"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?

[tam]

Peace again,

This is utterly incredible.

Is it? Because I suspected you would simply move the goalposts once your claim was shown to be incorrect, and that is what you have done.

You claimed that only the apostles had gifts (and only they could hear Christ) - with some exceptions due to laying on of hands (and of course making Paul an exception as well.)

Now that this has been shown to be incorrect, you have added another 'exception' - gifts and such were given as a sign (that was also apparently only needed back then.) You seem to have made yet another exception, but it is further along in this post.

Me - I am just going to continue to take Christ at His word.

You completely ignore the fact that the normal Christians at the time were completely dependent on the teaching of the apostles, which demonstrates beyond doubt that the normal Christian at the time did not have a direct line to Jesus, but rather had to be taught.

You completely ignore the fact that John said to those who were anointed (aka - those who were Christian) that they needed no man to teach them. See previous post.

I mean, let us just take a look at what Luke had to say in his first letter to Theophilus.

"Since many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word, it seemed fitting to me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in an orderly sequence, most excellent Theophilus; so that you may know the exact truth about the things you have been taught."

I have a question for you. If Jesus speaks to people directly, and we can expect this to be the norm, then why in the world would Luke have to sit down in order to write not one, but two long and detailed letters addressed to Theophilus, in order for Theophilus to know the exact truth?

Luke says himself why he did it: 'it seems fitting to me.'

Why? Perhaps because Theophilus was a person yet being witnessed TO, perhaps he needed to see it all written down in an orderly form? To help him put faith in Christ.

You actually have the nerve to accuse those opposed to you as holding on to the doctrines of man,

It is not nerve. It is fact. The doctrines you have consistently promoted in this thread are doctrines and interpretations of men.

Christ did not teach them.

The claim that the bible is the word (even the living) word of God - this is a doctrine of men and religion. The bible does not make that claim. The bible in fact points to Christ as the Word of God. Yet still, men insist upon saying that the bible is the word of God.

The claim that gifts and such have ended - this is a doctrine and interpretation of men. The bible does not say these things ended. This is an interpretation of men (logically that is all it can be, if the men making that claim also claim that Christ no longer speaks.)

The claim that Christ can, but chooses not to, speak - this is not biblical. That is the opposite of what the bible records. There is no such statement in that book or from Christ or from any of the apostles that Christ can - but chooses not to - speak.

John 10:3-5, 16, 27
See also from Revelation:

Whoever has ears, let them hear what the Spirit says to the churches.

Here I am! I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and eat with that person, and they with me.

The Spirit and the bride say, “Come!” And let the one who hears say, “Come!” Let the one who is thirsty come; and let the one who wishes take the free gift of the water of life.

when the fact is, you did not come up with the idea that Jesus communicates with us directly all on your own. Rather, it is a fact that another member of the human race (man) taught you this idea.

Another person who listens to Christ and gave their witness that He speaks, yes. Which opened up the possibility to me. But I also heard truth in it. I saw that it is indeed supported in what is written. And of course there is the reality that Christ is alive and living beings speak. And then of course He is the Living Word of God - what would the Living Word of God do if not SPEAK?!!

He even said He would speak and His sheep would hear His voice!

I need only believe Him (and it is my Father in heaven who led me to His Son in the first place.)

So I asked for ears to hear as well.

I know my Lord lives and speaks because I hear His voice.

No matter what you say - no matter the incredulity or personal insults (mental health, arrogance, false accusations that I think 'I am so special', etc. - these are all tactics designed to keep people down so that they do not think they are 'good enough' to come to and belong to Christ. Well newsflash - no one is good - is it not about us being good or good enough, it is about Christ and God and their love and their mercy.)

Someone else's witness simply helped me see - so as to help me put faith in Christ - and in something He said all along. (just fyi - this is also how I know that I/others could most certainly have learned of and about Christ without the bible if that were God's will - although no one comes to the Son unless the Father draws them.)

Moreover, and again, you would not have ever known the name of Jesus without what is contained in the Bible, which goes on to demonstrate that you would have never known the name of Jesus if it was not a source from outside yourself.

Oh, I learned the name "Jesus" from the bible (well probably from a Sunday school class). But that is not His name. When I learned that "Jesus" is not the name He would ever have been called, I stopped using it. I could not associate something erroneous with the One who is the Truth.

As we move on, you continue to use these events recorded in the Bible, as if these things are to apply to you as well.

To this I will leave my previous post to stand. Because at this point you are just deeming all those examples as 'exceptions', when it is quite clear that many people received an anointing of holy spirit (and if they did not, they were not yet Christian), and various gifts that came with.

