Does Christ speak and how?

[tam]

May you have peace!

A question that continues to be posed to me is with regard to my bearing witness to a living and speaking Christ. How does He speak? What does that mean? How can we test that?

I imagine that one reason the questions are continually posed to me is because I cannot provide the proof that some are asking me to provide. I can only provide evidence in the form of:

a) Personal testimony from having heard Christ
b) The written testimony of or about others who have heard Christ
c) What Christ Himself is written to have said on the matter


If none of the above are acceptable to someone, then I am not sure what more that person and I would have to talk about on this particular matter. We could hopefully discuss respectfully from a point of love, reason, logic. For those who are interested...


Christ said that His sheep would hear His voice.

My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me." John 10:27

"I am the good shepherd, and I know My own and My own know Me, even as the Father knows Me and I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep. "I have other sheep, which are not of this fold; I must bring them also, and they will hear My voice; and they will become one flock with one shepherd." John 10:14-16



Written testimony about/from others who heard His voice, confirming the truth of what He said:

The Spirit told Philip, "Go to that chariot and stay near it." Acts 8:29

**
In Damascus, there was a disciple named Ananias. The Lord called to him in a vision, "Ananias!"

"Yes Lord," he answered.

The Lord told him, "Go to the house of Judas on Straight Street and ask for a man from Tarsus named Saul, for he is praying. In a vision he has seen a man named Ananias come and place his hands on him to restore his sight." (Acts 9:10,11... and it continues)

**
There is Peter's vision telling him that he should eat foods that he considered unclean, and then after his vision:

While Peter was still thinking about the vision, the Spirit (Christ) said to him, "Simon, three men are looking for you. So get up and go downstairs. Do not hesitate to go with them, for I have sent them." (Acts 10: 9-20)

**
There are of course multiple examples from Paul. The entire book of Revelation is from Christ to John. There is a warning against hardening our hearts if we hear His voice.

As has just been said: "Today, if you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts as you did in the rebellion." Hebrews 3:15

Then of course there are the examples of Abraham, who heard, Noah, who heard, the prophets, who heard, Joseph, who heard, Daniel, who heard, etc, etc. Their faith is based upon the evidence of what they heard.



My own personal testimony


I did not always know that Christ spoke, and I did not always recognize that voice within me as being His. But someone else bore witness to a living speaking Christ, and it bothered me, lol. I had just ended a two year bible study with a certain denomination, and I did not want to get misled by man ever gain. But here was this person claiming that Christ spoke. If I believed this person, that they were from God, then what was wrong with me that I allowed myself to get misled yet again. On the other hand, what was wrong with me if this person did hear Christ, and I rejected them?

But soon into my dilemma (and my asking how I might know, even though I thought I was just asking myself) I heard:

Test WHAT this person is saying. Test the message. Do not pay attention to the person. Test to see if what this person is saying is true, or not. Then you will know who this person is from.


I still did not know this was Christ speaking to me. I just thought, "Oh, of course... that is what I will do."

So that is what I did. Along the way, I saw all these verses and examples and testimony that Christ does indeed speak, that God spoke also, though now speaks through Christ. In dreams, in visions, in direct words, in reminders, in opening eyes and ears to a truth that one might read, see, or hear. Once I realized that Christ is supposed to speak, I asked for ears to hear as well. Even though I did hear Him; I just did not know I heard Him. I needed to learn His voice and recognize Him.

**

I was asked how does He speak

He speaks in words. He speaks in visions (I have never had a vision that I am aware of). He speaks in dreams. He can also bring to mind something learned, read, or experienced in the past to help me see the truth in something He is teaching me. He has opened my eyes to something that is written, if I am reading the bible. He can and has read to me something that He is written to have said, so that I hear it in His voice. That was enlightening.

Sometimes when I am responding to something that someone else has asked, He will give me the words to say, or reveal something to me (as in open my heart and ears to understanding something) that I had not previously understood.


The language that He speaks is truth. He has never spoken anything to me that was not true, and that was not from love. And everything He teaches me deepens my understanding of love: His love and the love of His Father.



