"Take my word for it, or his, or this book"

[Zzyzx]

Most of us probably know better than to believe everything said or written. If someone tells us they can fly by flapping their arms, our response is likely disbelief and a request that they ‘show me’. If they refuse to demonstrate or fail in flapping, we regard their claim as false. Agreed?

If a person claims to have come back to life after being dead for days none of us are likely to believe the claim unless it could be verified. Right?

If someone writes that fifty years ago a long-dead person came back to life and flew away into the sky, what would be your / our likely reaction? Would we be convinced if they say ‘many saw him’?

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

[Realworldjack]

[Replying to tam in post #314]

This has to be one of the most unreal things I have witnessed in my life. I mean, first you tell us that the scripture is not trustworthy, and it is filled with "scribal errors," and you tell us we are not to hold things up to the Bible, and you even mention Paul and how we are not to hold things up to what Paul has authored, and then you refer us, not only to what the Bible has to say, but it is what Paul has to say. You throw out a quote from Paul (and I am positive you had no idea it was Paul) when he says, "we walk by faith and not by sight" as if this would apply to you, and when I demonstrate to you clearly that it could not have possibly applied to you, you go on to quote straight out of the Bible, and the unbelievable thing is, it is another quote from Paul, all the while you are scolding me for holding things up to the Bible, and even Paul. You really cannot make this stuff up!

First - and the spirit has just reminded me of this

This is just TOO, TOO FUNNY! The Spirit has not reminded you of anything. What you are about to quote comes straight out of the Bible, and it comes from Paul, both of which, and whom you tell us not to hold things up to, and yet the Spirit is reminding you of a passage of scripture from Paul which we are not to hold anything up to. Tammy, if you cannot see the problem here, then I am not the one who can help. Do you remember how this whole conversation between us started? It was when I joined in by saying,

Or it may verify that the one doing the hearing may need to seek psychiatric help.

This advice still stands! CERTAINLY, you have to see the problem with one who trashes the Bible, explains to us about the scribal errors, scolds us for holding things up to it, who continues to use the very same Bible in order to defend the idea that we do not need the Bible because we can have a direct line to Jesus, who directs us back to the Bible. Tammy, please listen to me! Simply because a verse from the Bible comes to your mind, does not mean the Spirit was involved.

Paul may have been writing to the Corinthians and describing his faith (that he walks by faith and not by sight, among other things)

No Tammy! It is not just that this "MAY HAVE BEEN" the case, rather it is in fact the case that Paul had no one else in mind as he wrote the words "we walk by faith and not by sight" other than himself and company. PERIOD! It is so simple to understand this to be the case, and I will challenge you to take this passage to any language expert you wish, and they are going to tell you that Paul only had himself, and those traveling with him in mind when he penned the words, "we walk by faith and not by sight," and yet you use it as if it were referring to all of us as Christians.

The whole point here is the fact that, even if there was another passage in scripture which commanded us as Christians to "walk by faith and not by sight," and even if there was another passage which had that same concept, it still would not change the fact that you cannot use the passage from Paul to make the case. Your problem here is the fact that Paul is the only one in all of scripture which penned the words, "we walk by faith and not by sight" and we all know this is the verse you were quoting, and now that you realize that you have used the verse incorrectly, you now want to attempt to save face, by appealing to another quote from Paul, who we are not to hold things up to. Let's see how this works out for you.

but he ALSO tells the Corinthians to follow his example (1 Corinthians 11:1)

You cannot imagine how hard I am laughing right now. Do you really believe that Paul said the above out of the blue? Do you imagine that Paul was writing along, and simply decided to throw in there, "imitate me as I imitate Christ" to mean that the Corinthians were to imitate Paul in everything he does, because everything Paul did was an imitation of Christ? Do you think there may have been some context involved in Paul saying, "imitate me as I imitate Christ?" Or do you believe Paul to be saying that the Corinthians should imitate Paul in everything he did? Jesus healed the sick, and so did Paul. Are we to imitate Paul in this way? Jesus raised the dead, and so did Paul. Are we to imitate Paul as he imitated Christ in this way? Jesus turned water into wine, but Paul did not imitate Christ in this way. I wonder why?

