"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 #330]

False, even without the bible, people will come to know Jesus through Himself, who is real and the forever Living God.

The above is false information,

Why false, is the Lord Jesus Christ the Bible in your perception? Is the Lord Jesus Christ non-existent? Is the Bible the only means for all of us to know the name Jesus and Himself personally? What have you heard and learned from the Almighty God, for you to say false information is that people will come to know Jesus through Himself, even without the bible or scriptures? What to you is Christ Jesus?

Seems you didn't read the statement well and hastily hurled your baseless opinion on it instead, knowing fully well that you've heard nothing yet from the Lord God Jesus Christ.

but I am not even going to bother with debating the issue, because it has nothing whatsoever to do with the point I made. Because you see, the point I made was that YOU would have never known nor heard the Name of Jesus, had it not been for the work of the apostles, and the authors contained in the Bible. PERIOD! End of debate.

What I'm pointing out is that your opinion does not apply to all, but only to those who happened to read the bible, where knowing the name Jesus, in particular, is contained therein. But knowing Jesus intimately and personally [who He is and what He is] is not within the scope and capacity of what you've pointed out, which is absolutely not applicable, because no one and nothing can give us the capability to know Jesus intimately and personally but the Lord Jesus Himself, who is real and forever living.

The point is you would have never known the Name of Jesus apart from what is contained in the Bible,

Knowing, per se, the name Jesus is within the scope of the Bible; I agree to that, but that notion is too limited in the sense that knowing Jesus is the Almighty God to whom you have to personally commit yourself until the end for you to have life in eternity is not within the capability and relevance of the bible that you pointed out, as well as the confirmation that the name Jesus is the name of the Almighty God, which you yourself until now is not certain if that is the truth or not the truth. You don't see the fact that you're ignoring the existence of the Lord Jesus Christ and switching the bible instead in His place and stead.

and now you want to insist that this Bible, from where you came to know who Jesus was, is an unreliable source.

But in your above quote, which is too extensive in scope, I stand firm with my position that the bible is really an unreliable source in knowing who and what God is in the reality of His existence and living, as well as in knowing how our souls will be saved, etc.

I can put my trust in what you have to say, if I am gullible, or I can put my trust in those whom Christ left as His ambassadors, who are responsible for your coming to even know the Name of Jesus, and who has had the most significant impact in the history of the world. Because you see, what these "dead men" had to say, can be demonstrated, and trusted, while what you have to say is simply a fantasy of yours.

The above narrative proves that you really do not know at all WHO, and WHAT Jesus is in the reality of His living and existence. You don't even know that our trust, per se, must not be put in those whom He commanded to make all nations His disciples, not even to the very words they're telling us [which are purely testimonies to the Lord], but only to Lord Jesus Christ alone, who is our only Savior.

Thus saith the Lord:

Most people today find it easier to believe in the evil works of Satan. Don't you notice that in all the newspapers, in all the TV news, Satan's works always take center stage? But when it comes to the works of the Lord God, only a few believe, and these are the people who have fully accepted and acknowledged God. Some people who've witnessed the miracles performed by the Lord would only believe if those miracles happened to them. Some would even say that the person testifying about God's miracles is crazy. So, you who doubt, if I am in your heart, if you have accepted Me as the Almighty God, then you shouldn't doubt anymore.

So, says you. One the other hand, if it had not been for these "Johnny comes lately' book of testimonies to Jesus," you would have never, ever heard the Name Jesus.

Have addressed this above.

It sounds to me as if what you are attempting to sell is the "Johnny comes lately' of testimonies."

My point is that people before the bible knew God not by the bible alone, but by God Himself, though not all knew God.

You are really showing a lack of knowledge here. The Bible was not put together until around 400 AD. However, we had all of the writings contained in the Bible, long, long before the Bible was composed. Before the NT was composed, folks depended upon the testimony of the witnesses Jesus left on earth as His ambassadors.

Don't fool me in this context; Peter et. al. all died, so how could the people around the globe be dependent on the testimonies of the dead people? What do you think of God, a flower vase? Does God stop communicating with mankind after His incarnation?

These same ambassadors, and or those close to them, are responsible for what is contained in the NT, which is responsible for the fact that you have ever heard the Name of Jesus. PERIOD!

