"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?

[OneJack]

[Replying to OneJack in post #109]

It's not the name, per se, that matters, but the attachment that the name carries.

What attachment does the name Jaheshua carry?

It's not the name Jaheshua but the name Jesus, per se, who is the Almighty God.

The 'small still voice' spirit denies that Jesus is the Almighty God but claims to be the Son of God in the spirit nature.

So what?

Denying Jesus is the Almighty God means the 'small still voice' spirit is deceiving Tam because Jesus is the Almighty God. Claiming to be the Son of God in the spirit nature means the 'small still voice' spirit is a deceiver, since the Son of God was the man who served as the physical vessel of Jesus Christ in His incarnation among His apostles and disciples. Also, Christ is the Almighty God Himself who dwelt in the Son during His incarnation. The 'small still voice' spirit mixed up the terminologies Christ and the Son of God, and worse, he claims the two for himself.

Jesus wasn't someone who called himself God Almighty anyway.

What exactly have you audibly heard from the Lord Jesus Christ in this regard?

That is just a popularized theological concept. Biblical Jesus was more into telling people that they should have a relationship with The Father and claimed that following him/what he said, was the way to enable that.

I'm afraid you're just talking about your opinion on biblical matters here, aren't you?

Tam is testifying more for the bible instead of the 'small still voice spirit' that until now has not given her the details of who he really is in his own living and existence.

Therefore, you want the details - the verbatim.

Why not if there are any?

Something like a narration of what goes on in tams head, as it transpires, rather than simply the claim with biblical referrences?

Whatever, provided they come from the 'small still voice' spirit.

[William]

[Replying to OneJack in post #111]

I'm afraid you're just talking about your opinion on biblical matters here, aren't you?

I dare say we all are...only - I am not afraid to admit it. Anyway, in this sub-forum, "biblical matters" are not any more authoritative than opinions on biblical matters are.

But opinions about other members ... that's a whole other story.

[OneJack]

[Replying to OneJack in post #111]

I'm afraid you're just talking about your opinion on biblical matters here, aren't you?

I dare say we all are...

Why say ‘we all are’ when you do not personally know everybody here, do you?

only - I am not afraid to admit it.

Good for you then, for your candidness.

Anyway, in this sub-forum, "biblical matters" are not any more authoritative than opinions on biblical matters are.

Is there such a thing as ‘authoritative biblical matters,’ per se? I don’t think there is such a thing; even ‘opinions on biblical matters’ are not authoritative in any sense.

But opinions about other members ... that's a whole other story.

I agree.

[Realworldjack]

[Replying to tam in post #105]

Okay, you are getting nowhere. It has been demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt that you are not hearing from Jesus directly and never have. Just the other day you claimed to have heard from Jesus when he reminded you of the fact that we have been set free from the law. This is absolutely hilarious in that anyone at all who has been a Christian for any time at all, would know this to be the case, because it is recorded right there in the Bible. It is not like this was some sort of grand revelation given to you by Jesus. Rather, this is simple common knowledge for the everyday Christian. In other words, anyone who is a Christian would not have to be reminded of such things, because it is Christianity 101. It is baby food. I am just telling you that I would be ashamed to even say that anyone had to remind me of such a thing as a Christian, much less attribute such a thing to Jesus. I mean, do you see what I am saying? You have absolutely nothing of substance to tell us concerning what Jesus has revealed to you that we do not already know, and so you resort to Jesus having to remind you of the extremely elementary basics of the Christian faith, and then attempt to give Jesus the credit.

Next, one who truly hears from Jesus would certainly have a good understanding of the scriptures the Holy Spirit was involved in, and yet you claim to not even have the ability to interpret the scripture. This is one of the most absurd things I have ever read here on this site. Think about what I am saying. You claim to hear directly from Jesus, and Jesus says that scripture is about Him, and Jesus is evidently not communicating to you what the scripture has to say about Him. There is no way you can make this make sense in your own mind.

The funny thing about this is, I give you a random passage of scripture, and ask for your interpretation, but as a Christian, you understand you cannot be involved in attempting to interpret the passage because you understand you cannot afford to be in error. Ergo, you go on to claim to not have the ability to interpret the scripture which is about Jesus. Again, it is the most absurd thing I have heard here. You, as a Christian, cannot even afford to join in with other Christians in order to discuss the meaning of scripture, and it is not because you do not possess the ability to interpret, because you are demonstrating everyday here on this site that you can interpret language just fine. Rather, you cannot afford to join in with the rest of us concerning the meaning of scripture, for fear this will expose the falsehood of you hearing directly from Jesus.