I will point out to you that the prophecy Peter spoke of in Acts 2 (17-21) could not have been limited to the apostles, because it clearly states 'sons and daughters'. Unless one of the 12 apostles was female, this prophecy was not completed in the 12 apostles.

As we look at what you have to say in your last post, I guess you overlooked the fact that I said that only the apostles had these certain gifts and abilities, but I also went on to talk about others later on who the apostles commissioned by the laying on of hands, who obtained certain gifts given to them by the apostles. Can you imagine who would be on that list which received these gifts through the apostles by the laying on of hands? Well, that would be Stephen, and Philip. So then, we can eliminate when you refer to Stephen and Philip, since they did not begin to display these sorts of gifts until after they had been commissioned by the apostles.

But others did. Without laying on of hands. Such as Cornelius and his family and friends.

We then move on to your reference of Ananias, which was a one-time event, and guess who else was involved? Well, that would be Paul who became an apostle.

So? Ananais still heard - and was not even surprised that Christ was speaking to him (suggesting it was not an unusual occurrence.) Which also contradicts your claim that people would be afraid if they heard His voice.

And again, the funny thing is the fact that you pick and choose those things which apply to you when reading the Bible, because when we read of those in the Bible raising the dead, healing the sick, casting out demons, etc., you do not claim to have these sorts of experiences, but for some strange reason you claim to have direct communication with Jesus.

This is because I am NOT doing what you keep accusing me of doing. I am not reading something in the bible and assuming it must be the same for me.

Listening to Christ and His voice - that is something His sheep do. He said this Himself. I can bear witness to the truth of this because I listen to His voice.

Gifts that are given with holy spirit - these are different (by which I mean there are different kinds of gifts.)

The other funny thing is the fact that when I asked you to demonstrate this to be the case by giving us an interpretation of scripture, you hide behind the idea this would be testing God

That is exactly what you were asking me to do, but this has been explained in a previous post and I am not going to repeat myself here just because you don't wish to respond to that post.

I want to stress the fact to you that the Gospel of Luke, and the Actions of the Apostles were letters authored by Luke who only intended Theophilus as his audience.

I agree. Doesn't change the fact that these things happened.

I mean, if Jesus communicates to us all directly, then what in the world would we need the Bible for?

Good question. We would not - if indeed we were listening and walking by faith.

However, most walk by sight (at least to start, until we learn to walk by faith.)

I'm not sure why you promote the bible so much, yourself, when you believe none of it applies to you or me or anyone else living today.

You cannot insist that we needed the Bible in order to know who was communicating with us,

I didn't. I simply pointed out that it supports a living and speaking Christ.

As far as Agabus being a prophet that is indeed the case, and a prophet is listed as one of the gifts of the Spirit.

EXACTLY. One receives a gift of the spirit when one receives (is anointed with) holy spirit. There are many different kinds of gifts. All are used to help build up the body of Christ.

There is no need for the gift of tongues today, and since this is the case, there is no need for the gift of interpreting

I cannot agree with you that this gift is no longer given. (also not sure why you say there would be no more need for it)

However, it makes sense that a gift would be given according to need - so different gifts at different times, for different occasions/needs - just as Christ sees fit.

We do have prophets today and these prophets do speak on God's behalf, as they read, interpret, and rightly divide the word of truth.

Oh, now wait a minute here, Jack.

So these words that were spoken specifically to Timothy by Paul - these words apply to more than just the audience Paul wrote - these words apply to people today? The exact opposite of what you have been saying all this time to me? (2Timothy 2:15 KJV, so the reader can see exactly what was and was NOT said)

You're breaking your own rules now.

Not only have you broken your own rule, you have made another exception to the 'no one but the apostles and those of whom the apostles laid hands upon' had gifts.

This is doing a whole lot of damage to your idea that we can all hear directly from Jesus. However, it is about to get even worse for you. Paul goes on to say this to Timothy,

"All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work."

Okay, so if the Scripture is "God-breathed" as Paul says, then this would mean we are hearing directly from God as we read. However, as we move on, we see what Scripture is useful for, which is teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness. GOOD GRIEF! What else do we need? But then Paul goes on to say, "so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped." Do you happen to know what thoroughly means? It means, completely, fully, comprehensively, from the ground up, totally, perfectly.

So then, the Scripture is sufficient to equip the servant of God. In other words, it is all we need.

Saying scripture is good for certain things does not mean it is all we need. If that were true, then Christ would not have needed to admonish the people who were diligently searching the scriptures, yet not recognizing or even coming to Him.

Paul, himself, needed more than scripture. How did he come to know the things he knew? How did he know that gentiles did not need to be circumcised? He learned these things from Christ.

