Sola Scriptura Doesn't Make Sense

swordsman1

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2015
3,940
1,064
✟252,447.00
Faith
Christian
Metaphorical voice is your term. I never used that term and really have no idea what you mean by it. In my view, God is capable of communication/speech, in various ways. Therefore He has a voice.

I can't debate "metaphorical voice" with you since I have no idea what that means.

I'm referring to the "voice" in John 10:37 that you appealed to. It's not Jesus's literal voice is it? So it is a metaphor for something else. What is it? A feeling?

So, generally, I'd say that God's voice consists of any real-time impression more or less distinct ("loud and clear") that He imposes on the mind via His direct agency.

Right, now we are getting somewhere. So the metaphorical "voice" in John 10:27, according to you, is "an impression...on the mind". Show me from scripture where you get that from. Where is an impression described as being God's "voice". Otherwise it is just your own unwarranted assertion and counts for nothing.
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Site Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,508
7,861
...
✟1,194,503.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I'm referring to the "voice" in John 10:37 that you appealed to. It's not Jesus's literal voice is it? So it is a metaphor for something else. What is it? A feeling?

Right, now we are getting somewhere. So the metaphorical "voice" in John 10:27, according to you, is "an impression...on the mind". Show me from scripture where you get that from. Where is an impression described as being God's "voice". Otherwise it is just your own unwarranted assertion and counts for nothing.

In this point of the Bible: I believe Jesus was referring to his actual literal voice (Which was immortalized into the pages of the 4 gospels). We are to hear and obey the words of Jesus in Scripture (Which is a record of His literal voice speaking that others heard).
 
Upvote 0

JAL

Veteran
Site Supporter
Oct 16, 2004
10,777
928
Visit site
✟343,550.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Yet, that is not the standard. Some think they are doing good while they do evil.

"They shall put you out of the synagogues: yes, the time comes, that whoever kills you will think that he does God service." (John 16:2).

What is the standard by which the Lord will evaluate each of us according to Scripture?

"He that rejects me, and receives not my words, has one that judges him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day." (John 12:48).

According to the Bible and not you, it says that the person who receives not the words of Jesus, those very words by Jesus will judge them on the last day. So it is the Bible (i.e. Jesus's words in the Bible), and not some conscience alone or some voice.

But if you were right, then your voice, or your conscience would have gave you the more correct information here. But in reality, the Bible is correct on this one.

See.... that is why you need a Bible;
And to take it more seriously in regards to our final word of authority on spiritual matters. Nothing should come between you and God's Word.
You've managed to raise some challenging verses that are certainly worth discussing. But let's bear in mind what you have NOT managed to do. You haven't identified a single possible scenario clearly calling for depart from this maxim:

"If I feel certain that action-A is evil,and B is good, I should opt for B".
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Site Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,508
7,861
...
✟1,194,503.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I'm referring to the "voice" in John 10:37 that you appealed to. It's not Jesus's literal voice is it? So it is a metaphor for something else. What is it? A feeling?



Right, now we are getting somewhere. So the metaphorical "voice" in John 10:27, according to you, is "an impression...on the mind". Show me from scripture where you get that from. Where is an impression described as being God's "voice". Otherwise it is just your own unwarranted assertion and counts for nothing.

I do also believe that men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. I also believe the Scriptures are the result of being under the inspiration of God (God breathed). So this means God can move certain men of God to speak and or write what He wants them to say. While God may have spoken to them at other times, in these particular actions, there was no audible voice.

In the End Times or now: When believers are persecuted to the point of death, and they are worried about what to say, they can allow for God to speak those words to those who are killing them. But of course, no new doctrine, or new words of Scripture should be added to the Bible on this account, though. God's Word (the Bible) is complete.
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Site Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,508
7,861
...
✟1,194,503.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
You've managed to raise some challenging verses that are certainly worth discussing. But let's bear in mind what you have NOT managed to do. You haven't identified a single possible scenario clearly calling for depart from this maxim:

"If I feel certain that action-A is evil,and B is good, I should opt for B".

