"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 #218]

What are the things, in essence, that you said in your post regarding the Lord's way of communication with us, people of the world today?

There are no such things I said in my post.

I shared a sample of the type of conversation I have with Christ.

That's it, how do you know He is Christ when you're talking to a machine?

You replied with a comment pertaining to a prophetic utterance and when questioned about that, replied that it wasn't directed AT me personally and thus had nothing to do with anything I had posted.

Are you the words, per se, that you wrote and posted, to whom I addressed what we've heard and learned from the Lord?

[William]

[Replying to OneJack in post #221]

how do you know He is Christ when you're talking to a machine?

What machine?

Are you the words, per se, that you wrote and posted

Are you the words you wrote above?

Why not - rather than attempt deflection simply think about what you want to write in answer to others and then perhaps not even write what you do?

[OneJack]

[Replying to OneJack in post #221]

how do you know He is Christ when you're talking to a machine?

What machine?

VoC, how do you know it's Christ voice? That's how I understand your conversation with Christ.

Are you the words, per se, that you wrote and posted

Are you the words you wrote above?

Why not - rather than attempt deflection simply think about what you want to write in answer to others and then perhaps not even write what you do?

The words I wrote are only letters and prints. I am a real human being who can speak with you virtually. Can't I address my post to the words you posted, say as a contradictory remark that needs no response but pondering?

[tam]

Peace to you,

[Replying to William in post #214]

Peace to you William,

May I ask why you share these conversations?

Hi tam.

You asked me why I share my conversations. I do so for many reasons. In this case I do so as evidence which can be tested in a thread which asks questions about such things..."What would it take to convince us that the tale told was true?

Okay, thank you for answering.

I don't share for that reason.

If someone asks a question and I have received anything from my Lord on that matter which could help that person (or if I am told to share it), then I share it. If I am given something to share, to help build up the body of Christ, then I share it.

I do not share things I have received from my Lord... just to put it on display. I am not going to take random things that I have received from my Lord and put them on display, all for the sake of me being able to basically say 'look at me, look what I can do.'

Who would that serve other than myself?


**

I came on this thread to answer Zzyzx, to answer the question that he asked. That is all. Maybe it will be something for him (or others) to think about, maybe not.

In the case of the opening post, the focus is on the resurrection claims. But such questions can apply to anything claimed as true.

Like you and I claiming we converse with Christ.

My testimony - my witness - is that Christ lives and speaks. I can give this witness because I know it to be true, because my dear Lord does speak and I do hear His voice (and not me alone, of course.) But it is not about me and 'my conversations with Christ.' It is about Him. I am just a witness TO Him.

Peace again to you

[William]

[Replying to OneJack in post #223]

VoC, how do you know it's Christ voice?

Yes and isn't that the very type of question Zzzz is asking with the opening post?

That's how I understand your conversation with Christ.

Rather, that is the doubt you bring into it when faced with the claim.

The words I wrote are only letters and prints.

Not only are they those things. Indeed, one can get themselves banned for words they write which are "only letters and prints".

Furthermore, when one uses The Lords name the way that you did - well - one cannot complain when one is challenged to account for why they did so...and your reasons for doing so naturally enough ring rather hollow...

I am a real human being who can speak with you virtually.

If that is so, then perhaps show me how you would do so.

I address my post to the words you posted, say as a contradictory remark that needs no response but pondering?

And here you sound as if you are now even doubting your own word.

[William]

[Replying to tam in post #224]

You asked me why I share my conversations. I do so for many reasons. In this case I do so as evidence which can be tested in a thread which asks questions about such things..."What would it take to convince us that the tale told was true?

Okay, thank you for answering.

I don't share for that reason.

You do not share because to do so would then allow your sharing to be tested?

If someone asks a question and I have received anything from my Lord on that matter which could help that person (or if I am told to share it), then I share it. If I am given something to share, to help build up the body of Christ, then I share it.

What does that indicate tam? That The Lord has not told you to share? That he has not given you anything which can help "build up" this "body of Christ" ? Would that not indicate to you then that you may be sharing even the claim that Christ and you converse, is inappropriate to this venue? Why are you here then? Simply to make a claim (supposedly permitted by Christ) but to withhold sharing the details asked for (implied by your own words above)?