In any case,

A - scripture is that which is given in spirit/inspired. That does not include Paul's letters, nor Acts, nor the gospels. It does include Revelation. John was taken in the spirit and told to write down what he heard and saw. Most of the prophets have an introduction that "the Word of [the LORD]" came to them...

B - scripture can be useful for those things, but it isn't perfect. What was received has been handled and handled and handled by men. See Jeremiah 8:8 (lying pen of the scribes.) Even Christ said - woe to you scribes!

"So, we have the prophetic word made more certain, to which you do well to pay attention as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star arises in your hearts. But know this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture is a matter of one’s own interpretation, for no prophecy was ever made by an act of human will, but men moved by the Holy Spirit spoke from God."

Do you see that? Peter refers to a voice he heard from heaven, but he does not teach us that we should expect the same sort of experience, but rather tells us that the scriptures are more certain than any voice you could hear from heaven, and it is the scripture we need to pay close attention to,

Peter most certainly does not say that the scriptures are more certain than any voice you could hear from heaven. Are you kidding me? You think Peter listened to Christ because he read it in the scriptures or because a) God drew Peter to Christ, b) Christ called and chose him, and c) Peter heard this command from God, Himself.

Perhaps you should re-read his words - particularly the ones where 'no prophecy of scriptures is a matter of one's own interpretation...'

Finaly, we get to the passage in 1 John where John talks about an anointing. Exactly who is the target audience of John in this letter? Do you know?

His letter addressed the people who were anointed (meaning Christians) at that time. However, the truth in the statement applies to all who are anointed with holy spirit.

In the same way that Paul wrote a letter to the Corinthians about how he (and some others) walked by faith and not by sight. The truth in this does not just apply to Paul, however. Because Christians are supposed to be walking by faith.

In other words, the authors contained in the NT were addressing a particular audience at the time, with concerns for that particular audience, and the authors were not at all concerned about anyone else reading what they had to write, other than that particular audience, which means that not everything which is recorded would apply to us. Moreover, you cannot simply pick and choose what it is you would prefer to apply to you, while dismissing what it is you would like to ignore the way in which you do.

Yet you apply a double standard when it comes to Paul's letter to Timothy.

What we are doing is to clearly demonstrate you do not have a direct line to Jesus.

Who is 'we'?


Peace again.

[OneJack]

[Replying to tam in post #91]

I know my Lord lives and speaks because I hear His voice.

Tammy dear, could you please post/show us direct utterances from the ‘small still voice’ that you’ve been hearing from, verbatim, what he quoted to you about himself?

[tam]

Peace again,

[Replying to tam in post #91]

I know my Lord lives and speaks because I hear His voice.

Tammy dear, could you please post/show us direct utterances from the ‘small still voice’ that you’ve been hearing from, verbatim, what he quoted to you about himself?

Jack #1, you and I have already gone down this road, and I see no reason to start it up again.

[OneJack]

Peace again,

[Replying to tam in post #91]

I know my Lord lives and speaks because I hear His voice.

Tammy dear, could you please post/show us direct utterances from the ‘small still voice’ that you’ve been hearing from, verbatim, what he quoted to you about himself?

Jack #1, you and I have already gone down this road, and I see no reason to start it up again.

You haven’t posted anything about the personal utterances of the ‘small still voice’ about who he is, Tammy dear, despite the trainload narratives you presented, half of which were passages from the bible that you used, as the foundation of your testimonies, to prove that the ‘small still voice’ converses with you till this time.

[Realworldjack]

[Replying to tam in post #91]

This is SO, SO, FUNNY! It is you who is the one who "moves the goal post." Let's go back through this again. I completely demonstrated that on the "Day of Pentecost" that only the apostles were speaking in tongues, along with demonstrating the fact that the early Christians who were added on the "Day of Pentecost" did not have a direct line to Jesus, but Luke clearly says the ordinary Christian was having to be taught by the apostles, and every time Luke mentioned miraculous events he ensures that he makes it clear that these miraculous events were occurring by the hands of the apostles. I showed you this over, and over, where there was a clear distinction being made between what the apostles were doing, as opposed to the ordinary believer. So then, when I said that only the apostles were performing the miraculous gifts, this had to do with when I was referring to. In this case I was referring to the days, weeks, and years after the "Day of Pentecost" when the ordinary believer is described as "devoting themselves to the apostles teaching" which clearly demonstrates they are having to be taught, as opposed to the apostles who are the only ones reported as preforming the miraculous.