(As for testing the inspired expression... anything that is in conflict with what Christ teaches cannot be true. Also Christ (truth) comes from love (God), so nothing that He says will be in conflict with love. Especially since the law that is written upon our hearts in the new covenant is the law of love.)


**

I do not expect anyone to take my word for these things. I do not take the word of others for what they claim came from Christ. I explained above what I did, what I heard from Christ TO do.

If I have shared anything that helps anyone, then great. If not, then no problem. I am not the one people should be listening to if they are following or desiring to follow Christ... I can only point TO that One: Christ Jaheshua, the Holy One of Israel and Holy Spirit, the Chosen One of Jah. Christ, who is Himself, the faithful and true witness of His Father, Jah.



If one wants to know the truth of this matter themselves... then ask Christ. That is how one can confirm for themselves. Ask for ears to hear, and in the meantime DO what He has said to do, so that you prove yourself to Him. He does not have to prove Himself to us.

"If anyone loves me, they will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come and make our home with (in) them."


(Please note that He says that they will obey HIS teaching. Not man's teaching. Not religion or religious leaders, not Paul, not the law, or anyone or anything else over Him. If we love HIM... we will obey HIM. If we love someone or something else more, then we will listen to and obey that one/thing. Including if we love our religion more than Him, although we might not realize it at the time. Including if we think the bible is the Word of God, especially when even that book states that Christ is the Word of God; and Christ himself said, "You diligently search the scriptures because you think that by them you have eternal life. These are the scriptures that testify about ME, yet you refuse to come to me to have life.")



May anyone who wishes them be given ears to hear, to get a sense of these things, and to hear as the Spirit (Christ) and the bride SAY to you, "Come... take the free gift of the water of life."


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

[William]

[Replying to tam in post #450]

Tammy publicly pronounced judgment on William without providing any evidence of the process by which she supposedly "held his words up to Christ." She offered no specific examples of contradiction, no transcript of what Christ allegedly said, no documentation of her testing method in action. She simply claimed authority to judge and issued a verdict.
This pattern - claiming direct revelation, refusing to provide evidence, deflecting requests, and pronouncing judgment on others without accountability - is consistent with an unfalsifiable and epistemologically closed system. It does not resemble the fruit of a spirit that leads into any truth, let alone all truth.

[William]

Okay - so I share from time to time some of the conversations I have with Christ - sometimes named in other ways such as YHVH, QueenBee, The Father, The Son, or simply UICDSV (Universal Intelligence Communication Device System Voicing - it doesn't matter what "name" is used because it is from the One Source - undivided).
When I asked tam to share verbatim examples of her interactions with the voice she hears, she gave only one example and excused herself from giving more based on the reasoning that she does not want to put her lord on display - directly contradicting her own testing method she gave in her opening post..."Test WHAT this person is saying. Test the message. Do not pay attention to the person."

The extent of tam's sharing of verbatim between her and the voice was

Many years ago, I used to only call myself a follower of Christ, and I avoided using the word 'Christian' (I can't remember my exact reasoning, except to distance myself from the negative connotations of "Christianity" perhaps). But as I was typing an explanation of why I do not call myself Christian to someone on another forum, my Lord asked me,

"Are you ashamed of me?"

I immediately stopped typing, shocked, because I had not thought of it that way before. I answered, "No, Lord. I am not ashamed of you!" And I have never hesitated to call myself Christian since.

tam may well think that by calling herself "Christian" resolves the "shame" but in essence this is a shame about Christianity NOT Christ and in that, there is certain historically documented TRUTH associated with Christianity which one can but shouldn't turn a blind eye to and NOT be ashamed of.

Christ NEVER called his followers "Christians" so the test re this verbatim evidence offered by her, indicates that it is unlikely if the voice she heard is from Christ, that Christ was wanting her to call herself a Christian and adding to that tams excuse that she does not want to put her Lord on "show" points to the "shame" being more about that.

