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 Diagoras in post #190]

It sounds rather like an 'inner voice of conscience' of someone who lives by strong personal principles of caring for others

And would you agree that (broadly), the idea of a 'guilty conscience' might feel very similar for many people who try to live a 'good life' (however they perceive it)?

Wouldn't that suggest that you are in fact 'working things out for yourself' over time?

I think those three Human traits can be attributed to anything the individual wants to, and that there may be a perceived advantage for those who believe these normal things are "The Voice of their Lord speaking to/with them".

One thing I have noticed is that one can easily overstep in relation to others whom one thinks it is acceptable to judge/make ad hominem comments against, because one essentially "models ones self" on the image one sees of the biblical Jesus and "gives ones self the right" alongside the claim they are "hearing Christs voice" and basically 'channel' what one hears in their conscience, either verbally, with body language, and/or in written form, against another...all "in the name of" whatever "lord" they are using to allow themselves this "authority" to do so.

Such does happen. Folk who use the "voice of their own conscience" in such a manner, are often proved fraudulent as a result.

On a larger scale, this is precisely what the Christian Church has done throughout its checkered history in relation to atrocities it committed "in the name of" Christ, so it is fair to question the validity of such claims even if in doing so, one only discovers that what some refer to as "The Shepherds Voice" is really their own voice of conscience.

Essential the idea of living "Spiritually" has to do with deep productive introspection which involves all three of the attributes you mentioned. Many cannot achieve any level of introspection without the aid of having a type of external prompt in which to bounce off of, normally some character they are suitably impressed by, [and even willing to die for in some extremes.]

Certainly that in itself isn't something to criticize, unless of course - as I mentioned, those using such method overstep to the point of judging others because the 'voice' they listen to is what is doing the judging. [Such can lead to being willing to kill for, in some extremes].

I think the more honest and self empowering approach would be to recognize ones own inner voice of introspection for what it is, rather than assigning an imagined "lord and master" is doing all that on ones behalf. Equally I acknowledge that it might not be possible for some folk to connect with their conscience without the aid of an external prompt, someone whom one can give the credit to, because it is less dangerous than having to deal with the possibility of developing "pride" in ones own achievements, or even in acknowledging ones own part in the overall process.

[tam]

Peace to you,

I've read through the whole (currently 19 pages) thread, just to check that you're not being asked to repeat yourself - always tedious - so would you object to a few questions coming from a point of reason and logic at least?

Sure, but also love, right?

I intend my questions to be respectful, but I can't honestly say they are 'coming from a point of love' - that's too nebulous a description.

That is fair.

I am certainly appreciative of you answering all my questions, and for (I feel) being as helpful as possible to further my understanding. What you've written has made the picture in my mind of what you experience when you talk to Christ that bit clearer - thank you.

You are welcome.

Sometimes it is just understanding that has been given, a knowing down to the bones.

* Does this 'knowing' feel like a sort of 'A-ha!', like suddenly seeing a picture in a different light, or when an answer to a puzzle 'clicks'? Or is it a gradual, "I might be sure... I think I'm sure... I AM sure!" process?

More the 'aha', seeing something in a new light (which is an apt description, since it is in HIS light, the light that is Christ). But sometimes that can't happen until one learns other things first (building blocks). In the same way a person must learn addition and subtraction before they are able to learn algebra.

Something that intrigued me when I asked you how often Christ instructs you to do something specific: you said:

I don't have an answer for how often... except to say whenever needed (no doubt I have missed some though, from not listening). Nothing allegorical that I can recall.

* Are you saying that sometimes Christ is at times talking to you 'when needed', but you don't listen properly? Is that due to being distracted, or something like that?

Distracted or perhaps not wanting to do something (for whatever reason). People can be pretty good at ignoring things they don't want to hear or deal with. I try not to do that - I know my Lord won't lead me wrong, I know His words are good and true - but I can't say that I have never missed something.

Your example of the co-worker being down and you being told "Is that what love would do?" actually reinforces my initial supposition that Christ's words to you might be heard like that.

Well sure. That is the most common way that we hear people speak is it not? With words?

It sounds rather like an 'inner voice of conscience' of someone who lives by strong personal principles of caring for others - a description that I imagine could well apply to you. Same thing actually, with your JW memorial meeting story.

I understand that some people think of it as you do. But I must state clearly that my own inner voice is not the same as my dear Lord's voice. And I would offer something as food for thought (as a dear sister once shared with me), that 'still small voice' is not our conscience. Our conscience is not what speaks. Our conscience is what convicts or releases us (so that we feel good or remorseful) depending upon whether or not we listened to that voice.