I was careful then to be sure to acknowledge the fact that there were those later who obtained certain gifts after the laying on of the apostles' hands, which would be an "anointing" of these men by the apostles. I clearly stated this. With this being the case, and since you have no idea at all who was being addressed by John (the apostle) when he talked about the "anointing" teaching whoever he was addressing, the audience certainly could have been disciples of John whom John had laid his hands upon, because we know for a fact that John had disciples who followed him, just as John had been a follower of Jesus. However, you read this passage and assume who the audience is, and go on to apply this passage to yourself, when you have no idea at all who the audience was. I have also demonstrated to you, and you would have to acknowledge the fact, that not everything contained in the Bible would apply to you, and I have demonstrated this by pointing to the fact that it would depend on who the audience was who was being addressed at the time, along with what the command, or teaching would be. Again, with this being the case, you take a passage of scripture authored by the apostle John, having absolutely no idea who the target audience was, and you go on to use this passage claiming to have the "anointing" this apostle is referring to.

You seem to want to insist the miraculous gifts are still in effect today, so please do tell me, who is it today who is an apostle? Who is it today who is raising the dead? Who is it today who is speaking in tongues? Who is it today who has the gift of interpretation of tongues? Who is it today who is the prophet who hears directly from God and speaks on God's behalf? I have heard of no one who has the gift of healing today. Have you? Do you know someone who has the gift of healing? I have heard of no one raising the dead as the apostles did, have you? I have heard of those speaking in tongues today, but what good is the speaking in tongues when the whole of the Church speaks the same language? I have heard of those who supposedly have the gift of interpretation of these tongues, but again, what need would there be in one today speaking in a language no one in the Church understands, and then everyone in the Church having to depend upon the one interpreting being correct?

It is complete, and utter nonsense, along with being a dangerous, and reckless theology. This is your dilemma. You seem to want to insist the miraculous gifts are still in existence. I am assuming this would mean all the gifts are still with us today. If this is the case, who is it today who is the apostle among us, seeing as how one of the qualifications of an apostles was to have witnessed the risen Christ? Your dilemma is, if there are no more apostles, then we have demonstrated at least one of the gifts which have ceased to exist. If not, then who is it who you identify today as an apostle? Little by little we are chipping away with your claim to possess the miraculous gift of hearing from Jesus directly.

Now, let us move on in order to demonstrate that it is you (the one who claims to hear from Jesus directly) who is "moving the goalposts." You claim to have this miraculous gift from God, to hear from Jesus directly, but you refuse to even give your own private understanding of a passage of scripture. You then go on to admit to us that you do not even have the gift, or the ability to interpret scripture, which is absolutely an unbelievable claim. I mean, you do not seem to have any trouble at all with interpreting what I have to say, but for some strange reason when it comes to what is contained in the Bible, you claim to not have the ability to understand it. Do you really want to talk about "moving the goalpost?" This is not really moving the "goalpost," rather this is just being dishonest, because we all can see you have the ability to interpret the English language. So then, this is being dishonest, in order to avoid. If it is not, then all you have to do is to demonstrate that it is not being dishonest, and tell us what Paul meant when he said, "We take every thought captive." It cannot possibly be a trick, or a trap, to ask a Christian how they understand a passage of scripture. Unless of course, this particular Christian cannot afford to be in error. OH? That would be the Christian who claims to have the miraculous ability to hear directly from Jesus. This would be the Christian who would have to compare themselves to Jesus, along with comparing the one asking the question to Satan and claiming that it you were to attempt to give an interpretation this would be to be "testing God."

Do you really want to talk about "moving the goalposts?" Do you really want to talk about avoidance? It is not "testing God" in order for you to give us your interpretation of what Paul meant when he said, "We take every thought captive." There is no shame at all with being corrected in your understanding of scripture. Unless of course, one is claiming to have a direct line to Jesus. Because you see, the one who is claiming to have a direct line to Jesus cannot afford to be in error. This is because, if such a one is found to be in error concerning anything in scripture, then this would open the possibility that they are in error concerning those passages they use in order to defend the idea they have this direct line to Jesus.

The bottom line is you have admitted yourself you do not possess the ability to interpret scripture, which demonstrates you cannot interpret the passages you use from scripture to defend your fantasy that you hear from Jesus directly, correctly. We also know it to be a fact that you would have never heard the Name of Jesus, if it had not been for what is contained in the Bible, but by your own admission, you do not have the ability to interpret what is contained in the Bible. It is, complete, and utter nonsense!

You cannot in any way demonstrate that you hear from Jesus directly. Ergo, even if you do hear from Jesus directly, there would be no benefit to any of the rest of us. What benefit is there then in, insisting that you have such a miraculous gift, if the only one who benefits is you? The unbeliever does not need to hear about your direct communication with Jesus which you cannot demonstrate. Rather, what the unbeliever needs to hear is the resurrection of Jesus, and the forgiveness of sins because of the resurrection of Jesus, along with the historical facts and evidence in support. In other words, Jesus lived, died, and rose again, in real time, in real space, and in real history, and all of these events occurred outside of us all, in real time, in real space, and in real history. In other words, no one has to experience the resurrection of Jesus inside themselves, because this resurrection occurred outside, in real time, in real space, and in real history.