Let's look at this a little closer. It was Paul who said, "we walk by faith and not by sight" but we have determined that Paul was only referring to himself and those traveling with him. Who was it that Paul & company was putting their faith in? That would be Jesus, correct? If this is the case, was Paul & company imitating Christ, by walking by faith and not by sight? Who is it that Jesus puts His faith in? You see, Jesus has no need for faith, since Jesus is in control. As you can see, the spirit you are receiving this reminder from is not very reliable. Because you see, Paul was not imitating Christ when he "walked by faith and not by sight" because Christ has no need to have faith. What we have here is a "trainwreck" of the biggest magnitude.

Okay, I would not be surprised if you did not know this, but when the authors of what is contained in the Bible wrote, they did not divide what they wrote into chapter and verses as we have now. This was done much later in order for us to turn to specific passages, or to be able to give exactly where we may be quoting from. This means, when Paul authored his letters, he authored them in the same way in which you and I are communicating right now. Ergo, when Paul said, "imitate me as I imitate Christ" it was not out of the blue somewhere, but was rather tied to a context. Let us look at that context as we read exactly what Paul had to say right before he said, "Imitate me as I imitate Christ."

1 Corinthians 10:27-33
"If an unbeliever invites you to a meal and you want to go, eat whatever is put before you without raising questions of conscience. 28 But if someone says to you, “This has been offered in sacrifice,” then do not eat it, both for the sake of the one who told you and for the sake of conscience. 29 I am referring to the other person’s conscience, not yours. For why is my freedom being judged by another’s conscience? 30 If I take part in the meal with thankfulness, why am I denounced because of something I thank God for?

31 So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God. 32 Do not cause anyone to stumble, whether Jews, Greeks or the church of God— 33 even as I try to please everyone in every way. For I am not seeking my own good but the good of many, so that they may be saved."

So then, does Paul say, "imitate me as I imitate Christ" out of the blue to mean, that everything Paul does is an imitation of Christ, including "walking by faith and not by sight" when we all know Christ has no need for faith? Or was when Paul said, "imitate me as I imitate Christ, tied back to what Paul had just said when he said,

"31 So whether you eat or drink or whatever you do, do it all for the glory of God. 32 Do not cause anyone to stumble, whether Jews, Greeks or the church of God— 33 even as I try to please everyone in every way. For I am not seeking my own good but the good of many, so that they may be saved."

I think we all know the answer here in that Paul "walked by faith and not by sight" and Christ has no need in faith, since He is the object of faith. Ergo, when Paul said, "imitate me as I imitate Christ" he could not have possibly been referring to "walking by faith and not by sight" since Christ has no need to have faith since He is the object of faith. Rather, when Paul said, "imitate me as I imitate Christ" he is definitely referring back to what he had just said which was,

"For I am not seeking my own good but the good of many, so that they may be saved."

Can you see that? Paul is referring back to what he had just said in this first letter to the Corinthians and could not have possibly be referring forward to the second letter he addressed to the Corinthians where he said, "we walk by faith and not by sight' where he was only referring to himself and company.

Tammy, can you not see that the spirit you are claiming to hear from is not very reliable? It is not possible in the least for Paul to say in his first letter to the Corinthians, "imitate me as I imitate Christ" and be referring forward to a letter he has not even written yet. I will get to the rest later, but this spirit (which is not really a spirit at all but rather your own imagination) is a complete "trainwreck" if it can possibly be saying that when Paul says, "imitate me as I imitate Christ" that Paul is referring forward to a letter he has not even thought of as of yet. It just ain't possible.

[William]

Post #302 (tam): Tam refers William back to the original post for her witness on Christ's voice, denies making negative statements about Christians, and argues that Christ does not teach contradictions because He is truth—so any claim about the Father's house containing illusions or self-deception must be false, regardless of whether the Bible was "concocted" by religion.

Post #305 (William): William presses Tam for a direct quote from the OP answering his question about internal dialogue, clarifies that her comparison of religions as "not following the Lord's voice" is itself a negative statement, argues that YHWH creates "true illusions" (simulation), and asks for a concrete example of the type of conversation she has with the voice she claims is Christ.

Post #306 (tam): Tam reiterates that Christ alone prepares the rooms in the Father's house, so there can be no illusion or deception there; she notes that her statements about religion may be perceived as negative but are not untrue; and she directs William back to examples already shared in the OP and elsewhere rather than providing a new conversation transcript.