Again, John 12:48 trumps your maxim. Evil men can think they are doing good when in reality they are doing evil. The standard is God's Word according to John 12:48. Jesus says that His words will judge a person on the last day when they do not receive His words. That's the standard. Not a person's conscience alone. People can defile their consciences.
 
Upvote 0

JAL

Veteran
Site Supporter
Oct 16, 2004
10,777
928
Visit site
✟343,550.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
I'm referring to the "voice" in John 10:37 that you appealed to. It's not Jesus's literal voice is it? So it is a metaphor for something else. What is it? A feeling?
I think my last post was pretty clear on how I define God's voice.

Right, now we are getting somewhere. So the metaphorical "voice" in John 10:27, according to you, is "an impression...on the mind". Show me from scripture where you get that from. Where is an impression described as being God's "voice". Otherwise it is just your own unwarranted assertion and counts for nothing.
Do you want me to be rationally minded here, or not? The verse talks about a voice that obviously has an impact of some kind on us. How then can you possibly fault me for understanding God's voice to us as some kind of impression/impact ? More or less distinct("loud and clear").

You seem to want to limit it to audible words? But why then use the term metaphorical? And how can Jn 10:27 apply to all Christians if it is limited to sound-vibrations from God's mouth experienced at the same degree of loudness as ordinary conversations. Certainly Moses had that experience with God, but most of us do not.

You're trying to dismiss my views on Voice out-of-hand but surely it's a bit more of grey area than you're inclined to admit.

And my overall position on Direct Revelation hardly stands or falls on the precise technical definition of 'voice' - the fact is that God can communicate to us via any or all of the senses, for example, and any emotions, as the Scriptures abundantly testify. It's all Direct Revelation, regardless whether some of it (such as a vision) doesn't meet YOUR strict narrow definition of voice. K?
 
Upvote 0

JAL

Veteran
Site Supporter
Oct 16, 2004
10,777
928
Visit site
✟343,550.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Again, John 12:48 trumps your maxim. Evil men can think they are doing good when in reality they are doing evil. The standard is God's Word according to John 12:48. Jesus says that His words will judge a person on the last day when they do not receive His words. That's the standard. Not a person's conscience alone. People can defile their consciences.
Sir? Do you know what a maxim is? It's not a historical commentary on what people have done, or a foretelling of what evil men will do in the future.

It's an advisory on how I should behave in the here and now. Still waiting for you to show me a clear case where I should depart from the maxim.
 
Upvote 0

swordsman1

Well-Known Member
May 3, 2015
3,940
1,064
✟252,447.00
Faith
Christian
Do you want me to be rationally minded here, or not? The verse talks about a voice that obviously has an impact of some kind on us. How then can you possibly fault me for understanding God's voice to us as some kind of impression/impact ? More or less distinct("loud and clear").

So I can provide 20 verses that show God's metaphorical "voice" is Scripture, and you can provide zero verses that show it is an impression on the mind. Gee, I wonder who is correct?


You seem to want to limit it to audible words? But why then use the term metaphorical? And how can Jn 10:27 apply to all Christians if it is limited to sound-vibrations from God's mouth experienced at the same degree of loudness as ordinary conversations. Certainly Moses had that experience with God, but most of us do not.

No, the "voice" in John 10:27 is metaphorical. We agree it is not Jesus's literal voice. "My voice" is a metaphor for Jesus's words in scripture.
 
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Site Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,508
7,861
...
✟1,194,503.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Sir? Do you know what a maxim is? It's not a historical commentary on what people have done, or a foretelling of what evil men will do in the future.

It's an advisory on how I should behave in the here and now. Still waiting for you to show me a clear case where I should depart from the maxim.