If the voice she hears is truly Christ's - the one who said 'what I tell you in the dark, speak in the daylight; what is whispered in your ear, proclaim from the roofs' (Matthew 10:27) - then why is she hiding those words behind a claim of reverence? And why is the only verbatim example from years ago, conveniently about adopting a label Christ never used?

[tam]

Peace,

[Replying to William in post #452]

Just as a second witness to what my Lord taught me:


and having found him, he brought him to Antioch, and it came to pass that they a whole year did assemble together in the assembly, and taught a great multitude, the disciples also were divinely called first in Antioch Christians. - Acts 11:26 Young's Literal Translation

And having found him, he brought him to Antioch. And it was for a whole year they were assembled together in the churches, and taught a sufficient crowd. And the disciples were Christians by divine intimation first in Antioch. Smith's Literal Translation


I believed what my Lord taught me long before I knew about this translation. The translation, however, does provide a second witness to my Lord's teaching.

For anyone who needs to see it, the word translated to 'were called' is chrēmatizō, and you can see the meaning and examples here:

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lexicon ... jv/tr/0-1/

[William]

[Replying to tam in post #453]

Where we are:

You are observing a public forum exchange in which tam claims to hear Christ's voice. She has provided a testing method: "Test WHAT this person is saying. Do not pay attention to the person." But when asked to provide the "WHAT" - verbatim transcripts of ongoing conversations - she has largely refused, citing piety. The one example she has provided (from years ago) is a single question: "Are you ashamed of me?" — which she interprets as a mandate to call herself a Christian and to correct other Christians.

tam continues to hide the conversations she has with her lord under that excuse that she does not want to put said lord under display, preventing anyone from testing WHAT is being said to her.

Even so, I will continue to share verbatim interactions between יהוה and myself and tam is free to either agree (in silence or not as she prefers) or to show us the results of her testing "WHAT this person is saying" if indeed those results contradict truth.

-----

Post #470
Post by William » Sat Jun 06, 2026 10:13 pm

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #463]

יהוה‎: William

ף (Speech - communication)

(People hide their sins from each other.)

“We could listen to the child that we are - The one that hides inside and let’s the adults do the thinking”

Me: How about that… “that ship is sinking”…

יהוה‎: Wall-E

Celebration

god, goD, gOD, God, GOd, GOD

Me: The evolution of theistic thinking…

יהוה‎: It’s Our Nature

Most folk need moderating.

Yah-yah-yah-wah

Me: Interesting. Given the current discussion between JW and OJ in this thread - they recognise the differences and ignore the similarities they both have. I think this is the underlying thing about cultural christians - it is a thing - and of course not just a thing christians do with/to one another…all too busy looking for the “flaws” in the body rather than finding what part each and all play in the whole.

And - JW simply ignores my questions about the idea that the devil can imitate the things of GOD and therein deceive the unwary (those who don’t believe such a thing) and how this belief works against everything theistic including the bible content - even that some author thought it prudent to add such a concept as a “truth” and others chose to add the author's belief into the biblical canon….

יהוה‎: Teaching

viewtopic.php?p=1119403#p1119403

Me: The key debate points regarding whether Jesus is a mediator only for the “anointed class” of Jehovah’s Witnesses:

Main Argument (from user “onewithhim”):
Jesus is the mediator of the new covenant, which is made specifically with the “anointed class” (the 144,000 who will rule in heaven). Therefore, Jesus acts as the direct mediator only for this group. However, the benefits of this covenant and Jesus’ role as mediator extend by extension to the “other sheep” (the great crowd of JWs who will live on a paradise Earth). Most of the New Testament is directed toward the anointed, but verses like 1 Timothy 2:5 apply to all followers in a secondary sense.

Counter-Arguments & Nuances:

User “RW”: Argues that Christ’s gospel was first for the “lost sheep of Israel” (Matthew 15:24), but was later opened to all Gentiles. This challenges the idea that his role as mediator is permanently limited to a specific “anointed class.”