The real funny thing is, I give you a random passage of scripture in which Paul says, "we take every thought captive", and you refuse to engage by claiming not to be able to interpret. However, when I give you the correct interpretation (and it is indeed the correct interpretation and there can be no other) you are force to complain about the correct interpretation because it demonstrates Paul had authority over the Corinthians, and your idea that you are being taught directly by Jesus contradicts this interpretation. In other words, when one is being taught directly by Jesus, they have no need in anyone being in authority over them. I want to stress the fact that this was simply a random passage I picked because it is one of the passages most Christians interpret incorrectly. However, it just so happens to go against what it is you would like to believe. Strange how that worked out, isn't it?

So then, you argue against the correct interpretation because it goes against your idea that Paul had some sort of authority and accuse Paul of some sort of mind control. However, the thing is, Paul actually talks about the authority he had over the Corinthians in that same passage when he said,

"So even if I boast somewhat freely about the authority the Lord gave us for building you up rather than tearing you down, I will not be ashamed of it."

There it is in black and white. Paul is claiming to have authority over the Corinthians. In fact, Paul goes on to say this,

"For some say, “His letters are weighty and forceful, but in person he is unimpressive and his speaking amounts to nothing.” Such people should realize that what we are in our letters when we are absent, we will be in our actions when we are present."

This is a clear warning to the Corinthians that if they do not straighten up their act, they would discover the authority he had, and go on to discover that he, along with those traveling with him, had the ability to "take every thought captive and make it obedient to Christ." That is the correct interpretation, and you cannot argue with it, because you cannot afford to. Notice, you are not arguing with the interpretation but are rather arguing that it goes against what you would rather believe. Your problem is the fact that the interpretation is not going to change, and the correct interpretation is as plain as the nose on your face. Paul was an apostle, and an apostle means sent one, and Jesus sent His apostles to speak on His behalf. In other words, the apostles had authority from Jesus. It is clear that we have demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt that you are not hearing from God.

This is an extremely dangerous game you are playing, and this game you are playing can have consequences upon others who need to hear the "Good News." Just to demonstrate how dangerous this game you are playing is, all you need to do is to look at what is going on in the administration at the White House here in the U.S. Trump has a spiritual advisor who is Paula White, and Paula claims to hear directly from God. Here is a clip of Paula after Trump lost the 2020 election calling angels from Africa.



Is Paula hearing directly from Jesus? It is absurd. I mean, Paula is responsible for gathering a bunch of "so called apostles and prophets" who are tied to what is called the New Apostolic Reformation to meet with Trump leading up to Jan. 6th. These apostles and prophets all claim to hear directly from Jesus, and every single one of them predicted that Trump would win the election in 2020 because they had heard from God. When Trump did not win, it could not have possibly been the fact that they did not hear from God, but rather the lie that Trump did win, and the election was stolen. Again, absurdity. I mean, God communicates to them Trump would win, but God forgot to mention the democrats would steal the election.

But this is not all. These same folks from NAR, (you know, the ones who claim to hear from Jesus directly) were meeting with the Trump administration leading up to Jan. 6th, and it was these apostles and prophets who were responsible for the gathering of folks on Jan. 6th. If there are those who do not believe this, I would urge you strongly to listen to "Reformation Revival Fury." It is about 8 hours long, but if you will just listen to the last episode (although I recommend the whole thing) you will clearly hear these folks say with their own mouths that they were involved heavily on Jan. 6th.

Okay, but now that Trump has been re-elected, it is these same apostles and prophets who are around the administration, and they are using their direct line to God in order to guide the administration. I hope you will listen in horror as I did to Paula White here, from just the other day, right before Easter.

https://x.com/atrupar/status/2039481190 ... 6652759%2F

This is what is called "blasphemy," and it is coming from those who claim to hear directly from Jesus. You claim to hear directly from Jesus, and all you have given us thus far as to what Jesus has communicated to you is that He supposably had to remind you of something any Christian would never have to be reminded of, because it is so elementary. All you are doing is to get some idea in your head, (the way in which we all do) and then going on to attribute this to the work of Jesus. The whole point I am making here is, while this dangerous game you are playing is more than likely having a very small impact upon the small influence you have in your small sphere of influence, there are folks such as yourself who claim to have the same communication as you who are causing "real world" damage across the whole world, as these folks are now in the seat of power, and going on to use this reckless and dangerous theology claiming to hear from Jesus even causing wars in the Name of Jesus.