What I have demonstrated is, your "supposed" direct communication with Jesus has no benefit whatsoever with anyone else but you, unless you can demonstrate this direct communication you have. I gave you the opportunity to demonstrate this to us, by allowing you to give us your interpretation of a passage of scripture, and we all know why it is you declined to give us any interpretation at all. It is because, if you have a direct communication with Jesus, you cannot afford to be in error, while those of us who are not insisting that we have this miraculous gift, would more than welcome the idea that we could be in error.

What I am telling you with confidence is, you do not have a direct communication with Jesus. What I am telling anyone else who may be reading this is, you do not need a direct line of communication with Jesus in order to know that Jesus was a real historical figure, who lived in real historical times, who had a real historical following, and this real historical following claim to have witnessed Jesus alive after death, and that this real historical resurrection atones for our sin. In other words, it is not what happens inside us which matters, but rather what has occurred outside ourselves, which is the real historical life, death, and resurrection which occurred outside of us. The point is, you do not have to have the same experience that Tammy claims to have, in order to know that your sins have been forgiven. In other words, the forgiveness of sin is offered to all, and you do not have to claim to have a direct communication with Jesus to accept this offer.

[Realworldjack]

[Replying to OneJack in post #94]

While I do not agree with "Onejack" and I will get to "Onejack" when we demonstrate you do not possess the ability to have a direct communication with Jesus, if you do not respond to this post, the "crickets" will speak volumes. In other words, if "Onejack" is correct in that, "half of which were passages from the bible that you used, as the foundation of your testimonies" and you do not claim to have the ability to interpret what is contained in the Bible, then how can we know that what you are using from the Bible is interpreted correctly? Again, I want to stress the fact that "Onejack" and I do not seem to be on the same page. However, I want to ensure we have demonstrated the fact that you do not possess an ability to have a direct communication with Jesus before moving on to "Onejack."

[tam]

Peace to you,

[Replying to tam in post #91]

This is SO, SO, FUNNY! It is you who is the one who "moves the goal post."

I did not. In fact, you admit this yourself, partially down this post.

It seems at this point that you've given up engaging in discussion. Your responses seem to be simple repetition, ignoring points that dispute your claims, and ignoring questions asked.

I was careful then to be sure to acknowledge the fact that there were those later who obtained certain gifts after the laying on of the apostles' hands, which would be an "anointing" of these men by the apostles. I clearly stated this.

As stated previously, Cornelius and his household (multiple friends and family members) received holy spirit and began talking in tongues without the laying on of hands.

Cornelius and his household were not the 12 apostles.
Cornelius and his household did not have hands laid upon them in order to receive from God "the same gift he gave us who believed in the Lord [Jesus] Christ" - Peter, Acts 11:17

Let me ask you a question Jack - do you believe that Christians receive (are baptized/anointed with) holy spirit?

With this being the case, and since you have no idea at all who was being addressed by John (the apostle) when he talked about the "anointing" teaching whoever he was addressing, the audience certainly could have been disciples of John whom John had laid his hands upon, because we know for a fact that John had disciples who followed him, just as John had been a follower of Jesus.

I can see why you would want it to mean that, because it supports your chosen belief.

However, the fact remains that the laying on of hands was not necessary for Cornelius and his household to receive holy spirit and the gift they were given along with it (speaking in tongues.)

In addition:

I have other sheep that are not of this sheep pen. I must bring them also. They too will listen to my voice, and there shall be one flock and one shepherd.

One Shepherd. One Teacher. One Master. Christ Himself.

Remember also the instruction from Hebrews to 'imitate the faith' of those who came first?

However, you read this passage and assume who the audience is, and go on to apply this passage to yourself, when you have no idea at all who the audience was.

Actually I brought up this passage to show you that Christ was continuing to teach and speak to people after His death and resurrection and ascension - not just the apostles, but the "regular Christians" as well.

You originally claimed that Christ had stopped speaking because of a Hebrews verse which states "In these last days God has spoken to us through His Son." You claimed that 'has spoken' means no longer speaking. However, that has been shown to be untrue - because Christ was clearly still speaking to people (apostles and others) after this letter was written.

Why does the fact that you were wrong in this not give you pause?

I have also demonstrated to you, and you would have to acknowledge the fact, that not everything contained in the Bible would apply to you, and I have demonstrated this by pointing to the fact that it would depend on who the audience was who was being addressed at the time, along with what the command, or teaching would be.

I never suggested that everything contained in the Bible applied to me.