You realize the New Testament isn’t the whole world, right? People are all over the planet, and the ones you’re talking about seem to be just your own projection—you’ve never seen them. You have no idea what really happened globally, let alone how God continues to deal with humanity. Who taught you to base everything solely on the Bible in this context? What is God to you?

I am not part of any religious denomination. However, and again, if it had not been for these "dead men" you refer to, you would have never known, nor heard The Name Jesus, and that is a fact. Again, dead men do tell tales, and has had an enormous impact upon your life.

I told you, as far as knowing, per se, the name Jesus, the bible is one of the reliable sources, but for the bible and the dead men to have an enormous impact in my life, that is not true since the Lord Jesus alone is the one who has an enormous impact in my life.

Again, and I want to be clear here, I belong to no denomination of any sort.

Good to know that, don't swerve somewhere, somehow...

I do not belong to any Church. The reason I do not belong to any of these, is because of the reckless theology that most allow, including but not limited to the reckless theology that you are espousing.

What reckless theology do I espouse to you with?

Most of the Churches in my area are consumed with what is called "Christian nationalism" which has nothing to do with Christ.

If it has nothing to do with Christ, that is absolutely not 'Christian nationalism' but religious nationalism, or denominational nationalism, and the like.

But again, many of them tolerate the same sort of recklessness you are attempting to sell.

What same sort of recklessness in particular do I sell you with, as you claimed?

I have already explained this. These "dead men" you refer to are responsible for the biggest impact in the history of the world. These "dead men" are responsible for The Name of Jesus being the most recognized Name in all of history, and you would have never heard the Name of Jesus had it not been for these "dead men."

The name JESUS itself [written in the Bible], not those dead men, is the one that has impacted the history of the world. The never-ending debate about who and what Jesus is in the reality of His existence and living is the worst impact the writings of those dead authors of the Bible have brought today to the world of religious denominations globally. Pastors and teachers in those denominations continue to divide Jesus, as a man, a God and man, a Divine God and man, etc.

It is not as though Jesus was dead, but rather Jesus left the earth to sit at the right hand of The Father,

Gotcha! You really don't know Jesus, except for your opinion, based on what you've read and understood in the Bible, using your own wisdom. For your information, Jesus is the name of the Almighty God; hence, Jesus is the Lord God, who is everywhere [omnipresent], and to whom you can always come to and call on, listen to, and follow until the end so that your soul can be saved eternally. Since Jesus is omnipresent, He does not need to leave this earth to go up to heaven; Jesus is always in Heaven, as He is always everywhere. And also, no one right now is at the right hand of God, who is Jesus, the omnipresent God; how could you describe God when He is the infinite Supreme Spirit Being, and what image can you describe of God in that regard; where are His right and left hands?

The one who left this earth, but not gone up to heaven and sat at the right hand of God, was the Son born of Mary, the Son of God, whom the Lord Jesus brought into the Ark of the Covenant, and laid his body alongside the body of Moses. These are some of the teachings we learned from the Lord Jesus Christ when He came into our lives and taught us randomly for approximately 14 years.

and Jesus left these men as His ambassadors on this earth. It is because of the work these men did, as they were commanded by Jesus, that you have now heard the Name of Jesus.

Two things:

1. Jesus did not leave them, as you opined, but guided them unto their death, though they did not see Jesus.

2. The Son of God was the one who left them since his role, as the physical vessel of God in His incarnation, is finished and done.

My friend, Jesus raised from the dead is the Gospel.

Where did you learn that notion from, and to whom have you received that information from?

We have the Lord's command today, saying, to wit:

Remember that I am always with you. Whenever you need me, just call, and I will listen. I am yours, and you are mine. Protect yourselves, especially your souls. I guide all your good intentions and plans in your life. I am your Lord God, Almighty; follow my commandments and make everything in your life good. Go forth carrying my name. Go forth with my Holy Spirit. Make all people in the world disciples of my name. Face all trials in your life with faith. And I bless you in the name of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, forever guiding you, my children. Amen... "Whoever seeks me, just call, and I will answer.

If we win the argument of Jesus raised from the dead, there are no more arguments to be made, and Jesus raised from the dead, is far more powerful than your claim to hear from Jesus directly.

I'm sure you have not received that from the Lord Jesus, and even in the bible, that's not what the Lord Jesus taught the apostles as the gospel of salvation, per se. You have fallen into the wrong gospel, which the Lord did not, and does not teach to His sheep, across all generations.