Post #308 (William): William confirms that Tam has an internal dialogue with the voice she hears, presses her to directly answer questions rather than pointing back to the OP, argues that YHWH creates "true illusions" (simulation), accuses her of cutting off his message, and warns that denying Christ's role as a bridge to YHWH makes her claimed voice suspect—repeating his request for a concrete example of a conversation with this voice.

Post #317 (William): William asks Tam to provide a sample dialogue formatted as a transcript between herself and the voice she claims is Christ, in order to facilitate ongoing testing of her claim.

Post #318 (tam): Tam responds simply by asking William why he wants a sample dialogue, rather than providing one.

Post #319 (William): William points out a contradiction: Tam condemns religions like the RCC, WTS, LDS, Christianity, and Judaism as false, yet she binds the voice she claims is Christ to the Bible—a religious icon produced and sold by those same religions—asking why the alleged voice of Christ would be subject to the dictates of the very religions she condemns.

Post #320 (tam): Tam denies any contradiction, explaining that the biblical texts were composed by individual people (John, Paul, Peter, etc.)—not by religions—and that Christ is not bound by any religious icon, even the Bible; she insists William's assumptions are simply incorrect.

more...

[Realworldjack]

[Replying to tam in post #314]

Jack, you know it is not perfect.

I have never said what is contained in the Bible is perfect. I have argued with many folks who claim what we have in the Bible is inerrant, and I have won every one of those debates. However, this does not mean we are all left to depend on hearing some sort of voice directly. What we have in the Bible is sufficient for all of us to know about the life, death, resurrection, along with the life and death of Jesus being an atonement for our sins. What in the world else do we need? Moreover, think about the fact that what is contained in the Bible has convinced most all scholars, even those who are not Christian, that the early followers of Jesus, including the apostles, could not have possibly made the story of the resurrection up. In other words, according to these scholars, the early followers, including the apostles, who witnessed the life of Jesus on this earth were somehow truly convinced that they had witnessed Jesus alive after His death. Tammy, that is powerful, and remarkable.

So, let us think about this for a moment. Even though we agree that what is contained in the Bible is not inerrant, it has convinced those who dedicate their lives to the study of such things, and again, even those who are not Christian, that what is contained in the NT could not possibly be the product of fabrication on the part of those who claim to have witnessed the events. Again Tammy, that is powerful. You claiming to hear directly from Jesus, without any ability in the least to demonstrate this to be the case, has absolutely no power whatsoever. NONE! The point is, why point folks to the idea they can hear from Jesus directly, instead of pointing them to those who were witnesses of the life of Jesus on this earth, who also witnessed His crucifixion, and then went on to witness the resurrected Christ, with the historical evidence being so overwhelming that it has convinced scholars who are not Christian, that those who reported the event, truly believed they had witnessed the event.

Now then, you tell me? What is more powerful? Is it what is contained in the Bible, even though it may not be inerrant? Or your claim that you hear directly from Jesus? The point here is it is the argument of Christ raised from the dead which has the power to save sinners, not I hear from Jesus directly, with absolutely no evidence whatsoever.

Jack, it is even written in the bible that Christ is the Word of God.

Correct! How in the world does this go on to be translated, we can hear from Jesus directly? GOOD GRIEF! The thing is you argue that it is written in the Bible (you know, the Bible which is full of errors) that Jesus said, "my sheep will hear my voice," but even you admit that you do not hear a voice, and you continue to appeal to the Bible which you claim is full of errors. So then, please do tell us how we can know that when the Bible says, "Jesus is the Word of God' that this is not one of those many scribal errors?

The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.

The author here is John who was one of the apostles, and when John says, "among us" he literally means "among us" as though Jesus was alive at the time in which they were living. In fact, in the very next sentence, in the very same verse, John has this to say,

"We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth."

When John uses the word "WE" in this sentence, he is not referring to me, you, nor anyone else alive today, but was rather referring to only those who were there to witness Jesus alive during His earthly ministry, because you, me, nor anyone else alive today was there to witness "God in the flesh." Rather, we all today rely upon the testimony of those who did, which goes on to demonstrate my case that you would have never known, nor heard of the name of Jesus had it not been for what is contained in the Bible you claim is full of errors, and yet continue to cite what it has to say.