You are, however, doing the very thing you are accusing me of doing: You have taken instruction given SOLELY to Timothy by Paul - and applied that to yourself (or others today.)

Again, with this being the case, you take a passage of scripture authored by the apostle John, having absolutely no idea who the target audience was, and you go on to use this passage claiming to have the "anointing" this apostle is referring to.

It would be the anointing of holy spirit.

Is there a different anointing that you know of, one in which people would not need anyone else to teach them because that anointing teaches them all things?

(*please note that even though they needed no man to teach them, John did not cut off communication and relationship - he still encouraged them, perhaps even shared with them things he had received at times - because that is what we do for one another, out of love, and as Christ directs us to do so.)

Please ALSO note (as the spirit reminded me just now):

You, however, have an anointing from the Holy One, and all of you know the truth.

John makes no mention of the laying on of hands. He does however clearly state that they have an anointing from the Holy One (from Christ.)

That is the anointing (of holy spirit) that I received from my dear Lord.

I am going to share the experience in case that helps anyone (not to come to me, or think I am anything because I am not - but to instead come to Christ, put faith in Him). Before I describe it, I just want to emphasize that I knew nothing about anything. I had faith in God and His Son, I knew that I am to listen to His Son (though I learned even these things from my dear Lord Jaheshua and His Father.) I asked to be led wherever God wanted me to be (which was to His Son), and I had asked to know truth, including the truth of Him.

So I was sitting in my car after this (not driving), and suddenly a gentle wind blew through the car, and with it immense peace washed over me.

That was my anointing of holy spirit - an anointing from my dear Lord, Jaheshua, the Holy One of God. But I did not know this at the time. I am not exaggerating when I say I knew nothing - except Christ and His Father. I did not know anything about holy spirit (what it was), I did not know anything about anointing/the baptism of holy spirit.

Some time later (a year or two or three - I am bad at tracking the passage of time), some of my brothers and sisters in Christ were having a discussion about receiving holy spirit (among other things) and how that is what makes a person Christian (an anointed one.) Otherwise, one is yet a disciple but not yet Christian (anointed.)

Some might be offended by that (at the idea that they might not yet be a Christian, but only a disciple - despite the fact that even the apostles were disciples first and later anointed/Christian.)

I was not offended, however. I cared about the truth (and so also Christ, the Truth.) And Christ is the One who chooses, not me. I can be willing, but it is up to Him who He chooses, as He and His Father see fit. It is His Kingdom, His Body, His Church - and His choosing.

So I was not offended. I was curious and I wanted to know what was true - and not claim to be something that I was not. So I asked Him, am I not Christian? Again, there was no offense in my question. I was just asking. Because I could not remember having an experience of an anointing.

In response, my Lord brought that moment to my mind - that moment in the car with the gentle wind and the peace washing over me. THAT was my anointing, and yes, I am Christian.

THEN - some years later (I think years, again, I am bad at keeping track of time) - I forgot all about this reminder. Because this same topic came up again (about anointing and holy spirit and what makes a person Christian) - and I again wondered and asked my Lord, am I Christian?

AND AGAIN - my dear Lord reminded me of that moment in the car with the gentle wind and the peace that washed over me.

Which of course reminded me that He had already reminded me of this same thing when I last asked the question the first time around!

That is TWICE that my dear Lord confirmed to me that I did receive an anointing from Him (of holy spirit) and that I am indeed Christian. So I can know it is true - not from the bible - but from my dear Lord.

I must also thank my dear Lord Jaheshua and His Father for their patience.


I am going to stop here because this post is pretty long, and continue with the rest in another post.


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

[tam]

[Replying to tam in post #91]


You seem to want to insist the miraculous gifts are still in effect today, so please do tell me, who is it today who is an apostle?

You seem to assume that gifts are given only to apostles, but this is untrue. You will then say that gifts could be given via laying on of hands (which is true).

But this can also be given without the laying on of hands, Jack. Such as with Cornelius and his household.

You also seem to want to differentiate between miraculous gifts and non-miraculous gifts. But a gift is a gift, and given out as Christ sees fit.

Who is it today who is raising the dead? Who is it today who is speaking in tongues? Who is it today who has the gift of interpretation of tongues? Who is it today who is the prophet who hears directly from God and speaks on God's behalf? I have heard of no one who has the gift of healing today. Have you? Do you know someone who has the gift of healing? I have heard of no one raising the dead as the apostles did, have you? I have heard of those speaking in tongues today, but what good is the speaking in tongues when the whole of the Church speaks the same language? I have heard of those who supposedly have the gift of interpretation of these tongues, but again, what need would there be in one today speaking in a language no one in the Church understands, and then everyone in the Church having to depend upon the one interpreting being correct?