Still waiting for you to explain John 12:48. It trumps what your pushin'.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

JAL

Veteran
Site Supporter
Oct 16, 2004
10,777
928
Visit site
✟343,550.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
No, the "voice" in John 10:27 is metaphorical. We agree it is not Jesus's literal voice. "My voice" is a metaphor for Jesus's words in scripture.
Who agrees? Not I.
Consciousness is loudness as I've explained. You're making distinctions that don't hold up, as shown previously. All I'm saying write now is that it's not a major bone of contention because Direct Revelation can speak to us in any number of sensory modalities.
 
Upvote 0

JAL

Veteran
Site Supporter
Oct 16, 2004
10,777
928
Visit site
✟343,550.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Still waiting for you to explain John 12:48. It trumps what your pushin'.
I'm at work. Doing the best I can here. You've made 1 post and demanding a response. Yet I've been waiting 350 posts for you to show me when I should depart from the maxim. Still waiting.
 
Upvote 0

JAL

Veteran
Site Supporter
Oct 16, 2004
10,777
928
Visit site
✟343,550.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
So I can provide 20 verses that show God's metaphorical "voice" is Scripture, and you can provide zero verses that show it is an impression on the mind. Gee, I wonder who is correct?
Scripture makes no impression on the mind? Regardless of how you define the voice, it makes an impression on the mind, right?

No, you haven't provided 20 verses that show God's voice is 'metaphorical' (whatever that gibberish means I have no idea, nor do you) nor that His voice is Scripture. I've already rebutted you several-fold on this point, in my discussion of the divine Word vs written Word, a couple of posts back. Now, let's look at 1 of your 20 verses:

Judges 2:20 "So the anger of the Lord burned against Israel, and He said, “Because this nation has transgressed My covenant which I commanded their fathers and has not listened to my voice""

How does that prove your point? The term 'qowl' is 500 times sonic in the Bible. The term 'obey' in Hebrew means 'hearken unto a voice'. How in heaven's name do you see this verse as proof it is written text? You'll say it, 'it mentions the covenant, which is written text'. No it's not. Look at Ex 20 - the 10 commandments were VOICED to Israel before they were written down on stone tablets. And the rest was vocalized to Moses.

You're trying to tell me that sonic Voice is not sonic? You'll reply, "But Jal, you're doing the same thing, because you broaden the meaning of God's voice".

This gets into metaphysics. The divine Word is a substance departing from God's mouth (Isa 55:11). It is thus sonic in nature. HOWEVER, it can then assume any physical form of God's choosing (such as Light utilized to create a vision in the eyes, although that's not the only way to create a vision). Thus, again, the Voice is ANY kind of impression (more or less distinct ('loud and clear') made up on our souls by God's direct agency. For example, if He stirs my brain electrocheimcally to get my thoughts oriented toward believing in Christ a my savior, this is the Voice.

It's not a 'metaphorical' voice in my view. It's God releasing actual sonic Voice that subsequently changes shape to any kind of desired modality.

None of this essential to my argument that Direct Revelation can speak to us in a variety of ways. HOW He does it is somewhat immaterial We know from Scripture that He CAN do it.

Let's look at your verse again:

Judges 2:20 "So the anger of the Lord burned against Israel, and He said, “Because this nation has transgressed My covenant which I commanded their fathers and has not listened to my voice""

You do realize, don't you, that the OT and written law says to obey the Voice? 50 times? If the Voice were just scripture, then alll we'd expect for it to say was, "obey this text" instead of 50 sonic references.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

JAL

Veteran
Site Supporter
Oct 16, 2004
10,777
928
Visit site
✟343,550.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Again, John 12:48 trumps your maxim. Evil men can think they are doing good when in reality they are doing evil. The standard is God's Word according to John 12:48. Jesus says that His words will judge a person on the last day when they do not receive His words. That's the standard. Not a person's conscience alone. People can defile their consciences.

Here's what I tell everyone. Exegesis is difficult (that's why we need Direct Revelation). And due to this complexity, I'll prefer a simple tautology (such as my maxim) over exegesis 10 times out of 10.