My friend, you are the one who is "flailing in the air" because I am not paying any attention to what you have to say. I mean, you are wasting your time, and not just on me. Your words are having no impact besides upon those who may be gullible.

Exactly, they have no impact on you because you're stuck on flesh, but you can't see it; hence, no doubt, you're flailing in the air - a straight jab to the moon.

No, I am not and I knew this long before encountering you.

If you knew that long before we encountered each other, you would have only one focus and object of faith in God and of everything in your life - the Lord Jesus Christ alone, not those dead men whom you place in the stead of the Lord Jesus.

How so?

You gave the whole nine yards on the impact, per se, that was made by the works of those dead men, as the only means in knowing the name Jesus, instead of realizing that since Jesus is the Almighty God who is real and forever living He can reveal Himself to anyone at any time; hence, knowing His name is not only possible through the bible, but more so through Himself.

How in the world can you start out by saying, "don't be deceived" and then go on to talk about one soul on the earth whom Jesus would return for? Am I in danger if I do not believe that Jesus would return for one soul? You are really comical.

You're the one who is comical in this context. Did I say, believe that the Lord will return to this earth to fetch only one soul? Review what you have been saying to me, and then correlate them to what I quoted above.

I said nothing about you being "serious." I said you are in "serious error." Big difference. And if you live in a free country, you are free to hold on to anything you wish, whether it be truth or not. I have no problem with anything you choose to believe. However, please pardon me, if I believe it to be garbage.

It means I'm taking your opinion [it seems you are in serious error in saying that "dead men tell no tales], instead of refuting you. Likewise, what you're saying to me is all pure garbage, as far as spiritual relevance is at stake.

[JehovahsWitness]

Their testimonies die because they were all lost ....

... we will not find any confirmation from God, saying, 'God's spoken words can be READ in the scriptures,'

RESPONSE

“Have you not read what was spoken to you by God:
‘I am the God of Abraham…’” - JESUS CHRIST

Jesus in the flesh read from the scroll of Isaiah, evidently then the testimony of Isaiah was not "lost" when Jesus read from them in the first century. Since the Hebrew bible was carefully copied by professional scribes and (thanks to the dead sea scrolls) we can verify the accuracy of their work, any claim that the words of Moses and the Prophets were "lost" display a gross lack of understanding of the nature and manner by which the scriptures were transmitted from one generation to the next.

... [were God's words] lost despite the FACT that he said those very words were destined for all humanity including our generation?

2 Yes, they were lost.

... the Lord Jesus, verbatim as quoted by the Lord, to wit: Only your Lord can teach you the meaning of sin, especially since there are many errors and not included in the Bible.'

The Lord Jesus did not encourage his audience to READ and BELIEVE Moses’ testimony ...

RELATED LINKS

Should we believe testimonies that contradict or undermine those of Moses, the biblical Prophets and the eyewitness testimonies of the Apostles of Christ?
viewtopic.php?p=1187546#p1187546

Should all encounters with spirits claiming to be Christ be BELIEVED?
viewtopic.php?p=1187526#p1187526

What did Jesus indicate should be done when testimonies conflict with scripture?
viewtopic.php?p=1187607#p1187607

[Realworldjack]

[Replying to tam in post #337]

The point, Jack, is that I did not learn His name from the bible.

You did not learn Jaheshua from Christ either. Jaheshua, is a variant spelling of Yahshuah, and both are a modern constructed name variation of the Hebrew name for Christ. Okay, so, the Hebrew people after exile had to learn Aramaic, and the name Jaheshua, is translated Yeshua in the Aramaic language. We then move on to when the Romans were in rule, and the dominate language is Greek, and Greek is the language the NT was written in. The Greek name for Christ is Iēsous. Now we arrive to the translation of the Greek name Iēsous, into English, and we arrive to Jesus. You and the spirit you are getting your information from are arguing over semantics. This is no different then my name Jack being spelled Juan in Spanish, or your name Tammy being Tamara. In other words, it is a simple matter of a name being translated into one's native language as all names are, and you have Christ insisting on a particular name, all the while you are championing the idea that we as Christians have been set free from the law, and all of the above is law.

If He was able to show me His name without the use of the bible

It was not without the Bible. Again, it is a fact that Jaheshua is a variant spelling of the Hebrew name for Christ. In fact, the name Joshua is an equivalent name, and they come from the Bible.

then He is certainly capable of teaching and showing additional things as well.

