1184011
viewtopic.php?p=1183705#p1183705 (very bottom)

Next, why is it that when you read of these folks having the experience of Christ speaking to them you insist this applies to you, but when you read elsewhere of others who are performing things such as signs, wonders, and miracles, these sorts of things do not apply to you? Again, what causes you to come to the conclusion that only the experiences you read in scripture which describes folks hearing from Jesus directly includes you, as opposed to what causes you to come to the conclusion that when you read of other experiences they may have had would not include you?

This has also been addressed:

viewtopic.php?p=1184752#p1184752
viewtopic.php?p=1184705#p1184705

As we move on, you have no idea if either Ananias, or Phillip were terrified or not. Simply because it was not recorded does not mean they were not.

Jack, you tried to claim everyone who heard Christ (or God) came away terrified, but the evidence does not support your claim.

And the same person who wrote about Paul's experience (where the fear of both him and his companions is described) wrote about Ananias and Philip, with not one indication that they came away terrified.

We can even go back to Samuel from the previous post. Was Samuel terrified?

One thing we all know for certain is, we never read in the scripture where Christ is reading bedtime stories to these folks, and the annunciation of the words Christ used were described.

The only person talking about bedtime stories is you.

(Please note for yourself that you are now relying upon the fact that we haven't read in scripture that Christ is reading bedtime stories, when just a moment ago you claimed that even if we don't read it happening doesn't mean it did not happen)

However, as we read about the life of Phillip, we not only read of "an angel of the Lord" directing him

Let me be more specific. Acts 8:29 (in case you were attempting at some point to state that Phillip heard only an angel, and not Christ/the Spirit.)


Everything else has been responded to in previous posts, including the most recent posts:

viewtopic.php?p=1188915#p1188915
viewtopic.php?p=1188917#p1188917
viewtopic.php?p=1188919#p1188919
viewtopic.php?p=1188920#p1188920
viewtopic.php?p=1188036#p1188036


Peace again.

[tam]

Peace to you,

[Replying to tam in post #499]

No, you go even further than insisting that He cannot speak. You claim that He CAN speak - but that He chooses not to speak. Not even to His sheep. Why would He not - when He is capable of doing so?

Allow me to demonstrate the absurdity above. You are insisting that if I agree that Christ can speak, then this is evidence that He continues to speak, and the question is, if He has the ability to speak then why would He not speak?

Let's first quote the entire thing that I asked:

No, you go even further than insisting that He cannot speak. You claim that He CAN speak - but that He chooses not to speak. Not even to His sheep. Why would He not - when He is capable of doing so? When He demonstrated that He has done so? When He said Himself that He would?

Does that last question apply to the comparison you are trying to make?

Okay, well we know from the recorded public witness to us all, that after the resurrection Jesus showed His real physical body to the disciples, and not just apostles, and He showed the wounds in His body from the crucifixion. Christ even sat down and ate meals with folks after the crucifixion. This demonstrates beyond any doubt that Christ has the ability to show Himself, in His real physical body after the crucifixion to human beings. The obvious question here is if Christ has the ability to show Himself to us with His real physical body wounds and all, then why in the world would He not do so?

1 - He never said that He would do so.

What He said is that His sheep will listen to His voice. That He had more sheep to call and they too would listen to His voice. That His sheep know His voice. That we can hear His voice (since He said 'if anyone hears my voice and opens the door...')

2 - He does not look like that. He took the form of a human for a period of time, but He, Himself, is not human. When He returns, He will return as He IS.

3 - Not everyone could handle seeing that. Consider Paul's reaction.


**

Okay, your turn. Why would He not speak when He is both capable and said that He would do so?


Peace again.

[Mr E]

[Replying to Zzyzx in post #1]

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?

Agreed. What a zinger.

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?

This is true of any claim that wasn't personally witnessed. You'd either have to see it for yourself, which would mean you wouldn't have to believe it at all, rather just accept what it was you saw.... OR you'd have to weigh the credibility of any claim that could be made. "Isaac Newton was really smart." -- Was he? No one here knows, because no one here knew him. You have to rely upon writings and reports.

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’?

I can think of three such reports from long ago rather than fifty years ago-- First, there was Enoch. Then there was Elijah. Then there was Jesus. We have writings/reports of all three instances of virtually the same thing, though I don't recall if these former events included the person dying. But without the flying away into the sky, there are thousands of reports of people coming back from the dead. As a fire/medic I've seen it myself a half dozen times, and experienced once personally. (and I have actually flown away into the sky many times since- lol)

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

There is no convincing available-- you have to believe. You can accept something as having been true, based upon the credibility of such reports and your judgment of them.