I do not share things I have received from my Lord... just to put it on display.

Nor do I. You appear to be implying that perhaps that is what I am doing - what I did in sharing what I shared.

I am not going to take random things that I have received from my Lord and put them on display, all for the sake of me being able to basically say 'look at me, look what I can do.'

Yet you don't have the same standard when it come to declaring you and Christ interact.

Who would that serve other than myself?

How would the one thing you won't do serve your self while the other things you DO do, does not? How does your declaration that you hear the voice of Christ not sever your self?

I came on this thread to answer Zzyzx, to answer the question that he asked. That is all. Maybe it will be something for him (or others) to think about, maybe not.

Maybe so, but somehow the conversation drifted into the claim you make and have consistently made here on this forum...and here we all now are...and for whatever that is worth, we should all be able to admit that what you claim IS relevant to the broader question Zzyzx asks re the thread heading. "Take my word for it, or his, or this book".

My testimony - my witness - is that Christ lives and speaks. I can give this witness because I know it to be true, because my dear Lord does speak and I do hear His voice (and not me alone, of course.) But it is not about me and 'my conversations with Christ.' It is about Him. I am just a witness TO Him.

Rather than OF him or FOR him? Like a part of the "body" which is acting as a witness TO the body, not OF or FOR the body?

Well - IF at any time your Voice of Christ gives you permission to share...I will be interested in viewing that conversation.

Meantime, there appears to be little else we have in common to discuss...

[OneJack]

[Replying to William in post #225]

Yes and isn't that the very type of question Zzzz is asking with the opening post?

Now I'm asking you since you asked me what the 'utterance' I posted [in response to your post] has to do with you. How could asking AI, a robotic machine, produce the VoC when the latter responds?

Rather, that is the doubt you bring into it when faced with the claim.

That's a natural occurrence - more questions for clarification, rather than outright belief in the claim.

Not only are they those things. Indeed, one can get themselves banned for words they write which are "only letters and prints".

I agree, but still, they are not you/me/them personally.

Furthermore, when one uses The Lords name the way that you did - well - one cannot complain when one is challenged to account for why they did so...and your reasons for doing so naturally enough ring rather hollow...

What I posted would be nothing if the wisdom coming from the Lord were brought to you.

If that is so, then perhaps show me how you would do so.

There are many social media platforms today, a messenger app is one, and we can converse via video call with each other virtually in that app.

And here you sound as if you are now even doubting your own word.

If I were the one to do the pondering in that regard, you would have your point.

[Realworldjack]

[Replying to tam in post #206]

Hence, test the inspired expression (1John 4:1) Because many false prophets have gone out into the world. So test all things against Christ, hold all things up against Him. He is the Light and the Truth.

I am just telling you, this is more than likely the most unreal thing I have witnessed on this site. I mean, it is a crying shame when the unbelievers, and atheists on this site make more sense than those who claim to be Christian. The overwhelming majority of unbelievers and atheists on this site were at one time convinced Christians, and it is Christians like you and "OneJack" who are responsible for many Christians rejecting Christ. There is no way in the world you can make the above comment of yours make sense.

You and "OneJack" both are claiming to hear directly from Jesus, but you are at odds with each other as to who is getting the correct information. Ergo, your advice to we who are reading in is to "test the inspired expression" along with "test all things against Christ, hold all things up against Him" as if we were to do so we would discover it is you who is the true prophet, and it is "OneJack" who is the false prophet.

The problem here is the FACT that neither you, nor "OneJack" can demonstrate your case. Neither you nor "OneJack" can demonstrate that you all hear directly from Jesus. Therefore, we all would be left with taking one of y'all's word for it, because again, neither of you all can demonstrate that you have heard anything at all from Jesus. Now that we are here, you both want to insist the other is the false prophet. I can tell you with confidence I consider the both of you to be false prophets, but please do tell us Tammy why we should take your word that you are the one hearing directly from Jesus, and that "OneJack" is the false prophet?