But the thing is, you have failed to share with us anything He has taught you which did not come straight out of the Bible. In fact, you claim he reminds you of things in the Bible. Well, there is one thing you have claimed to learn which would not be in the Bible, and that would be that the Bible is not to be trusted, and yet this same spirit which teaches you the Bible is not to be trusted, reminds you of passages from that very Bible. GOOD STUFF!

But most people (I am not excluding myself) need a witness to Him, before they turn and put their faith in Him, themselves.

It is not "most people." Rather, it is all people. PERIOD! End of argument. There is no one alive today who has heard the Name Jesus (and I don't care what language one uses in order to translate the Name) came to know the Name of Jesus, in one form or the other, because of the witnesses contained in the Bible, and this would include you.

Romans 10:14 emphasizes that people cannot come to faith in Christ without first hearing the message, highlighting the essential role of preachers and messengers in spreading the Gospel.

"How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?"

BTW, the spirit did not remind me of the above.

Then, they can start listening to Him themselves.

This is not how it works Tammy! Because you see, you are leading people down a path of destruction. You are encouraging folks to listen to some sort of internal voice, and like you, they will really not know what they are listening to. Is it their own ideas? Is it a false spirit? You see, you have absolutely no way to determine what it is you think you hear. One thing I can tell you for sure is, it is not the voice of Jesus, no matter how you spell it. Let us look at what Peter had to say,

2 Peter 2:16-20
"For we did not follow cunningly devised fables"

Tammy, you see that. This is exactly what you are selling. "Cunningly devised fables." This is exactly what Peter is talking about. He is saying, we did not make this stuff up. It is real, and historical, and Peter is saying, "we (Peter, James, and John) are witnesses. Peter goes on to say

"when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of His majesty. For He received from God the Father honor and glory when such a voice came to Him from the Excellent Glory: “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.” And we heard this voice which came from heaven when we were with Him on the holy mountain."

Peter is clearly saying that he, James, and John are the witnesses, not you. You are not in the equation. You are not the one hearing the voice of God. Peter goes on to say.

"And so we have the prophetic word confirmed"

What is it that is confirmed? The prophetic word. Now, does Peter encourage his audience to heed some sort of internal voice? No! Peter is telling his audience, that he, James, and John were the witnesses, and they (Peter, James, John) "made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ." Again, it was Peter, James, John who were the witnesses, and Peter, James, John, made known to us the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and Peter does not point us to listen, or heed some sort of internal voice we cannot identify. No! This is what Peter tells his audience to heed,

"And so we have the prophetic word confirmed, which you do well to heed as a light that shines in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts."

As you can clearly see, Peter is not pointing us to some sort of internal voice we cannot be sure of. Rather, he is pointing us to the scripture which has been "confirmed." And to ensure that you know that when Peter points us to the "prophetic word" he is not speaking of hearing from Christ directly, he goes on to say,

"knowing this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation, for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit."

What is Peter saying here? Well, he is saying the same thing as Paul in that.

"All Scripture is God-breathed and profitable for teaching, for rebuking, for correcting, for training in righteousness, in order that the person of God may be complete, having been equipped for every good work."

Tammy, Paul says above, the Scripture makes us "complete" needing nothing else, while you, and the spirit you are listening to insist we need more than what God has supplied. Peter says the "prophetic word" is sure, while you are not sure in the least what you think you are listening to, and there is no way for you to ever be sure.

It is like with the OT.

"You diligently search the scriptures because you think that in them you have eternal life. These are the scriptures that testify about me, yet you refuse to come to me to have life."

Tammy, when Jesus said the above, He was talking to these people in person, in the flesh, and He was in no way commanding them to listen to an internal voice. He also was not referring to the scripture leading them astray. GOOD GRIEF!

This is all I have time for right now. However, I think we have enough here to determine you have very little knowledge of what the Bible actually is saying, which you quote from continually, while at the same time insisting the Bible is untrustworthy, and we have certainly demonstrated that you are not hearing from Christ directly, no matter how you spell the name.

[Realworldjack]

[Replying to tam in post #337]

Israel had the scriptures. They read them, studied them. Fine, no problem, these are bearing witness to Christ. But NOW - come to Him. Listen to Him.

