"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 Zzyzx in post #115]

Hello Zzyzx, great to hear from you again. I really enjoy our conversations. The problem as I see it as far as your questions are concerned is, if we are going to insist that we cannot know who the authors of the gospels, and Acts are, nor when or where they wrote, then we cannot insist that the authors were not Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

Next, you continue to talk about the material being authored decades out. Exactly how many decades are we talking about? Because you see, we would naturally expect all the material to be authored decades out. I mean, just looking at the life of Paul, we know Paul was originally opposed to Christianity, and it was several years before he converted. We also know it was some 3 years before Paul went to Jerusalem in order to meet the other apostles. Then it would have been some years before Paul set out on his missionary journeys, and he would have been at the first Church he planted for a number of years, before he was off to the next. This is demonstrating that we are already at decades before Paul would have had the need to write his first letter to any of the Churches. The point I am making is, Paul authored letters some 4 decades out from the resurrection, and he was still very alive, and Paul would have been alive at the time of the events recorded in the gospels. In the same way, even if the gospels were authored decades out from the events, this does not mean the authors could not have been Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John.

However, the bigger problem I see with your questions is the fact that the overwhelming majority of scholars, whether Christian or not, are convinced by the material in the NT that the reports of the resurrection could not have been made up. In other words, no matter who the authors may have been, no matter where they were when they wrote, no matter when they may have authored the material, and even no matter how untrustworthy the material may be, it is this same material which has convinced most all scholars, that the witnesses were truly convinced they had witnessed Jesus alive after death.

If I have already shared this with you then you can skip it, but as an example, Bart Ehrman gives a scenario in which he attempts to explain how all these things came to be. However, Ehrman goes to great lengths before sharing this scenario, explaining very carefully that he does not believe this scenario is the correct scenario, because he agrees to just how unlikely this scenario would be. However, Ehrman goes on to explain, "no matter how unlikely this scenario would be, it is still far more likely than the resurrection." The question which should be arising in all of our minds right now is, why would Ehrman not give us a scenario which would be likely? It is extremely simple, and that is the fact that Ehrman understands there is no scenario at all which would be very likely.

My whole point here is, I do not see how the argument that we do not know who the authors were, nor when they wrote, nor where they were when they wrote, and not even an argument against the trustworthiness of what is contained makes much difference at all, when we can know that the earlier followers of Jesus were all convinced they had witnessed the risen Jesus, along with knowing they continued to proclaim this to be the case.

[tam]

Peace again,

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.

So does blasphemy not ever come from people who claim to base their faith on the bible alone? Does blasphemy never come from religion?

What point do you think you are making, Jack?

**

BTW, I listened to that little X video and what she said was "I believe the Lord said to say to you..." This is not the same as "The Lord said to say to you..."

Just fyi.

Regardless, we were warned that false prophets would be in the world, were we not? Does that mean that all prophets are false?

You claim to hear directly from Jesus,

Jaheshua, not "Jesus".

You can now prove me wrong

Can I?

Because no matter what I share or say, it seems you will complain. If I share something true - it is too simple and I should be ashamed to show how uneducated or ignorant a Christian I am. Well, I am indeed a foolish thing. If I don't respond at all - that speaks volumes, but if I do respond (and it is true) - well that means nothing. In fact, you will use even a truthful answer against me.

So how exactly can I prove you 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."

What is confusing about this?

Christ invites people to come to Him. People who are weary and burdened. He will give them rest.

What exactly do you think needs to be interpreted about that?


Peace again.

[Realworldjack]

[Replying to tam in post #116]

Then why are you still posting?

Because you continue to proclaim this fantasy of yours, and it is this sort of thing which causes more damage to the cause of Christ than any atheist, agnostic, or unbeliever ever could. Moreover, the more we engage, and the more you continue to type, the more you are revealing yourself to be a false witness. More than likely this is the reason you are hoping I would not continue to post, because you understand the more you type, the more you reveal. I will also continue to go back to the fact that you completely refuse to engage in giving an interpretation of any scripture, which is extremely revealing your false witness. No one who claims to hear directly from Jesus could ever claim they do not have the ability to interpret the scripture which testifies of Jesus.