I would like you to answer this question without dodging in any way. Do you consider "OneJack" to be a false prophet? If so (and it clearly seems this is what you are saying) then how have you determined "OneJack" to be the false prophet as opposed to you?

But this is no different than you putting in all your study and claiming to have found the 'correct meaning' - and someone else making the exact same claim as you but coming to an opposing conclusion about the 'correct meaning.'

OH!!!!! But there is a tremendous difference! And I mean TREMENDOUS! Because you see, I can be demonstrated to be in error. Moreover, I am free to admit my error. In other words, if one were to look at the same passage, and demonstrate my error in interpretation, I am free to allow myself to be corrected. You see, this is exactly why I wanted you to join in the discussion concerning your interpretation of certain passages of scripture, because in this way we could discuss, and debate the passages, and at the very least we would have the passage as a guide rail. Moreover, anyone who may be reading along, would be able to read the passage themselves, and hearing the debate between us they may be able to determine which interpretation makes the most sense of the passage. Of course, you refuse to engage in the interpretation of these passages, and we all know why. Ergo, we are left with you continuing to claim to have a direct line to Jesus, with no way whatsoever to gage what you claim. Rather, we must take your word for it that you have a direct line to Jesus, because you have given us nothing whatsoever in any way to convince us this is the case. Can you spell "FALSE PROPHET?"

So then, as far as I am concerned, my interpretation of scripture can be demonstrated to be in error, and I am free to admit my error if this is demonstrated. On the other hand, since you claim the hear directly from Jesus, you cannot afford the luxury of being in error, much less admit to the fact.

I am not speaking on God's behalf.

I am afraid you cannot afford the luxury of not "speaking on God's behalf." If you have a direct line to Jesus, and Jesus reveals something to you, and you share what Jesus has revealed to you with others, you are by definition saying, "thus says the Lord." So then, if you hear the voice of Jesus (and even by your own admission you are not hearing a literal voice) you can say with confidence "thus says the Lord." Allow me to put it this way. If you are hearing directly from Jesus as you claim, and you are certain it is Jesus who is communicating with you, then you should have no problem with speaking on behalf of Jesus.

I am bearing witness to His Son - His Son is the One who is the Word of God, and the One to whom God said to listen.

But here is the problem. Both you and "OneJack" both claim to be bearing witness to Jesus, who we are to listen to, and you and "OneJack" are not in agreement on what Jesus is saying. The obvious question is which one of you are we to listen to? Or maybe, just maybe, we should listen to neither one of you, and instead listen to the ones we are confident spoke on God's behalf such as Paul when he told Timothy,

"But as for you, continue in what you have learned and have become convinced of, because you know those from whom you learned it, and how from infancy you have known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. 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."

Tammy, if the scripture is adequate "to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus," along with being "God-breathed" and it "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 else is it that we need? If the scripture equips us for EVERY good work, what is it that we are lacking?

Should we listen to you? Should we listen to "OneJack?" Or should we be content that God has supplied all we need in His revealed word to us all, meaning we are all on the same footing, not needing to all hear from Jesus directly. Because you see, in this way we can all discuss, debate, and give what we believe scripture to be saying, all the while acknowledging our ability of error, and being willing to admit our own error. On the other hand, if we all insist that we hear from Jesus directly, then we all are insisting that we cannot be in error, and anyone else who contradicts what we have heard from Jesus directly, must, and has to be in error.

Do you really want to know why there are so many folks who were at one time convinced Christians well into adulthood, only to reject the Lord Jesus Christ? Look in the mirror.

[POI]

it is a crying shame when the unbelievers, and atheists on this site make more sense than those who claim to be Christian.

I cannot speak for other unbelievers and/or atheists, but this unbeliever/atheist, POI, does not accept any claims of the supernatural and/or divine, as none of these claims have met their burden of proof with any convincing evidence. And yet, you seem to grant belief in this collection of supernatural assertion(s), based upon scanty claim(s) from a collection of books proven to be fraught with inconsistency.

Okay, carry on... As it is quite entertaining to watch two interlocutors exchange, where they are both ultimately wrong -- as there likely is no actual postmortem Jesus to worship in the first place.

Keep up the great work.