He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and his name is called the Word of God. Rev 19:13

Another quote from the Bible. How have you determined this would not be one of the scribal errors you are referring too? More importantly, how in the world could this be translated into, we can hear from Jesus directly?

[OneJack]

[Replying to Realworldjack in post #323]

The point is, why point folks to the idea they can hear from Jesus directly, instead of pointing them to those who were witnesses of the life of Jesus on this earth, who also witnessed His crucifixion, and then went on to witness the resurrected Christ, with the historical evidence being so overwhelming that it has convinced scholars who are not Christian, that those who reported the event, truly believed they had witnessed the event.

Dead men (shaded in red) tell no tales, do they? Only the living can do that, and since Christ Jesus is forever living, He alone is the only living witness TODAY to the life of the Son of God, whose name was Immanuel, or Mighty God, or Eternal Father, or Jesus, on this earth, his crucifixion, and his resurrection. Christ Jesus was the Spirit and Life that was in the Son of God. Pointing everyone to the Lord Jesus Christ is the only way to know God, salvation, and eternal life in the right way.

[tam]

Peace to you,

[Replying to tam in post #314]

This has to be one of the most unreal things I have witnessed in my life. I mean, first you tell us that the scripture is not trustworthy, and it is filled with "scribal errors," and you tell us we are not to hold things up to the Bible, and you even mention Paul and how we are not to hold things up to what Paul has authored, and then you refer us, not only to what the Bible has to say, but it is what Paul has to say. You throw out a quote from Paul (and I am positive you had no idea it was Paul) when he says, "we walk by faith and not by sight" as if this would apply to you, and when I demonstrate to you clearly that it could not have possibly applied to you, you go on to quote straight out of the Bible, and the unbelievable thing is, it is another quote from Paul, all the while you are scolding me for holding things up to the Bible, and even Paul. You really cannot make this stuff up!

The point is that you DO hold it as trustworthy (despite stating that it is 'dangerous and reckless theology' to teach that the bible is inerrant.)

So those quotes are for you (and/or the reader) to see it for yourselves.

but he ALSO tells the Corinthians to follow his example (1 Corinthians 11:1)

You cannot imagine how hard I am laughing right now. Do you really believe that Paul said the above out of the blue? Do you imagine that Paul was writing along, and simply decided to throw in there, "imitate me as I imitate Christ" to mean that the Corinthians were to imitate Paul in everything he does, because everything Paul did was an imitation of Christ?

They are to follow the example that Christ set.

They are to imitate the FAITH of those who came first (such as the apostles), as the author of Hebrews makes this clear. "Imitate their FAITH" - Hebrews 13:7

I do not understand how a person of faith can deny that Christians are to walk by faith (and not by sight.)

“Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

**

But you think that nothing in that book applies to you or me today (except for the times when you do think what was written to another person also applies to you). How are you picking and choosing what does and doesn't apply to you, Jack?

Question:

When Christ said to the apostles,

You call Me Teacher and Lord, and rightly so, because I am. 14So if I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another’s feet. 15I have set you an example so that you should do as I have done for you.

Do you think that does not apply to the rest of us who call Him Lord, Teacher, Master?

Matt 28:20

[William]

[Replying to Realworldjack in post #323]

but even you admit that you do not hear a voice,

Direct References to Hearing a Voice
Yes, she explicitly claims to hear an actual voice — but with important qualifiers:

Post #54 (Fri Jul 03, 2015 8:13 pm):

"I do not hear 'voices'. I hear His voice, within me, as He said that His sheep would hear His voice. In direct words, in direct questions, even a back and forth on occasion."

Post #64 (Sat Jul 04, 2015 2:55 pm):

"I hear His voice (Christ's voice), yes. Within me, yes, so not with physical ears. But a real voice that speaks words, asks questions, teaches."

Post #113 (Thu Jul 09, 2015 12:14 am):

"He does not have an audible - physical - sound. But His voice is still heard."

The voice is male
Post #54 (Fri Jul 03, 2015 8:13 pm):

"I hear His voice... He is not ME." (capitalization and pronoun use indicating male)

Post #64 (Sat Jul 04, 2015 2:55 pm):

"His voice and your voice are not the same voice. Also what you hear is not something that could have come from you because you know that you don't know these things."

Post #113 (Thu Jul 09, 2015 12:14 am):

"It is the voice of Christ I hear. Not God, Himself." (Christ understood as male)