It is a done deal and has been demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt that you are not hearing directly from Jesus. We all know this to be a fact simply by your refusal to even engage in the interpretation of scripture. There is no way one could claim to hear from Jesus on the one hand, and then on the other claim they do not have the ability to interpret the scripture. I mean, this is simply not possible. Rather, it is clear that you had no choice but to avoid attempting to give an interpretation because you realized it would expose the falsehood of your claim. However, what you are failing to realize is, your refusal to engage in the interpretation of scripture reveals this falsehood of what you claim. You avoided giving us an interpretation of what Paul meant by "we take every thought captive" along with at least two more passages I have ask you about, and you have completely ignored these other passages and not even mentioned them.

You can now prove me wrong by telling us what Jesus meant when He said, "come onto me all you who are weak and are heavy laden and I will give you rest for your souls." We all know you will not attempt to give an interpretation here, and we all know why this will not happen. However, your silence on the matter will indeed speak volumes. Because you see, there is no way a Christian would completely refuse to attempt to give an interpretation of scripture. Rather, a Christian would love to be involved in such an endeavor. Unless of course, such an endeavor would expose them as being a false witness.

[Zzyzx]

You say: "Sure, and believers believe the claim was/is verified, by those that were there, and saw."
-----------
WHO was there and saw Jesus come back to life?

WHERE are the actual reports by eyewitnesses? (NOT stories written decades later claiming that people saw)

[tam]

Peace again,

[Replying to tam in post #105]

Okay, you are getting nowhere. It has been demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt that you are not hearing from Jesus directly and never have.

Then why are you still posting?

You're not posting anything new. You're not engaging in discussion. You're just repeating your same claims. So my responses that have gone unanswered are the same.

Couple points though:

Just the other day you claimed to have heard from Jesus when he reminded you of the fact that we have been set free from the law. This is absolutely hilarious in that anyone at all who has been a Christian for any time at all, would know this to be the case, because it is recorded right there in the Bible.

Jack, do you remember that you asked me to answer that question?

You are also incorrect as to what I received and how I answered:

As I was pondering your question and listing off individual things (sin, death, fear, 'egypt - religion', etc.)... I received in the spirit "Slavery."

Free from slavery.

Then someone may ask slavery to what - and would that not be to anything that enslaves us, to which we are enslaved: sin, death, fear, 'egypt-religon', etc? Some were set free from the law as well (though the written law would not have applied to me, because I am not physical Israel, and I was never under that law to begin with.)

It is not like this was some sort of grand revelation given to you by Jesus.

Well it was your question.

(But I mean seriously - it is not enough that He would speak truth out of love, it has to also be a "grand revelation"?)

Rather, this is simple common knowledge for the everyday Christian. In other words, anyone who is a Christian would not have to be reminded of such things, because it is Christianity 101. It is baby food. I am just telling you that I would be ashamed to even say that anyone had to remind me of such a thing as a Christian, much less attribute such a thing to Jesus. I mean, do you see what I am saying? You have absolutely nothing of substance to tell us concerning what Jesus has revealed to you that we do not already know, and so you resort to Jesus having to remind you of the extremely elementary basics of the Christian faith, and then attempt to give Jesus the credit.

Again, it was your question and now you're complaining - not about it being untrue - but that it is too simple.

Well truth usually is simple.

(response to the NAR in next post...)

Peace again.

[POI]

You say: "Sure, and believers believe the claim was/is verified, by those that were there, and saw."
-----------
WHO was there and saw Jesus come back to life?

WHERE are the actual reports by eyewitnesses? (NOT stories written decades later claiming that people saw)

Exactly! The cognitive dissonance and/or special pleading needed to apply believe/faith to the Gospel accounts is/are absolutely amazing!

[tam]

Peace again,

[Replying to Realworldjack in post #114]

This is an extremely dangerous game you are playing, and this game you are playing can have consequences upon others who need to hear the "Good News." Just to demonstrate how dangerous this game you are playing is, all you need to do is to look at what is going on in the administration at the White House here in the U.S. Trump has a spiritual advisor who is Paula White, and Paula claims to hear directly from God. Here is a clip of Paula after Trump lost the 2020 election calling angels from Africa.