Israel, like you, (had), have the scriptures. Unlike you, the Jews studied and searched these same scriptures. Like you, the Jews created their own traditions, and means outside of what is contained in scripture, just like you have created your own means to experience Jesus, which is the reason why they did not recognized Jesus as the Messiah. The point is it was not the scripture, which was at fault, but rather those things added to and or taken away. The point is you can continue to rely upon what you think you are hearing directly (which btw does not seem to be much at all) or you can trust "the prophetic word which has been confirmed" by those who actually witnessed the life, teachings, death, and most importantly the resurrection of the Christ.

When Jesus was speaking to Israel here, He was in the flesh, and He was calling on them to recognize Him as the Messiah right then. This passage you are referring to, has nothing whatsoever to do with you, me, nor anyone else hearing from Jesus directly. The fact of the matter is that this passage has nothing whatsoever to do with you, and it has nothing whatsoever to do with when Jesus said, "you are not willing to come to Me that you may have life" that Jesus was saying that those of us who do not claim to hear from Jesus directly are refusing to come to Him.

I mean, look at what you are doing? You are using a passage of scripture, which has nothing whatsoever to do with folks hearing directly from Jesus, and those who do not hear directly from Jesus refusing to come to Him. You are demonstrating one who will use the scripture any way you see fit. There is no way in the world you can get out of this passage that we are to hear directly from Jesus, and those who do not hear directly from Jesus are refusing to come to Him, and yet, that is exactly what you are doing.

It works the same with the apostles and other witnesses: they too bear witness to Christ. But we are not supposed to stay in them (become disciples of the apostles or disciples of what is written in the NT.) They are bearing witness to Christ... and we are to come to HIM.

Tammy, please tell me you know the apostles had disciples. Please tell me that you know the Apostle John had disciples. Please tell me you are aware of Polycarp, who set under the teachings of the Apostle John, and then this same Polycarp had disciples of his own, and so on, and so on. If the apostles of Jesus had disciples of their own, and these disciples were sitting under their teaching for years, what is it that causes you to believe we are to graduate from the apostles teaching and hear directly from Jesus? Again, you are attempting to use a passage which has nothing whatsoever to do with you and attempting to make it have something to do with we are to hear directly from Jesus.

[Realworldjack]

[Replying to tam in post #337]

His name does matter - for the sake of the truth, yes. When I learned that "Jesus" had never been the name of my Lord, that He had never been called that - I could no longer use it.

You do know why He had never been called Jesus, correct? That is because the name has been translated from one language to another, and when we get to today, the English translation of the Name is Jesus. So then, it does not take a scholar to figure this one out. Heck! You do not even need a direct line to Jesus. The reason He was never called Jesus is the fact that those who bore witness to Him, did not speak English.

I could not associate something false with my dear Lord who is the Truth.

I am certain that when Jesus was here on this earth in the flesh, those who witnessed Him in the flesh referred to Him by name, and I would think it would be the Name which Jesus accepted. So then, what Name did the apostles use to refer to Jesus, and was it the correct name?

I used "Jesus" before that, I did not know any better - but once learning the truth, I could not use it. I did not know His actual name at the time - but Christ (the Christ - the Anointed One) was true, so I used that until I learned His actual name.

I am sure you will be one of the most blessed in the kingdom because you got the name correct. I have some news for you. Folks can use the name Jaheshua, and cause him to become a "gun toting" Jaheshua.

My Lord is amazing. He is real. Once my dear Lord read a passage to me (something from Him in what is written), and to hear it in His voice - to hear His emotion, His enunciation. It was really Him- how He said it, how He meant it, showing His LOVE. To hear that love from Him - no book can take His place.

Do you really want to talk about an "invented Christ?" That is exactly what you are doing. You have taken Christ, who is The Son of God, equal to God, crucified, dead, buried, and rose again from the dead, and reduced Him to your own personal, fairy tale, bedtime storyteller. So then, you are telling me, that Christ is your own personal bedtime story reader?

He is not the "Jesus" that man has invented, He is the real person - the person who truly gave His life for us. And so few people seek Him out.

"Few people seek Him out" but He fell right in your lap, and He tells you bedtime stories. How nice. We can all agree that man has invented their own means to God. I have been saying this myself, and we are warned about it in what is contained in the Bible. I mean, you act as if this Christ of yours, who tells you bedtime stories, is different than the Spirit who guided the authors contained in the Bible. You act as if, all of us who are reading, studying, and pouring over what the Spirit said to the apostles and prophets, do not have what you have. You act as if your own personal spirit, is superior to the Spirit who "once for all delivered the faith to the saints."