[tam]

Peace to you,

[Replying to tam in post #206]

Hence, test the inspired expression (1John 4:1) Because many false prophets have gone out into the world. So test all things against Christ, hold all things up against Him. He is the Light and the Truth.

I am just telling you, this is more than likely the most unreal thing I have witnessed on this site. I mean, it is a crying shame when the unbelievers, and atheists on this site make more sense than those who claim to be Christian. The overwhelming majority of unbelievers and atheists on this site were at one time convinced Christians, and it is Christians like you and "OneJack" who are responsible for many Christians rejecting Christ.

Oh please.

These are the reasons I have seen or heard people give for why they lost their faith:

a) they discovered the bible contained errors. If their faith was based upon the bible (believing the false teaching that the bible is the Word of God and without error)... once they discover that the bible does have errors, their faith crumbles too.

b) they see falsehood and hypocrisy in their religion (and in the people at the head of those religions), and so become disillusioned and reject it (and some reject anything God-related at the same time, especially if they think there is nowhere else to turn. All without understanding that it is not a 'where' to turn, but a WHOM to turn to: Jaheshua, the Son and Chosen One of JAH.)

c) they did not receive something they asked for, and they believe they should have, and since they did not, God must not exist

d) they suffered and gave up their faith (think Job, because the Adversary's accusation against us is that with enough trouble and suffering, we will 'curse God and die') - I don't think I've seen someone realize or admit that is what happened, but it does happen

e) people claim that the suffering in the world caused them to stop believing in God. (I've always had a hard time understanding that because - well, did you not realize there was suffering in the world while you were claiming to have faith in God?)

There is no way in the world you can make the above comment of yours make sense.

Do you think John also did not make sense when he instructed people to test the inspired expression or spirit?

You and "OneJack" both are claiming to hear directly from Jesus, but you are at odds with each other as to who is getting the correct information. Ergo, your advice to we who are reading in is to "test the inspired expression" along with "test all things against Christ, hold all things up against Him" as if we were to do so we would discover it is you who is the true prophet, and it is "OneJack" who is the false prophet.

This is not about me. Nor OneJack. Nor comparing myself to him. Who cares about Tammy? Who cares about OneJack? Who cares about RealWorldJack?

It is not about us.

It is about Christ.

God said listen to His Son. If you want to know if something is true, hold it up to Him (the Son, the Truth, the Light.) Listen to Him.

But this is no different than you putting in all your study and claiming to have found the 'correct meaning' - and someone else making the exact same claim as you but coming to an opposing conclusion about the 'correct meaning.'

OH!!!!! But there is a tremendous difference! And I mean TREMENDOUS! Because you see, I can be demonstrated to be in error.

Then please see this post:

viewtopic.php?p=1186823#p1186823

I am not speaking on God's behalf.

I am afraid you cannot afford the luxury of not "speaking on God's behalf." If you have a direct line to Jesus, and Jesus reveals something to you, and you share what Jesus has revealed to you with others, you are by definition saying, "thus says the Lord." So then, if you hear the voice of Jesus (and even by your own admission you are not hearing a literal voice) you can say with confidence "thus says the Lord." Allow me to put it this way. If you are hearing directly from Jesus as you claim, and you are certain it is Jesus who is communicating with you, then you should have no problem with speaking on behalf of Jesus.

He (Christ Jaheshua) speaks Himself. Continued in the next sentence below:

I am bearing witness to His Son - His Son is the One who is the Word of God, and the One to whom God said to listen.

But here is the problem. Both you and "OneJack" both claim to be bearing witness to Jesus, who we are to listen to, and you and "OneJack" are not in agreement on what Jesus is saying. The obvious question is which one of you are we to listen to? Or maybe, just maybe, we should listen to neither one of you, and instead listen to the ones we are confident spoke on God's behalf such as Paul when he told Timothy,

You ALMOST had the answer to your 'obvious question' there Jack. You should not be listening to either one of us. But then you went and added the part that I bolded... instead of understanding that God already said who you should be listening to:

"This is my Son, whom I love. Listen to Him."

The one you should listen to is not me, nor Onejack, nor Paul. Paul was not even speaking to you, right?

If you are listening to God, then you would listen to His Son.



Peace again.