Moving to my question about ambiguous or unusual responses, you replied (in part):

Dreams can often be ambiguous (and some dreams are just regular dreams). What I do is... I do not interpret them. I wait until my Lord makes clear their meaning (even if it might not come for years). In the meantime, I 'chew' and ponder, and often learn other useful things along the way.

* I'm puzzled by a couple of things here: firstly, whether there's still a clear distinction between a 'regular dream' and an 'ambiguous message from Christ'.

I'm not sure what you are asking. I was simply stating that dreams can be ambiguous (due to symbolism and metaphor) and that some dreams are just regular dreams (as in, I watch a movie from the Alien franchise and I dream about aliens, the Sigourney Weaver aliens).

I leave interpretation to my Lord, though I might learn some things through introspection or in research along the way.

Secondly, are you learning these 'other useful things' from external sources unrelated to Christ? Wouldn't that suggest that you are in fact 'working things out for yourself' over time? Do you ascribe all your personal insights to Christ's teachings, no matter their level of ambiguity?

First - if someone sets you on a path, can you really say that the things you learned on that path are unrelated to the person who set you on that path?

Second - if you do learn some things on your own, does that mean you never learn anything from someone else?

Another rather telling response came when I asked, "Has Christ ever said outright anything comparable to "I won't tell you / You're not to know that?"

"Telling" in what way, if I may ask?

You replied:

The closest I can think of is when I was curious about others' sin (if it even was a sin), though I could not actually form the question to ask, because I knew (the spirit given me knew) that it was NOT my business. I could not ask the question.

* Didn't this feel quite uncomfortable (unsettling)?

Asking would have felt uncomfortable, because everything in me protested asking about something that was between someone else and Christ, not someone else, me and Christ.

You must have realised that Christ would have been able to read your thoughts and know that you were curious about something that you knew was 'none of your business'. Did you feel you have to confess or apologise to Christ for this?

No, nothing at all like that. God is not that exacting and neither is His Son. Christ is not going to punish someone or even be mad at them for being curious and wondering about something. Not even if I had asked the question.

Consider at the end of the book of "John", when Peter turns around and asks, 'what about him, Lord?', referring to the disciple Christ loved. Christ answered Peter, "If I want him to remain alive until I return, what is that to you? You must follow me."

And would you agree that (broadly), the idea of a 'guilty conscience' might feel very similar for many people who try to live a 'good life' (however they perceive it)?

Of course. But this had nothing to do with a guilty conscience.

You also answered my last two questions pretty much as I expected. Paraphrasing you slightly, you "tend not to ask <specific> questions", but instead 'listen to his voice'.

Okay, well, there is a reason I am not a fan of paraphrasing, lol. I said I do not tend to (and so rarely) ask specific questions about the meaning of something written. That doesn't mean that I have never asked specific question or received specific answers, even on something written. But I do prefer to listen (and so that I go where my Lord leads), and because I trust that my Lord will tell me anything I need to know. I know I can trust that He will tell me anything I need to know, and when I am able to receive it, because He has always done so.

And because that is what love would do... and because my Lord has also promised to lead His people into all truth.

Would you accept a mild criticism from a scientifically-minded person such as myself that the surest way to test the reality of something is to ask as specific questions as possible?

Sure... but I am not testing the reality of something when I am asking a question. I already know my Lord (and His Father) are real, and true. If I am asking a question, I am seeking to know what is true regarding the question I asked.

For instance, the kind of person who claims to be able to talk to the dead (and typically charges money to help people 'connect' to past relatives) never confirms specific details to prove their methods. You might hear "He's remembering something around water", for example - which could refer to any number of family vacations - but never "He's confirming that he was a midshipman aboard the 'Charlotte Grey' from 1936 to 1941". I'd hope you can see that a skilled charlatan might use the former, but never anything like the latter in a private reading.

The closest you got to anything specific was deciphering some symbolism in a dream of Revelation:

The closest example I gave regarding something written, but that was just an example to help you get a sense of what I meant.

I understand what some of the symbolism represents in Revelation - not because I figured it out, but because my Lord told me (or confirmed to me what another of His servants shared as He gave them). For example, one time in a dream, I was seeing something just as it is described in Revelation, but I could not remember what the symbol represented, and so I asked in my dream - what are these again, Lord, I forget... and they immediately changed into what they represented. That was pretty specific, lol.