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

I really do not recall such a question, but it really does not matter. What matters is the fact that you claim to have some sort of direct communication from Jesus the other day, and none of what you claim Jesus revealed to you would be anything at all that a baby Christian would not know, because everything you claim was revealed to you that day is readily available from the Bible. Moreover, and again, you would have never known a thing about this Jesus you claim communicates with you, if it had not been for the Bible. It is also a fact that you would not have come up with the idea that this Jesus communicates with you, if it had not been for another teaching you such a thing, which brings us back to the fact that you are holding to the doctrine of man which you rail against.

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

It is the fact that what you claim was revealed to you by Jesus, is something any elementary Christian would have already known by reading what has been revealed in scripture. If you cannot understand why this would be embarrassing, then I do not know how to help you. It would be like me saying, "Jesus revealed to me just the other day that He was crucified on a cross, and that He died for our sins." The point I am making is, if you are going to share with us something Jesus has revealed to you, then you need to wait until He shares with you something we do not already know. I hardly doubt that is going to happen, since you cannot even share with us your interpretation of any scripture at all, which goes on to demonstrate you are not hearing from Jesus directly.

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.

It is not that it is "too simple." Rather, it is the fact that there would be no reason to reveal to you something which has already been communicated in scripture, which we can all read for ourselves.

[POI]

[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.

I was making a comment regarding RealWorldJack's epistemology. His beliefs (upon a risen Jesus) are based upon the same flimsy types of 'evidence' he is telling others to reject.

Christianity never promised to meet empirical standards. It promises relationship, not proof.

Well, I guess it might depend upon what parts of the Bible one decides to cleave to (verses) ignore/minimize/other.

The question isn't "where's the evidence?"

Well, then it's a good thing for the defenders of Christianity, since such 'evidence' appears to be lacking. Which is why I guess faith is instead heavily touted?

"why would anyone base their life on faith?"

Because the deemed "authoritative book" tells them to?

Neither will convince the other. Is that the point the OP was making all along?

Maybe?

[tam]

Peace to you,

[Replying to tam in post #116]

Then why are you still posting?

Because you continue to proclaim this fantasy of yours,

Jack, I'm not going to deny my Lord.

If you think your posts are going to make that happen, then you might want to reconsider who really is the delusional one here.

and it is this sort of thing which causes more damage to the cause of Christ than any atheist, agnostic, or unbeliever ever could.

Unproven and unfounded assertion.

Moreover, the more we engage, and the more you continue to type, the more you are revealing yourself to be a false witness.

On the contrary, you have proven yourself to employ double standards in much of what we have talked about. You took me to task for claiming that Christians are to walk by faith and not by sight - even though you don't disagree. You simply wish to claim that Paul wasn't speaking to anyone today - and yet you turn around and apply Paul's words to timothy (literally just to timothy) to yourself and people today.

You have not shown that I have given a false witness. Everything I have shared is corroborated by what Christ said, Himself. Even by what the apostles said.

More than likely this is the reason you are hoping I would not continue to post,

Who says I was hoping you would not continue to post?

because you understand the more you type, the more you reveal. I will also continue to go back to the fact that you completely refuse to engage in giving an interpretation of any scripture, which is extremely revealing your false witness. No one who claims to hear directly from Jesus could ever claim they do not have the ability to interpret the scripture which testifies of Jesus.

Can you provide some evidence for this claim of yours?

You do remember that Christ had to open the scriptures to even the apostles, right? They did not interpret or even understand on their own.

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

I really do not recall such a question, but it really does not matter.

It matters. You're taking me to task over a response to a question that you, yourself, asked. You even cautioned me to 'be careful' in how I responded.

Here is where you asked the question: viewtopic.php?p=1183843#p1183843

What matters is the fact that you claim to have some sort of direct communication from Jesus the other day, and none of what you claim Jesus revealed to you would be anything at all that a baby Christian would not know, because everything you claim was revealed to you that day is readily available from the Bible.

So why did you caution me to 'be careful how I answer'?

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

It is the fact that what you claim was revealed to you by Jesus, is something any elementary Christian would have already known by reading what has been revealed in scripture. If you cannot understand why this would be embarrassing, then I do not know how to help you. It would be like me saying, "Jesus revealed to me just the other day that He was crucified on a cross, and that He died for our sins."

I wouldn't have a problem with it. There is nothing false in that statement (other than the name 'Jesus', since Christ was not named that nor was He ever called that.)