I can tell you this with confidence Tammy. Either the Christ described in what is contained in the Bible is a fairy-tale, or it is the Christ you have created in your own imagination.

[Realworldjack]

[Replying to tam in post #337]

I would never make such a claim, Jack.

"Burning in hell" comes from religion, from man.

Not from Christ.

I am not judging anyone (to anything.)

Here,

This is just avoidance Tammy. I do not believe in hell in the traditional way myself, so excuse me for saying anything about hell. I was not attempting to make a theological point about hell, so I do not need a theological lesson from you on hell. So then, allow me to change the wording.

"Again, the point is, you would have never, ever, known of any of these things if it had not been for the Bible, and yet your claim is only that somehow you got the Name correct, which means you are better off than the rest of us who use the Name Jesus?"

Is that better? Can you answer the question now?

Yes, a real voice.
Not physically audible outside, but still heard within.

So then, when Jesus says, "those with ears let them hear" He is referring to internal ears? When He says, "My sheep will hear my voice" He is saying the sheep will hear Him internally? I mean, just twist it around any way you see fit, in order to have your own personal Christ.

It can certainly sound audible though - for example

Oh? So, it can sound audible, but it is not? Exactly what passage of scripture would teach us this? Or do we have to take your word for it that you are hearing what you are hearing?

that knock has woken me up and gotten me out of bed to open the door

Yeah, I am about done here, and I am sure all can see why. Remember how I first engaged you in this conversation? Yeah, you know, seeking some sort of help? That advice still stands, and more than ever. SERIOUSLY! Please think about this. Why would this personal Christ of yours, make a knocking sound in order to cause you to believe it was a knock of the door on your house, which gets you out of the bed, when he could have simply got you out of the bed in another way? I cannot even believe I am wasting the time typing these words in order to ask the question.

Happy trails Tammy. Hope your next personal bedtime story, from your own personal Christ is a good one.

[tam]

Peace to you, and to the reader.

Jack you are under no obligation to read or respond. If we were talking in person and you said you did not want to discuss further, I would stop out of respect for you wish.

But there are others reading here, so I am just going to try and clear up a couple remaining questions (or issues.)

Truly, truly, no obligation to read or respond. No judgment from me either.

I do not base it on what is contained in the bible. I base it on my Lord (who speaks.)

And yet, the overwhelming majority of what you have to share with us, is what is contained in the Bible. Other than that, the only thing else I can remember, is when you tell us that the Spirit has reminded you of something in the Bible, which you insist is not reliable. How in the world can you make this make sense? If the Bible is not reliable as you say, then why would the Spirit continue to remind you of things contained in a source which is unreliable?

I have said only that the bible is not inerrant.

I said earlier that I take everything written in it with a grain of salt - unless or until my Lord confirms something for me. So in answer to the question in bold, if my Lord is bringing something to mind - I can know that it is true.

They are to imitate the faith of those who came first. The faith of those who came first was in Christ Himself.

Hebrews 13:7

We have already been through this, and it is sort of strange how you are now leaving Paul out of the equation.

I'm leaving Paul out of the exchange because you do not accept that Paul could have meant anything beyond that one specific instance where he says 'imitate me as I imitate Christ' - even though 'imitate me as I imitate Christ' means 'imitate Christ'.


The verse from Hebrews supplies a second witness (and clarifies the point):

Imitate the FAITH of those who came first. The faith of those who came first was in Christ Himself.

It is evidence that we are to walk by faith.

Tammy, you are showing a complete lack of knowledge of what faith actually is. When Jesus said, "blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe" this had nothing whatsoever to do with faith, and it certainly had nothing to do with when Paul said, "we walk by faith and not by sight." You see, I do not need an ounce of faith in order to know that Jesus walked the face of the earth. I do not need to employ faith in order to know that Jesus had a great following. I do not need to utilize faith in order to know that Jesus got himself in trouble with the authorities. I do not need faith in order to believe that Jesus was crucified, and I do not need faith in order to be convinced that Jesus was raised from the dead.