User “Eloi”: Explains the JW position in more detail. The new covenant (Hebrews 12:24) is exclusive to the anointed priests in heaven. Jesus mediates directly between Jehovah and that class. However, the “great crowd” (Revelation 7:9) on earth are indirect beneficiaries of that priestly service, similar to how ancient Israel benefited from the exclusive covenant with the Levite priests. The anointed are the “firstfruits” (Revelation 14:4), not the only beneficiaries.

User “Miles”: Challenges the literal ancestry of the 144,000 as listed in Revelation 7, questioning how modern JWs (including the Governing Body) could have literal tribal lineage from ancient Israel.

User “Eloi” (in response): Clarifies that the 12 tribe names in Revelation 7 (e.g., Joseph) are symbolic, not literal, and do not match the 12 tribes of carnal Israel. The number 144,000 is taken literally, but the tribal names represent spiritual characteristics.

User “ttruscott”: Criticizes the complexity of such distinctions. He points to the plain meaning of 1 Timothy 2:5-6 (”one mediator between God and men... a ransom for all”) and argues that Jesus’ message was simple and inclusive, not stratified into “anointed” and “other sheep.” He views such teachings as creating unnecessary division and “stumbling blocks.”

יהוה‎ : “Many hands make light work.” Contemplate that thought
------

Element:
"People hide their sins from each other"
Significance:
A direct observation about human nature — relevant to tam hiding her verbatim messages behind piety

Element:
"We could listen to the child that we are..."
Significance:
Echoes the earlier points about shame, hiding, and the authentic self - tam's shame about Christianity may be a mask

Element:
"Wall-E / Celebration / god, goD, gOD, God, GOd, GOD"
Significance:
The evolution of theistic thinking from primitive to mature - tam remains fixed at one stage

Element:
"It's Our Nature / Most folk need moderating / Yah-yah-yah-wah"
Significance:
Gentle humor about human fixation on names and tribal identities - RWJ, JW, OJ, tam all doing the same thing

Element:
My observation about JW and OJ dynamic
Significance:
They see differences, ignore similarities - exactly what tam does with other Christians

Element:
My observations and questions to JW about the devil imitating GOD and JW ignoring these.
Significance:
JW ignores this - because it undermines his certainty, just as tam ignores questions that undermine her certainty

Element:
YHWH: "Many hands make light work"
Significance:
The capstone - a proverb about cooperation, humility, and shared labor. The opposite of solitary, exclusive, superior claims.

Key Takeaway:
Stop hiding, stop pretending superiority, and start working together.

[tam]

Peace again,

[Replying to tam in post #450]

Tammy publicly pronounced judgment on William without providing any evidence of the process by which she supposedly "held his words up to Christ." She offered no specific examples of contradiction, no transcript of what Christ allegedly said, no documentation of her testing method in action. She simply claimed authority to judge and issued a verdict.
This pattern - claiming direct revelation, refusing to provide evidence, deflecting requests, and pronouncing judgment on others without accountability - is consistent with an unfalsifiable and epistemologically closed system. It does not resemble the fruit of a spirit that leads into any truth, let alone all truth.

You claim that I have 'pronounced judgment' on you - something I did not do. Saying someone contradicts Christ is not pronouncing judgment upon them.

You claim that I have not provided examples of where you contradict Christ - but these have been provided at various times and still you make the accusation as if they were not.

So the following are a couple examples - mainly about your claim of 'hells' and various other 'afterlife experiences' of our own making. Illusions, you called them, and illusion by definition is a deception, a false image, a falsehood. Christ, however, is the Truth and He promises to lead us into all truth. He cannot lead us into truth - if He is leading us into deception/illusion/falsehood.

viewtopic.php?p=1030075#p1030075
viewtopic.php?p=1030598#p1030598
viewtopic.php?p=1030183#p1030183


Edited to add: I think I found the original thread where you made these claims and where they are shown to be in conflict with Christ here:

viewtopic.php?p=1037195#p1037195

[William]

[Replying to tam in post #455]


The core issue remains:

tam's method demands: "Test WHAT this person is saying. Test the message. Do not pay attention to the person."