I've seen a response from you in another thread (will have to go and check the details) claiming to have been told by Christ what the symbolism in Revelation means. And in the recent '144,000' thread, you did suggest that you'd found studying such symbolism to be one of your least favourite subjects. I hypothesise that having such symbolism 'explained' to you in dream form is simply a way of getting over those feelings of displeasure in studying them in more conventional ways.

From that other thread:

The only means I know of to confirm what IS true though would be Christ (Christ sent that Revelation to John, and from my experience, the meaning of the content of that book must be revealed - I sure can't figure it out on my own; poetry and symbolism were two of my most disliked sections in high school.)

It is not about displeasure over studying - even if I loved poetry and symbolism, that would not mean that my interpretation would be true. It is about truth. Not just something that is interpreted by men (based on conventional or unconventional study). But about whether or not it is TRUE. Any number of religions and groups can and do give various interpretation of what every single thing in Revelation means - but that is just their interpretation. That does not mean any explanation they give is true, much less that EVERY explanation they give is true.

I am interested in truth.

Not in what is popular. Not in what is conventional. Not in what is (or appears to be) 'learned'.

The person who knows what Revelation means is the person who gave that Revelation, the same person who can open the scriptures to us. That would be Christ (and His Father, who gave the revelation to His Son).

In summary, thanks again for taking the time to answer.

You're welcome, and thank you for the respectful exchange.

Not many people would do so like you did. As this is another fairly long post, I just went back and placed an asterisk next to where I've asked a follow-up question. Hopefully not too onerous!

This is a pretty long post as well, but thank you for the asterisks!

At some point, I may feel inclined to open a thread on interpreting Revelation, so as a final question, is that something you'd be interested in debating - given your unique perspective?

Debating no (no disrespect, just being honest). Discussing, sure, if there is something I can share that might help or at least give some food for thought, (preferably) something even for someone to take to Christ themselves.


Peace again to you!

[William]

When someone thinks that their own inner voice is not the same as the Lord's voice and that 'still small voice' is not their conscience - is not what speaks - but that their conscience is what convicts or releases them so that they "feel good" or "remorseful" depending upon whether or not they listened to that voice, they are not really offering anything in the way of supporting evidence that 'the Lords Voice' is therefore involved in that process, as most everyone can identify with that same process without necessarily having to invoke an "other" source as that which is responsible for said process...in their particular case, as claimants telling others that they are listening to "The Lords Voice".

Since such a claim cannot be verified in any way, we are left with the logic that any claimant may well be switching places and are themselves playing the role of 'the still small voice' pretending through belief, that it is 'the Lords voice" they are listening to.

Therefore, just as logically, we have to ask the question that IF we cannot take the claimants word for it [for there is not logical reason to do so], WHY are such claims even voiced by said claimants?

[tam]

Peace to you,

WHY are such claims even voiced by said claimants?

To bear witness to Christ, to the truth, to serve/assist those who are seeking Him, and to respond to those who do have questions (such as in the case of this thread).



Peace again.

[Diagoras]

[William]

[William]

[nobspeople]

Peace to you,

WHY are such claims even voiced by said claimants?

To bear witness to Christ, to the truth, to serve/assist those who are seeking Him, and to respond to those who do have questions (such as in the case of this thread).



Peace again.

Or
To have fun
To make fun of something or someone
Attention
Mental illness

You can't have it one way only, without visiting the other side of the argument. If, that is, you want to find out the truth, not just accept one's narrow view of the truth.

[nobspeople]

[Replying to tam in post #1]

If one wants to know the truth of this matter themselves... then ask Christ.

So. If one wants to 'know the truth' you have to ask a guy that doesn't exist? As it seems you directed us to christ, you should be able to prove he exists, no?

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

Ah, so you can't prove anything. Good. Now, let's look at the items listed

a) Everyone has a personal story. That's great and all, but that's all it is. My personal story is your god is bunk.
b) Which ones? The ones accepted and accredited by 'the church'? What about the gnostic ones? Oh yeah, they're not 'considered' to be legit. What about the other writings of christ? Not to mention you're asking someone to base their life on stories written by imperfect dead men, translated by others, then edited by even more. But yeah, let's look at the book.
c) See b above.

But let's assume he does exist.
You're telling someone to go to the guy that says he's 'the truth'? That's like telling a person: "See that con-man over there selling snake oil? Go to him. He can sell you some good ol' snake oil!"
In other words, it makes zeros sense.

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.

It shouldn't be what is or isn't acceptable to some, but what's acceptable, period. And, what is laid out above, is only acceptable to those who wish it to be acceptable.

[tam]