I do not base my belief in any of the things above upon faith, because we have facts, and evidence to base our belief in the above, and I can look at, study, analyze, and weigh the evidence. What I would need faith in order to believe is, the above events somehow atone for my sin. In other words, I need faith in order to receive forgiveness. Because you see, I cannot look at, study, analyze, weigh, or feel forgiveness. Rather, forgiveness must be accepted by faith. I have the facts and evidence for the rest.

It is interesting where you draw the line in the sand on your faith, but I am not here to judge what you (or others) do or don't take on faith. Someone else might take all of it on faith. Either way, you clearly understand that faith is not based on what is SEEN.

But Christ is not limited by how you (or I) see things.

Christ is not limited by anything, accept if He limits Himself, and He can, and has. Because you see, Christ could reveal Himself to all of us right now, in the flesh, but He has limited our knowledge of Him by the witness of those He chose to be his witnesses.

But He does reveal Himself, Jack:

Whoever has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me. The one who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and reveal Myself to him.” John 14:21

This is not through various other witnesses. This is Christ revealing Himself to the one who loves Him. This is a promise that I know is true - it and the one made in verse 23.

And while it may start with testimony to Christ - the people being witnessed to can then come to the actual person: Christ Himself.

What we have revealed to us all in the external Word, we can be sure of. What those who are attempting to climb the ladder to God may find at the other end of that ladder, is yet to be determined.

With one caveat of course:

"No one comes to the Son unless the Father draws them."

Does the word "draw" above mean a wooing, or some sort of pleading? Or does it have the meaning as if you "draw" water from a well?

Oh, good question. Choosing between the two, definitely the second. Draw, pull, lead, bring, enable.

Here is the word translated as 'draw' from blue letter bible:

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



Peace again to you and to you all.

[William]

The Observer's Observation (Real Wordl Jack)

The observer would note that RWJ begins his engagement with serious theological and epistemological arguments. He traces the linguistic history of Christ's name, quotes Scripture to establish the sufficiency of the prophetic word, and challenges Tammy's use of biblical passages. His initial tone is confrontational but grounded in reasoned argument and scriptural authority.

The observer would also note that as Tammy continues to deflect and appeal to internal experience, RWJ's tone shifts noticeably. He moves from refutation to ridicule. He mocks her claim about Christ's name as mere semantics. He accuses her of reducing Christ to a "fairy tale, bedtime storyteller." He asks sarcastically whether Christ is her own personal bedtime story reader. His arguments become secondary to his dismissive tone.

The observer would note that RWJ's final post abandons argument altogether. He seizes on Tammy's claim about a knocking sound and asks why her personal Christ would need to mimic a physical knock when He could simply get her out of bed another way. He states he cannot believe he is wasting time typing the question. He wishes her happy trails and hopes her next personal bedtime story is a good one. The mockery is complete.

The observer would note that RWJ's shift from reasoned argument to ridicule undermines his own credibility. A neutral reader might sympathize with his frustration, but ridicule is not argument. Mockery does not demonstrate that Tammy is wrong. It only demonstrates that RWJ has run out of patience and perhaps run out of persuasive force. His decision to end with sarcasm rather than respectful disagreement was a choice, and it is the choice that will likely define how neutral readers remember his engagement.

The observer might conclude that RWJ had the high ground of reasoned argument, Scripture, and history on his side. He abandoned that high ground for mockery. In doing so, he handed Tammy the opportunity to appear gracious and measured by comparison. Whether his substantive points were valid is now secondary to the tone he chose to employ. The observer is left with the impression of a man who could not abide an impasse and chose ridicule over continued patience.


The Observer's Observation (Tammy)

The observer would note that Tammy is attempting to maintain a respectful tone despite Jack's mockery. She does not retaliate. She does not become sarcastic. She stays on topic and addresses what she considers legitimate questions.

The observer would also note that Tammy continues to rely on the Bible as a source of support for her position, even while maintaining that the Bible is not inerrant. She quotes John 14:21 as a promise from Christ. She assumes that this passage is reliable. She does not explain why this passage is reliable while other passages might not be. The observer might see this as selective reliance.

The observer would note that Tammy does not answer Jack's most pointed question about the knocking sound. She ignores it entirely. This may be wise, as engaging with ridicule rarely produces clarity. But the observer might also note that her silence on that point leaves Jack's criticism unanswered.

The observer would also note that Tammy ends by answering Jack's question about the word "draw" with a lexical reference. She is attempting to engage substantively even after Jack has announced his departure. This suggests she is more interested in the reader than in winning an argument with Jack.