But if there is nothing untrue in the statement, what problem would I have with it?

The point I am making is, if you are going to share with us something Jesus has revealed to you, then you need to wait until He shares with you something we do not already know.

You mean like the truth that He (Jaheshua) is alive and speaks, and that His sheep listen to His voice?

Because that is something you don't know. Despite His own words, the apostles words, the evidence of all the times He spoke after his death and resurrection and ascension, despite the complete lack of surprise from Ananias when Christ spoke to him - indicating that this was NOT a rare occurrence at all.


Peace again.

[OneJack]

[Replying to tam in post #118]

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.

In your case tammy dear, the 'small still voice' spirit being who continuously talks to you claims he is Christ, yet denies JESUS is the name of Christ, the Almighty God, which is a dangerous lie and causing harm as well to our souls if many believe in him. Also, it proves that you are talking only to a deceiving spirit being [who draws you away from the Lord Jesus], not to the Almighty God, whose name is Jesus.

[tam]

Peace again to the reader,

[Replying to OneJack in post #126]

I don't think we have much left to say to one another OneJack.

I am listening to the Son of God. You are not listening to the Son of God (by your own admission.) You claim the Son of God is dead.

We are clearly not listening to the same spirit.

viewtopic.php?p=1185169#p1185169

[Realworldjack]

[Replying to tam in post #0]

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.

Well, no! It is the fact that the scripture gives all we need in order to "live a Godly life in Christ Jesus" as Paul explained to Timothy, and you are not giving us anything at all from your direct communication from Jesus that any of us as Christians would not already know from reading the scripture. I mean, at least the false prophets from the NAR are claiming the hear from Jesus, and claiming that Trump has been anointed by God to be the president. You see, this is something which would not be revealed in scripture, and we can determine whether they are hearing from Jesus or not. You on the other hand have not revealed to us anything at all which we would not have already known. It is like you are guilty of parody, claiming to have this revelation which has already been revealed by another. You need to give us something which Jesus has revealed to you which we would not already know by reading what has already been revealed in scripture. Or if you cannot do that, then at least give us an interpretation of one of the passages I have begged you to share. You are not going to give either one, and we know that you are not going to give either one, because we all know that you cannot afford to do such a thing, because it will reveal you to be a false witness.

What about people who claim to be based solely upon the bible who tell lies and cause harm to others?

Can you give me an example of one who claims to hear only from the Bible and not directly from Jesus who tells lies, and causes harm to others? Because you see, I have given you an example of a whole lot of folks from the NAR who claim to hear directly from Jesus, and you have agreed. However, the thing is, I could continue on, and on giving you such examples of folks who claim to hear directly from Jesus in which you would have to agree that they are not, and so we will wait on you to reveal to us any of those who only claim to hear from the revealed word in scripture who causes such harm.

Do you then suggest that everyone who claims their faith is based upon the bible is a dangerous liar causing harm?

I'll be waiting on you to give us this one person who only claims to hear from Jesus from the scripture who is causing the same harm as those who claim to hear from Jesus directly.

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.

The more you type, the more you reveal. You would think that since you have a direct line to Jesus, He would have already revealed to you that I am not part of any religion. I mean, exactly what religion do you accuse me of being a part of? I know you have not heard this from me, because I am not a part of any religion. So then, who did you hear it from?

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?

What I am saying is,

"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."

What I am also saying is, you have given us nothing whatsoever which you have heard from Jesus directly which would not be contained in this scripture which Paul says is all we need for "teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the servant of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work." What else is Jesus revealing to you that we need in order to do good works? Is there something lacking which Paul neglects?

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.

Did John say this before the cannon of scripture, or after? In other words, how do we test the spirits now? Is it some sort of mysterious thing where we attempt to gage the spirits with what we claim we feel? Or do we gage the spirits against what has been revealed in scripture? As an example, when I hear the so-called apostles, and prophets of the NAR, am I to gage them according to what the spirit is telling me inside myself? Or should I gage them according to what has been revealed in what has been delivered by the apostles in the scripture? I am not thinking I need to hear from Jesus directly to understand they are bearing false witness, in the same way I do not need to hear from Jesus directly to understand that you are bearing false witness.