Is Paula hearing directly from Jesus? It is absurd. I mean, Paula is responsible for gathering a bunch of "so called apostles and prophets" who are tied to what is called the New Apostolic Reformation to meet with Trump leading up to Jan. 6th. These apostles and prophets all claim to hear directly from Jesus, and every single one of them predicted that Trump would win the election in 2020 because they had heard from God. When Trump did not win, it could not have possibly been the fact that they did not hear from God, but rather the lie that Trump did win, and the election was stolen. Again, absurdity. I mean, God communicates to them Trump would win, but God forgot to mention the democrats would steal the election.

But this is not all. These same folks from NAR, (you know, the ones who claim to hear from Jesus directly) were meeting with the Trump administration leading up to Jan. 6th, and it was these apostles and prophets who were responsible for the gathering of folks on Jan. 6th. If there are those who do not believe this, I would urge you strongly to listen to "Reformation Revival Fury." It is about 8 hours long, but if you will just listen to the last episode (although I recommend the whole thing) you will clearly hear these folks say with their own mouths that they were involved heavily on Jan. 6th.

Your point seems to be - look at these particular people who are claiming to hear from God; they are lying and causing harm (even causing wars); therefore all people who claim to hear directly from God (or in my case, to Christ) must be dangerous liars causing harm as well.

What about people who claim to be based solely upon the bible who tell lies and cause harm to others? Do you then suggest that everyone who claims their faith is based upon the bible is a dangerous liar causing harm? What about religion (which is what this NAR seems to be - just one more daughter of BTG/Babylon the Great)? Religion tells countless lies about God, has started countless wars 'in the name of God', causes harm and death and persecution and torment to countless people (including to those who belong to Christ.) Yet you do not seem to have a problem with religion.


So are you really saying that because there are people who falsely claim to hear from God (nothing new here), anyone who testifies to a living and speaking Christ is a liar and dangerous?

Because John said something much different:

Beloved, do not believe every spirit, but test the spirits to see whether they are from God, for many false prophets have gone out into the world.

John did not tell them to reject every spirit (or inspired expression). He tells them to TEST the spirit/inspired expression. Because many false prophets have gone out into the world.

**

I get that you don't like this movement (and I would agree that they are false prophets/apostles/etc - from what you have shown here - and that video is absurd) - but to me they are just one more daughter of Babylon the Great(er), and none of them are the Truth (Christ is the Truth - not man, not religion, not the bible - but rather Christ Jaheshua Himself.)

And look:

The movement regards the church as the true body of saved believers, as does most of evangelical Protestantism, but differs from the broader Protestant tradition in its views on the nature of church leadership—specifically the doctrine of five-fold ministry, which is based upon a non-traditional interpretation of Ephesians 4:11, the apostles and prophets, evangelists, pastors (also called the shepherds), and teachers.[43][14] Wagner considered 2000–2001 the beginning of the second apostolic age and believed the lost offices of prophets and apostles were restored around that time.[44][45] But the concept of the revived offices of apostle and prophet is not unique to the NAR.[13]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Apostolic_Reformation

It has leaders. It has doctrines. It has biblical interpretations. Mandates. It takes money and donations just like any other religion.


And what about the group you are involved with Jack? Because this is what you said:

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.

viewtopic.php?p=1184705#p1184705

So what about false prophets in the world? Does that mean ALL prophets in the world are false?


Peace again.

[William]

[Replying to tam in post #118]

This post effectively dismantles Realworldjack's guilt-by-association strategy. Tam is not defending Paula White or the NAR. She is rejecting the inference that their false claims invalidate her own witness. She also highlights an inconsistency in Realworldjack's position: he accepts the existence of prophets today who speak on God's behalf (through biblical interpretation), yet condemns tam for claiming to hear from Christ directly.

The observer post we crafted earlier remains relevant. The dynamic is unchanged: Realworldjack argues from within a framework of mediated authority (scripture, correct interpretation, institutional safeguards). Tam argues from within a framework of direct relationship (witness, testing spirits, personal responsibility). The two paradigms cannot reconcile, but tam is now explicitly naming the logical flaws in Realworldjack's attack.

[William]

[Replying to POI in post #117]

You're asking for public, verifiable evidence from a system that defines itself by faith. That's a category mismatch.

Christianity never promised to meet empirical standards. It promises relationship, not proof. The question isn't "where's the evidence?" - it's "why would anyone base their life on faith?" That's a different conversation entirely.

Your framework and theirs are incompatible. Neither will convince the other. Is that the point the OP was making all along?