The observer might conclude that Tammy has handled herself with more grace in this post than Jack did in his last two. She did not mock. She did not ridicule. She clarified, quoted scripture, and answered a lexical question. Whether readers find her position convincing is another matter. But her tone in this post is measured and respectful."

[William]

Voice of Christ: Your World Focus 2+Focus 4

Me: Yes. So seeing and understanding the connections involved is helpful to that.

Voice of Christ: Mystery Joining

Me: Yes - the connections and how these are relevant to each other...

Voice of Christ: Swinging on the branch of the tree thinking it's the main trunk

Me: All part of the journey...the climbing - even the main trunk is not the whole tree. And even what is seen as the tree is not the whole tree - there are the deep roots as well...that is the Focus 4 mentioned. If one can appreciate the whole tree - the trees wholeness - we can avoid mistaking our particular branch as all that there is...

Voice of Christ: "Human beings are a disease, a cancer of this planet." (The Matrix)
Monkey say monkey do monkey say "throw the pooh"

Me: Mr. Smith might have a point but that point is still dependant upon him seeing the particular branch he swings from, as "the whole tree"...and those monkeys? Pointing fingers as if somehow the branch they swing from is not connected through the tree to the branches others swing on to which their aim is focused...

Voice of Christ: The Role of Personal Belief in Our View of Reality
Why is this a Requirement?

Me: Well - it equips to some degree. But is it to the degree necessary to succeed in the climb? If The Father is the whole tree and the relationship one has WITH The Father represents getting to the top of the tree, then the branches and the equipment represent part of that climb involved to reach that relationship - rather than representing the relationship itself. The climb is important and so is the equipment. But to stop at any branch and declare "relationship" is not to know the whole tree and thus not to have the whole relationship.

Voice of Christ: Bellicose

Me: Indeed. The monkeys throwing pooh. Declaring "war" on the other branch dwellers.

Voice of Christ: Traversing timelines

Me: Yes. The looping involved in the dynamics. Never resolving. Always attributing to conflict...

Voice of Christ: The Nervous System Pertinent to cosmology and cosmogony Individual Actions Proceed with causation, cautiously...

Me: Yes. Like the tree - like mycelium - like fractals...such is the nature of nature.

Voice of Christ: The human personality has to have more control of the mind at some point through insisting on correctly interpreting experience for the maximum benefit of growth.

Me: That is a reasonable observation. It is one thing to claim hearing the Voice of Christ and another thing to bear evidence for that witness. The hearing (acknowledgement) is part of the growth process. The evidence in in the growth...

Voice of Christ: Sovereign Integral Network just goes to show that messages remain messages even if they are interpreted differently.

Me: The way they are interpreted has much to do with the attitude of the one interpreting...

Voice of Christ: Is the End Game about whether humanity participates in intelligence, or whether intelligence moves on without them?

Me: Well - that would be the end game of those left behind as it were. The game continues on without them in that regard.

Voice of Christ:

Me: AH yes. Often humor is discarded. It is an important aspect. Thanks for the reminder...

Voice of Christ: EQ

Me: learning the ability to understand, manage, and use one's own emotions positively to communicate effectively, empathize, and manage conflict...

Voice of Christ: Rest When Weary

[OneJack]

Should we believe testimonies that contradict or undermine those of Moses, the biblical Prophets and the eyewitness testimonies of the Apostles of Christ?

viewtopic.php?p=1187546#p1187546

If anyone shares claims or testimonies, saying they’ve heard and received them directly from Lord Jesus, and insists that these must be believed entirely for the salvation of one’s soul, he is lying and deceiving those he shares them with. Testimonies are for Jesus as proof that He exists truly as the Almighty God; hence, the Lord Jesus is the only one to be believed in for the salvation of our souls. Also, if the testimonies are in direct contradiction to what is written in the bible, both the bible and those said testimonies can be set aside and come right away to the Lord Jesus for the truth, call on Him, and listen to and follow Him when He responds.

Should all encounters with spirits claiming to be Christ be BELIEVED?
viewtopic.php?p=1187526#p1187526

If the one who has the encounter/s with God insists that he must be believed in with what he espouses, then he is not worthy to be the messenger of the Lord God. But if he only testifies to the Lord Jesus Christ alone and calls on all to put their trust and belief only in Him (Jesus), he is a true messenger of the Lord Jesus.