I will also point out the fact that you, yourself claim to not have the ability to interpret scripture correctly, and yet you continue to appeal to the scripture which you claim not to be able to interpret in order to defend the fantasy that you have a direct line to Jesus.

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.)

You are correct that I do not like this movement, but what I abhor even more is folks like you. Because you see, the folks in the NAR at least will give their interpretation of scripture, and they will also boldly tell us what Jesus is revealing to them directly in that Trump has been ordained by God to be the president of the United States. On the other hand, you refuse to do either one. You claim to have a direct line to Jesus but refuse to give any sort of interpretation of any scripture at all which testifies of Jesus. Moreover, the only thing you have shared with us that Jesus has revealed to you directly, is something anyone can know, whether Christian or not, by reading what has already been revealed in the scripture you claim not to be able to interpret.

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

Okay?

And what about the group you are involved with Jack?

Exactly what "group am I involved with?" Again, you would think that since you have a direct line to Jesus, you would know this already. I have not darkened the door of a Church in decades. This means that I am not part of any group. However, I have demonstrated that I do not need to be part of any group at all in order to demonstrate that you are bearing false witness.

There are prophets among us today who rightly divide the word of truth, but they are hard to come by these days, which is exactly why I have not attended Church in decades, because I cannot find such a Church in the area in which I live. How do I know this to be the case? Well, it is not because I have heard directly from Jesus, but rather because I can compare what they have to say to what Jesus has to say in the scripture, and most of the Churches in the area like you, claim to hear directly from Jesus apart from scripture. The ones who do not claim to hear from Jesus directly claim to believe one thing but teach something completely different.

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

I cannot speak for all prophets in the world, because I am not familiar with all the prophets of the world. I can say that here in the U.S. a good number of the so-called prophets claim to hear directly from Jesus, and many of the ones who do not have given themselves over to politics. There are a few left here in the U.S. who do not claim to hear directly from Jesus, and have not given themselves over to politics, but they are few and far between.

The point I am making is; I have a very low tolerance for the Christian nationalists of the NAR who claim to hear directly from Jesus, However, I have an even lower tolerance for folks such as yourself who claim to have this same direct communication with Jesus, because at the very least the folks in the NAR will tell you directly how they interpret scripture, along with the fact that they will tell you exactly what they have heard from Jesus directly, as opposed to you who refuses to engage in the interpretation of scripture, and only reveals to us what Jesus has revealed to them, which anyone who is not even a Christian would know by simply reading the scripture.

[OneJack]

Peace again to the reader,

[Replying to OneJack in post #126]

I don't think we have much left to say to one another OneJack.

I am listening to the Son of God. You are not listening to the Son of God (by your own admission.) You claim the Son of God is dead.

We are clearly not listening to the same spirit.

viewtopic.php?p=1185169#p1185169

Indeed, you and me are not listening to the same Spirit. But we’re listening to the the One who says now to all people around the globe, to wit:

"All of you who are listening, listen carefully! I am your Lord God. Who are you afraid of? I am the Almighty. Who are you intimidated by? Remember, when I am by your side, you have nothing to fear, nothing to worry about, because I will save you from any calamity if you trust in Me and regard Me as your salvation and eternal life. As your Lord, whom you alone will worship and none other, I am the one true God existing in heaven, earth, or universe. I created all things, I gave you life. Where will you go? If not to Me, you have nowhere else to go.“

His name is Jesust, and He is Christ, the Almighty!

[tam]

Peace again,

[Replying to Realworldjack in post #128]

You are correct that I do not like this movement, but what I abhor even more is folks like you.

Of course you do. I am not in the least bit surprised. It is a sad thing. But not a surprising thing.

You hate me for my faith and witness to Christ. Not because I have lied. Not because I have caused wars. I have multiple posts on the forum about things I have learned from my Lord. I have posted that nothing which contradicts Christ can be true; that everything which comes from God is from love; that love is the law.

I have posted that Christ keeps His promises, I keep my Lord's commands not to judge, but to love, to forgive, to show mercy. (not that I am not a sinner, because of course I am one, and I know that I need my dear Lord and am grateful to Him and to His Father.)

But because I bear witness to the truth that He is alive and He speaks - you despise me.

**

You prefer the people whom you claim are liars and who cause harm and who cause wars and who blaspheme. These people are more tolerable to you.



Peace still,
servant to the household of God and a slave of Christ,
tammy