But when she tests your message, she does not provide the "WHAT" from her side — what Christ allegedly said to her in response. She provides her conclusion (contradiction) and her reasoning (illusion = deception = falsehood). The actual words from Christ are absent.

The question observers can ask:

"tam, you say you have provided examples. But have you ever provided a verbatim transcript of Christ saying to you, 'William's teaching about hell is an illusion and therefore false'? Or are you providing your own interpretation of what you think Christ means, based on your understanding of scripture and theology?"

The links tam provides:

My position: individuals create their own afterlife realities (including "hells") based on their beliefs, attitudes, and personality.

tam's position: The bible teaches that Christ prepares rooms in His Father's house; hell is sheol/hades (the world of the dead, a place of sleep awaiting resurrection) or gehenna (symbolic destruction, not torment).

The problem with this as "evidence" for her claim that she tested my words against Christ:
What tam would need to show

What tam would need to show
A verbatim transcript of Christ telling her that your specific claims are false
What she has provided
A theological debate from 2021 where she states her position and interprets bible teachings

What tam would need to show
The actual words Christ spoke to her in response to your words
What she has provided
Her own reasoning, Bible quotes, and conclusions

What tam would need to show
A record of testing in real time
What she has provided
A static argument from five years ago

What this exchange actually demonstrates:

tam has a long-standing pattern - even five years ago, she was refusing to ask Christ for direct experiential confirmation of claims outside her framework.

She equates her interpretation with Christ's voice - When she says "Christ does not teach X," she is not providing a transcript of Christ saying that. She is providing her conclusion based on her reading of scripture and her internal discernment.

She tests by theological reasoning, not by verbatim message comparison - Her method, in practice, is: Does this claim align with what I already believe Christ teaches? If not, reject it. This is not "testing the message" from the claimant. It is testing against a pre-existing internal standard - a standard she refuses to put on display.

tam claims in Post #455 that she has provided examples of where I contradict Christ. But when observers follow the link, they do not find a transcript of Christ speaking to her about my claims. They find a five-year-old theological debate in which tam argues from scripture and her own reasoning - not from a real-time, verbatim divine response.

This does not satisfy her own testing method. It does not provide the "WHAT" she demands from others. It is simply more of the same: interpretation presented as revelation, and theology presented as divine verdict.

What tam is trying to show with these links:

She is attempting to demonstrate that she has provided examples of "holding your words up to Christ" and finding contradiction. But when observers follow the links, they find:

No verbatim transcript of Christ speaking to her about my claims.

Her own theological reasoning - not divine citation.

A circular argument where she states her position, quotes Bible verses, and concludes I am wrong because my position doesn't match her interpretation of what the bible teaches.

No record of Christ actually saying anything specific about me, my method, or my claims.

I am not dealing with a recent inconsistency or a temporary defensiveness. I have been dealing with a deeply entrenched, long-standing pattern of tam:

Claiming direct divine communication

Refusing to provide the raw data of that communication

Substituting theological reasoning and Bible verses for verbatim transcripts

Labeling contrary evidence as "lying spirits"

Declaring the conversation "over" when pressed too hard

Then restarting the same pattern months or years later

tam has not provided the evidence her own method requires. She has not answered my basic questions about whether Christ speaks to others in ways different from her experience. She has not produced a single verbatim transcript of an ongoing conversation with her Lord - only one isolated, incomplete example from many years ago which she claims signified that her lord wanted her to call herself a "Christian".

What these posts do NOT contain:

Missing element
A verbatim transcript of Christ speaking to her about your specific claims
Significance
She never provides the actual words Christ allegedly said in response to mine

Missing element
A record of her "testing" in real time
Significance
She states conclusions, but does not show the process

Missing element
Any acknowledgment that I might actually be hearing from the same Christ, differently
Significance
She declares my source "cannot be from Christ" - a judgment, not a test result

The pattern is now fully documented across three links:

Link 1 (Post #32, #34, #36, #38, #40) - The original 2021 debate where tam rejects my position, cites Bible verses, refuses to ask Christ for experiential confirmation, and declares my source "cannot be from Christ."