First, I do not assume that something cannot exist simply because I personally have not heard of it. Though I would agree that there are a lot of fakes out there, and even some who perform such miracles in the name of Christ, but who are not known by Him (Matt 7:22)

For me, the only gift from your list that I do not know of anyone having is raising the dead. (I would also just correct one thing: it is Christ who speaks on behalf of His Father (God). He is the mediator between man and God.)

It is complete, and utter nonsense, along with being a dangerous, and reckless theology. This is your dilemma. You seem to want to insist the miraculous gifts are still in existence. I am assuming this would mean all the gifts are still with us today.

It could mean that, but I don't know why it has to mean that.

Regardless, I don't think I brought up gifts into this conversation. I think you brought up gifts because you equate "hearing the voice of Christ/The Shepherd' as being one of these gifts, and as such, this could only be given to apostles.

But that cannot be true. Because Christ said His sheep would listen to His voice. He would call His sheep by name. His sheep will follow Him because we know His voice. He has also said (listed in the previous post), "Let the one with ears HEAR what the Spirit SAYS to the churches" and "If anyone hears my voice and opens the door..."

Many more people than just the apostles make up His sheep, are called by name, are anointed with holy spirit.

Now, let us move on in order to demonstrate that it is you (the one who claims to hear from Jesus directly) who is "moving the goalposts." You claim to have this miraculous gift from God, to hear from Jesus directly, but you refuse to even give your own private understanding of a passage of scripture.

Jack, what would hearing from Christ have to do with "my own private understanding" of a verse in the bible?

"My own private understanding" would necessarily be something I got from myself - rather than something received from Christ, in the spirit.

You then go on to admit to us that you do not even have the gift, or the ability to interpret scripture, which is absolutely an unbelievable claim. I mean, you do not seem to have any trouble at all with interpreting what I have to say, but for some strange reason when it comes to what is contained in the Bible, you claim to not have the ability to understand it.

I think we are using 'interpretation' and 'understanding' very differently.

Can you interpret revelation on your own? No, you admitted you cannot. Why not? I am not judging you. I also cannot interpret revelation on my own.

Are some things straightforward? Sure.

Do people put their own spin (interpretation) on many things, rather than simply taking them literally or waiting for Christ to explain the meaning? Yes, all the time. But how do you know (not just personally believe, but know) if your spin, your interpretation, is correct?

You have an interpretation about Paul's words 'we take every thought captive.' What you actually mean is still unclear because you have refused to answer my requests for clarity (viewtopic.php?p=1183882&sid=1b65bde14cf ... f#p1183882)

The point is that you have assigned meaning BEYOND what Paul literally said. I don't understand how you can be so sure that he meant more than what he simply said?

As I stated previously, if Paul meant more than what he said, I have not received anything about it.

But I explained this here:

viewtopic.php?p=1183705#p1183705

Do you really want to talk about "moving the goalpost?" This is not really moving the "goalpost," rather this is just being dishonest, because we all can see you have the ability to interpret the English language. So then, this is being dishonest, in order to avoid.

As I said earlier, you know I have not moved the goalpost. Instead you are accusing me of dishonesty. Something I have not been - so maybe you should consider questioning your ability to 'interpret' my words.

If it is not, then all you have to do is to demonstrate that it is not being dishonest, and tell us what Paul meant when he said, "We take every thought captive." It cannot possibly be a trick, or a trap, to ask a Christian how they understand a passage of scripture.

Responded to in the same post that I linked above:

viewtopic.php?p=1183705#p1183705

Unless of course, this particular Christian cannot afford to be in error. OH?

Answered at the bottom of this post:

viewtopic.php?p=1183516#p1183516

You cannot in any way demonstrate that you hear from Jesus directly. Ergo, even if you do hear from Jesus directly, there would be no benefit to any of the rest of us. What benefit is there then in, insisting that you have such a miraculous gift, if the only one who benefits is you?

Why did I give the testimony? (in no particular order:)

1 - as a response to Z on this thread. Not that I expect him to just believe me, but perhaps it is something for him (or others) to think about it. Maybe something can come of that, maybe nothing. That is not up to me. I answered truthfully to his OP. That is all. You are the one who decided to take issue and call my mental health into question.

2 - To bear witness to Christ, a living and speaking Christ. Which someone once did for me. Which helped me put faith in Christ and His words, His promises, even opening my eyes to the truth that He is TRULY alive. Why was I treating Him as if He was not alive, had no power, could not speak? And who does not speak to those they love (unless those they love do not want to be spoken TO)?

3 - My job, my purpose, is to bear witness to Christ (to praise Him and His Father.) That is WHO I am. So that is what I DO.