[tam]

Peace to you,

[Replying to tam in post #0]

Is that a 'no' then?

I cannot imagine any Christian who would say they refuse and would not want to hear from Christ. I can imagine those who want to take a short cut from the means Christ has ordained.

Jack, you have yet to show me where God ordains 'the bible' as the means that He and His Son use for communication.

Christ gives us these ordained means for our protection, in order that we do not have to attempt to determine what voices are playing in our heads. Rather, as Peter says, we are to heed the external word outside of us.

What words from Peter are you referring to here?

To all of your questions, no.

Our desire does not affect His ability to speak.

It does, however, affect our listening.

So then, Christ can speak to us, but His goal of communication to us can be affected by our refusal to listen?

What is the alternative? That He would force people to listen to Him? Did He do that when He was here in the flesh?

If people do not want to hear something (like truth), people can and do ignore it, dismiss it, turn away from it.

Agreed.

Then there you go.

Because truth is the language that Christ speaks.

But the above does not demonstrate Christ is communicating to us internally and there are those of us who refuse to listen.

Were there not people who refused to listen when He was standing right in front of them and speaking to them in person, physically?

Why do you think it would be different (or easier) in the spirit?

If one does not know that Christ speaks, one may also misattribute what one has heard as a mere random thought, or as one's own voice, etc.

You really cannot be serious!

I am serious. The example about Samuel shows this to be true. Samuel originally attributed the voice he was hearing to someone other than God.

Well, how about this? Is it possible that there may be those who want to be the main character in the show, which means they desperately desire to hear the voice of Christ,

Jack, are you suggesting that the only reason a person would desperately desire to hear the voice of the Son of God is because they want to be the main character in a show?

What about love?

(This is going right back to those men who teach people to be ashamed of even wanting to hear His voice. To be afraid to even want to hear His voice.)

and because they have this desperate desire, they attribute "random thoughts, and or their own voice," and or when a verse comes to mind to the voice they so desperately want to hear. Would this be possible?

Is it possible to misattribute something that one has heard?

Yes (as stated, see Samuel.)

My Lord is the One who reminded me of the times it was Him speaking to me as a child (when I had originally thought it was just my own inner voice.) I also know myself, and I do not know the things that my Lord has taught me.

Why is it that it must and has to be those opposed to you who do not want to hear the voice of Christ, or those who refuse to listen to Christ, or it has to be that they ignore the voice of Christ, or they dismiss the voice of Christ, who are the ones who have to, and must be in error? Has it ever occurred to you that it maybe you who is the one in error?

Because it is not about them being opposed to me. It is not about me being right. You keep looking at me instead of Him.

Christ said Himself that His sheep listen to His voice. That He had more sheep to call, and these TOO would listen to His voice, and there would be one flock with one Shepherd. He said Himself that He stands at the door and knocks, and that if anyone hears His voice and opens the door, He will come in and eat with them and them with Him.

You keep asking me why I hear and others do not. I have offered some possible reasons to consider, including that some simply do not know that He does indeed speak.

Could it be that you were correct when you did not claim to have a direct line to Christ, and that you were led astray by a man-made belief? Because, we have already determined that you did not come up with the idea that Christ speaks to you on your own. Rather, by your own admission you were taught this by another.

It is not a man-made belief, Jack. Christ said it Himself.

At any rate, allow me to give you a real true to life story which will determine the difference between you and I, and also the difference between one who loves the truth, as opposed to one who wants to be the main character in the movie with Christ being the co-star.

Decades ago, I went to the Christian bookstore looking for something to read. I found this Christian book authored by a Christian pastor and took it home and began to read. However, as I continued to read this book, I began to struggle with what was being said. I would love to explain the struggle here but that would take up too much space so suffice it to say that I was struggling with the contents so much so I could not continue reading and placed the book in my library as I continued to read the scripture, and other Christian material and I had forgotten all about the book. A couple of years later I was at home one day and had fallen asleep on the couch, and for whatever reason I had a dream about that very same book that I had not thought about in years. When I awoke and begin to remember the dream, it was almost as though the dream was daring me to go find the book and begin to read. Although I resisted at first, I could no longer shake it and went and grabbed the book and began to read immediately. To make a long story short, I continued to read, and I finished the book in just two days, and never had the first struggle.