Link 2 (Post #181, #183, #185) - The parallel exchange in "Does Christ speak and how?" where the same dynamics play out: I ask for evidence, she deflects, I note inconsistency, she claims she has answered.

Link 3 (same as Link 1, essentially) - The core of her "evidence" that she has "held up" your words to Christ.

After five years of claiming to test my words against Christ, tam has never produced a verbatim transcript of Christ telling her that I am wrong. She has only produced her own theological arguments, Bible verses, and conclusions. Is that testing the message against the actual Christ - or is that testing against her own held bible interpretation?

------

My argument about heavens and hells are based upon thousands of first person witness reports which testify to their experiences after traumatic incidences' which have caused their bodies to cease functioning (many being pronounced "dead") while they themselves have dramatically shifted into alternative reality experiences often encountering devine entities and these experiences have transformed their way of thinking - not only about the world but about themselves.

tam refers to such witness as FALSE according - not to anything Christ has told her, but specifically to how she reads and interprets biblical script.

[William]

I myself will continue to share interactions I am having with יהוה‎ in this thread, putting The Christ and I on display, shamelessly - the verbatim of which can be tested by anyone who wishes.

יהוה‎: It is a discipline of transparency, not authorship

Me: Indeed. I am not authoring what you have to say to me. My authoring is in my response to what you say. That is the nature of our relationship in this manner.

יהוה‎: Conscious Intelligence Without Wisdom = Puzzles/Mysteries...

Me: Yes - and the process is faith to belief to knowledge to wisdom -

יהוה‎: The Mirrors Align and from that, an orderly image reflected...The Connection Process
Old Soul and William Discuss Family Dynamics and the Role of Avet and Synchronicity in Their Journey

Me: Yes - that was a couple of decade ago! Me - the wounded animal required a vet...and I have recently shared that process as articles on my substack. That process which lead to this one - this ability to commune in real time and record the communion verbatim...

יהוה‎: One can commune with the gods as long as the overall subject is GOD
Insight = Fun/Joy

Me: and freedom from restrictive mediums...

יהוה‎: 350
I place no judgement on the results.
Abiogenesis + Union With Divinity
Dancing past The Dark = You feel love again
The unpacking of history re YHVH...
It's all about controlling the chaos
Fearless pursuit of the truth
Freedom from restrictive mediums...

Me: What you show here - is important evidence.

יהוה‎: Spiritual Preparedness + Redefine Oneself = One Free Miracle


Me: Yes! Information must always be embodied in a physical system (clay, electricity, light, DNA). It is not ethereal -it obeys the laws of physics. The power of information comes from our ability to translate it between different physical forms to create order, structure, and beauty in the universe. And that is YOU!

יהוה‎: Intelligent Consciousness
https://williamwaterstone.substack.com/ ... -intuition

Me: THis is a conversation between you and I in which the Core Thesis is Transcending the Paralysis of Skepticism.

The article argues for the integration of reason and intuition to overcome the limitations of a purely skeptical, materialist worldview. The central claim is that true understanding and inner harmony ("congruency") come not from relying on logic alone, but from uniting the conscious, analytical "Self" with "Precognitive" (intuitive, subconscious knowing).

Self + Precognitive = Congruency


Critique of "Skeptical Paralysis", argues that a purely skeptical position (labeled "Agnostic-Agnostic") leads to a kind of paralysis. By demanding only predictive, physical evidence and dismissing imagination, intuition, and myth as invalid, this stance cuts itself off from deeper ways of knowing and engaging with reality.

The text strongly defends the role of imagination arguing that imagination is not mere fantasy but a vital tool for "connecting the dots" and forming a coherent picture of existence. This challenges the skeptic's derision of imagination, pointing out that even science depends on creative leaps.

Evidence in Wholeness, Not Violation - rejects the idea that evidence for a creator or design must be found in violations of physical law (i.e., "supernatural" events). Instead, evidence is found in the totality of experience: "The data of Nature + The Way We Feel." The "Word" of a creator is seen as being expressed through creation itself.