The unbeliever does not need to hear about your direct communication with Jesus which you cannot demonstrate.

Z might be a non-believer, but 'unbelievers' tend to be religious (claiming to be believers, but not really believing.)

Regardless, what business is it of yours who I respond to and who I do not?

Rather, what the unbeliever needs to hear is the resurrection of Jesus, and the forgiveness of sins because of the resurrection of Jesus, along with the historical facts and evidence in support. In other words, Jesus lived, died, and rose again, in real time, in real space, and in real history, and all of these events occurred outside of us all, in real time, in real space, and in real history. In other words, no one has to experience the resurrection of Jesus inside themselves, because this resurrection occurred outside, in real time, in real space, and in real history.

Well you do you, Jack. I never said you couldn't.



Peace still.

[OneJack]

Peace to you,

[Replying to tam in post #91]

I am going to share the experience in case that helps anyone (not to come to me, or think I am anything because I am not - but to instead come to Christ, put faith in Him). Before I describe it, I just want to emphasize that I knew nothing about anything. I had faith in God and His Son, I knew that I am to listen to His Son (though I learned even these things from my dear Lord Jaheshua and His Father.) I asked to be led wherever God wanted me to be (which was to His Son), and I had asked to know truth, including the truth of Him.

So I was sitting in my car after this (not driving), and suddenly a gentle wind blew through the car, and with it immense peace washed over me.

That was my anointing of holy spirit - an anointing from my dear Lord, Jaheshua, the Holy One of God. But I did not know this at the time. I am not exaggerating when I say I knew nothing - except Christ and His Father. I did not know anything about holy spirit (what it was), I did not know anything about anointing/the baptism of holy spirit.

Some time later (a year or two or three - I am bad at tracking the passage of time), some of my brothers and sisters in Christ were having a discussion about receiving holy spirit (among other things) and how that is what makes a person Christian (an anointed one.) Otherwise, one is yet a disciple but not yet Christian (anointed.)

Some might be offended by that (at the idea that they might not yet be a Christian, but only a disciple - despite the fact that even the apostles were disciples first and later anointed/Christian.)

I was not offended, however. I cared about the truth (and so also Christ, the Truth.) And Christ is the One who chooses, not me. I can be willing, but it is up to Him who He chooses, as He and His Father see fit. It is His Kingdom, His Body, His Church - and His choosing.

So I was not offended. I was curious and I wanted to know what was true - and not claim to be something that I was not. So I asked Him, am I not Christian? Again, there was no offense in my question. I was just asking. Because I could not remember having an experience of an anointing.

In response, my Lord brought that moment to my mind - that moment in the car with the gentle wind and the peace washing over me. THAT was my anointing, and yes, I am Christian.

THEN - some years later (I think years, again, I am bad at keeping track of time) - I forgot all about this reminder. Because this same topic came up again (about anointing and holy spirit and what makes a person Christian) - and I again wondered and asked my Lord, am I Christian?

AND AGAIN - my dear Lord reminded me of that moment in the car with the gentle wind and the peace that washed over me.

Which of course reminded me that He had already reminded me of this same thing when I last asked the question the first time around!

That is TWICE that my dear Lord confirmed to me that I did receive an anointing from Him (of holy spirit) and that I am indeed Christian. So I can know it is true - not from the bible - but from my dear Lord.

I must also thank my dear Lord Jaheshua and His Father for their patience.


I am going to stop here because this post is pretty long, and continue with the rest in another post.


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

Now I know why you're hesitant to show us utterances from the ‘small still voice,’ which, obviously by this testimony, are nothing but your plain assumptions based on what you've heard and learned from your fellow believers - whether Christians or not is yet to be tested.

[tam]

Peace to you all,

[Replying to OneJack in post #94]

While I do not agree with "Onejack" and I will get to "Onejack" when we demonstrate you do not possess the ability to have a direct communication with Jesus,

Couple things:

A - again, who is 'we'?

B - Jaheshua, not "Jesus"

C - Don't you think it is up to Christ if someone has the ability to hear Him?

if you do not respond to this post, the "crickets" will speak volumes.

No, see, I have responded to OneJack. On multiple occasions. We have had many - many - conversations on the board. Me not responding to him on this thread means nothing more than that I have no desire to go around and around and around... and around... and around.

I also stopped responding to Onejack because of accusations he lobbed against my Lord, and I do not want to continue a conversation that may end up with him doing worse (or more of the same.)


But if the reader is interested in what OneJack is asking me about:

viewtopic.php?p=1177986#p1177986

viewtopic.php?p=1178207#p1178207

viewtopic.php?p=1178910#p1178910

viewtopic.php?p=1181083#p1181083



Peace again.