Now, I share this true story to demonstrate that I have no doubt in my mind that you, and folks like you would automatically attribute the dream to God. This is not what I did. Because you see, I do indeed love the truth and therefore I stick to what I know to be the truth. What I know is,

1. I read a book which caused me to struggle so much that I could no longer read it.
2. I forgot about the book for over 2 years.
3. I had a dream about the book I had forgotten.
4. I went and got the book, read it from cover to cover without the first struggle.

These are the facts I know to be true. What I do not know is why I had the dream and it would be a false claim to insist to know the dream came from God. Could the dream have come from God? I am sure it could have, but I would have no way to know this and to claim to know this would be a lie, and it would add only one thing to the events, and that would be myself. In other words, I can stick to the facts as I know them and leave it at that, or I can add God into the equation as the source of the dream which is really only adding myself into the equation as one whom God saw fit to interact with.

You could ask, Jack.

I have dreams as well. Sometimes they're just dreams. But some dreams are from my Lord. Sometimes He wakes me so I do not forget and so I can know it is from Him.

The above Tammy, is the difference between one who actually loves the truth, as opposed to one who wants to be the star of the show with Christ being the supporting actor, and the truth is not going to get in the way.

Or - if a dream truly were from God/His Son - then it could not (truthfully) be said that the person giving credit to God/His Son has done so because they do not love truth.

This is the difference between one who understands that Christians have Bible verses which come to mind, as opposed to one who attributes a verse coming to mind as Christ reminding them of a verse. Think about what I am saying here. In our conversation, you have on more than one occasion, claimed that Christ has reminded you of a passage, in order to refute what I am saying.

Or just so you have something to help you see for yourself.

This alone demonstrates the falsehood of your claim, because if you have a direct line to Christ, and He is helping you to combat my arguments, He is not simply going to remind you of verses.

Why not?

Are verses not what you personally look to?

For example, the spirit has reminded me of when God called Samuel in the middle of the night, Samuel went to the priest Eli - mistakenly thinking that Eli had called his name. It wasn't until the third time that Eli realized what was happening and told Samuel who was calling him. 1 Samuel 3

Imagine now if Eli had told Samuel, 'go back to sleep, no one is calling you, you're just dreaming.'

Because that is what the world, theologians, and many religious leaders are telling you today (about Christ - and also God.) "Go back to sleep, no one is speaking, you're dreaming/crazy/deluded."

And here is exactly what I was referring to above. You have now on several occasions claimed that Christ, or the Spirit of Christ has reminded you of a passage of scripture which is in response to our conversation. So, let us go through this carefully. You and I are having a debate, and on a number of occasions now you have insisted that Christ has reminded you of a passage of scripture to use in order to refute what I have said. This means, Christ must realize that you are struggling in the debate and is offering you help in order to refute what I have said. I am just going to tell you that I am extremely flattered that Christ thinks so much of my arguments that He feels the need to jump into the debate. I mean, this is exactly what you are saying! You are saying that you know you have a direct line to Christ, and Christ knows you have a direct line to Him, but you seem to need some help, and so Christ reminds you of a few passages.

I'm struggling to understand what you find odd about Christ helping one (or more) of His sheep?

I have said from the start that I need to hear my Lord.

I want to start out with a question I have asked you over, and over, and over again which you continue to avoid. The question is, what is it in this passage concerning Samuel, which causes you to be under the impression that you are to have the same sort of experience as Samuel? We all know why you are avoiding this question

Jack, there has been avoidance to this question. I have responded to it on numerous occasions.

The point I am making is; there is no possible way Christ reminded you of this passage concerning Samuel in order to defend the idea that you have a direct line to Christ, because this passage has nothing whatsoever to do with you having a direct line to Christ.

Then you missed the point.

Samuel is an example showing that people can and do misattribute the source of the voice they hear.

And unlike Eli (who correctly told Samuel that God was the one calling him), your theologians are telling you to go back to sleep, no one is speaking to you, you are dreaming/crazy/deluded.


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

[JehovahsWitness]

Did I not tell you that you have nothing to take, be it from the bible or today’s revelations from the Lord, except for the knowledge that there is God, who truly exists?

Even SATAN believes there is a God that truly exists... if your testimony is only that there is a God it is truly very little indeed. The truth is the bible gives MUCH more information than that , it provides the words and testimonies of Jesus and the Prophets about God's personality, purpose and will for us as well as guidance and protection for those that wish to be saved. I accept that YOUR testimony has nothing more than "there is a God" but scripture is much more valuable.