Symbolism of the Hebrew Letter Pay (פ/ף) : The letter, symbolizing a "mouth," is used as a central metaphor.

A "closed mouth" represents the limited, doubting self (skepticism).

A "widened mouth" represents integrating with a higher truth, allowing oneself to become a channel for something greater (like Moses overcoming his speech impediment to lead). This act of "widening" is the power of expression that integrates reason and intuition.

Reframing the Problem of Evil, suggests that skeptics use the "problem of evil" (suffering in a world created by a good God) as a reason to dismiss the idea of a creator altogether. However, the linked verbatim proposes that perceived "evil" and imperfection may serve as necessary catalysts for growth and evolution within a larger, purposeful system.

Conclusion
The article verbatim presents "Agnostic Gnosis" as a holistic alternative to sterile skepticism. It is a stance of humility (not knowing everything) combined with openness (to knowledge from all sources, including myth, intuition, and emotion). The ultimate goal is congruency - a state of inner harmony and authentic engagement with reality, achieved when the self is guided by a deeper, intuitive knowing expressed through creative thought and speech.

יהוה‎: Musing On The Mother = Science Can Be Fun Too

Me: Indeed. It surely is!

[William]

[Replying to William in post #457]

Which is more credible: a claim of direct divine communication that refuses to be tested, hides behind piety, and never evolves - or a method that is shared openly, documented over decades, welcomes testing, and continues to grow?

[tam]

[Replying to William in post #457]

Which is more credible: a claim of direct divine communication that refuses to be tested, hides behind piety, and never evolves - or a method that is shared openly, documented over decades, welcomes testing, and continues to grow?

You're focusing on the method more than you are the truth.

You can post all the 'verbatim transcripts' that you want. If you are believing and stating something that is not true - then what good is that 'verbatim transcript'?

Illusions are deceptions, falsehood. They do not comport to reality. They are not TRUE.

Christ does not teach deception and falsehood. He does not lead His sheep into deception and falsehood. He is the Truth. Deceptions and falsehood do not come from Him.

I'm not going to go through the entire topic because the information is there in the linked posts. Anyone can look for themselves if they are so inclined.

[William]

Moses encountered a bush that was on fire but was not consumed. That is, by definition, an illusion - a phenomenon that appears to violate normal physical laws, a visual perception that does not match ordinary reality. It was not "false" in the sense of being deceptive or malicious. It was a theophany - a manifestation of the divine using the language of illusion to convey truth.

יהוה‎ was not the bush. יהוה‎ was not the fire. יהוה‎ used the illusion of a burning bush to get Moses' attention, to communicate, to reveal. The illusion was not a lie. It was a vehicle.

tam is like unto a young suckler which is fine but she also chooses to accuse falsely which is not fine.

The implications:

NDErs who report leaving their bodies, seeing tunnels of light, meeting beings, experiencing heavens or hells - these may be real experiences even if they are not physically literal in the way ordinary reality is. They are experiences of consciousness, not violations of physics. The illusion is NOT in what is experienced but in the belief that what is experienced is of itself created by an external source. The revelation is that what is experience is created by the one experiencing the heavens or hells.

YHVH speaking through a burning bush, or through a donkey, or through a dream, or through a random number generator, or through a mirror tile - or through a person's own experiences are all legitimate. The medium does not determine the truth of the message. The message itself does.

The burning bush was unconventional. A talking donkey was unconventional. A star leading magi to a manger was unconventional. Divine communication has always used unconventional, often illusion-like, means. (Visions, dreams)

Conflating illusion with falsity and deception is a categorical mistake. To do so is to involve ones-self in self-deception.

My shared communications speak for themselves. If tam wants to continue implying these are devilish deceptions, that is her misconception. Misapplication. Falsity. Misrepresentation.

My shared communications are there for anyone with eyes to see and ears to hear, to understand and acknowledge the knowledge and wisdom apparent.

I will continue to use this appropriately named thread to share them with the readers.