You can't refute the maxim because you'd be left with a logical contradiction - the maxim defines justice (as explained recently) and God is not unjust. Therefore it is obvious to me that any exegesis which SEEMS to contradict the maxim must be an error - all we have to do is find another possible interpretation of the passage. Here's the verse.

"He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my sayings, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I spake, the same shall judge him in the last day."

In my metaphysics, the divine Word exudes from the human body in proper preachinig and evangelism. Example, "Jesus breathed in them and said, Receive ye the Holy [Breath]" (usually mistranslated the 'Holy Spirit').

In several cases, Jesus alluded to the words from His mouth being the actual divine Word, e.g, "You are already clean because of the Word spoken to you" (Jn 15).

Thus going back to your verse, "the [divine] Word that I spake, the same shall judge him in the last day." That takes care of the latter part of the verse. Let's now consider the first part:

"He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my sayings..."

If our only judge is conscience, how can Jesus claim that it is necessary to know and obey Jesus? A couple of factors here. First, no one will get to heaven by obeying conscience - only because we're already fallen in Adam (can't discuss Original Sin here, and my version isn't the traditional one). Secondly, a person who is obey ALL of his conscience would not reject Jesus. How so? Imagine a person on a remote island who has never heard the name Jesus - has no idea who He is. Still, everyone ha General Revelation (Romans 1 and 2) which paints a primordial picture of God. If he submit to THAT God, he will get special revelation, in my view (he'll be born again and will receive the Holy Spirit). Now he has the Inward Witness, so if somene comes preaching "Jesus" to him he won't reject it - he will accept it by virtue of the influence of the Inward Witness.
 
Upvote 0

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,578
6,064
EST
✟993,185.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Here's what I tell everyone. Exegesis is difficult (that's why we need Direct Revelation). And due to this complexity, I'll prefer a simple tautology (such as my maxim) over exegesis 10 times out of 10.
You can't refute the maxim because you'd be left with a logical contradiction - the maxim defines justice (as explained recently) and God is not unjust. Therefore it is obvious to me that any exegesis which SEEMS to contradict the maxim must be an error - all we have to do is find another possible interpretation of the passage. Here's the verse.
"He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my sayings, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I spake, the same shall judge him in the last day."
In my metaphysics, the divine Word exudes from the human body in proper preachinig and evangelism. Example, "Jesus breathed in them and said, Receive ye the Holy [Breath]" (usually mistranslated the 'Holy Spirit').
In several cases, Jesus alluded to the words from His mouth being the actual divine Word, e.g, "You are already clean because of the Word spoken to you" (Jn 15).
Thus going back to your verse, "the [divine] Word that I spake, the same shall judge him in the last day." That takes care of the latter part of the verse. Let's now consider the first part:
"He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my sayings..."
If our only judge is conscience, how can Jesus claim that it is necessary to know and obey Jesus? A couple of factors here. First, no one will get to heaven by obeying conscience - only because we're already fallen in Adam (can't discuss Original Sin here, and my version isn't the traditional one). Secondly, a person who is obey ALL of his conscience would not reject Jesus. How so? Imagine a person on a remote island who has never heard the name Jesus - has no idea who He is. Still, everyone ha General Revelation (Romans 1 and 2) which paints a primordial picture of God. If he submit to THAT God, he will get special revelation, in my view (he'll be born again and will receive the Holy Spirit). Now he has the Inward Witness, so if somene comes preaching "Jesus" to him he won't reject it - he will accept it by virtue of the influence of the Inward Witness.
The language of the Greek Eastern Orthodox church has always been Greek. According to the EOB "Holy Spirit" is the correct translation of John 20:22.
http://fortsmithorthodox.org/NEW TESTAMENT.pdf
The EOB can be read and D/L at this link.
 
Upvote 0

JAL

Veteran
Site Supporter
Oct 16, 2004
10,777
928
Visit site
✟343,550.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Upvote 0

Bible Highlighter

Law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul.
Site Supporter
Jul 22, 2014
41,508
7,861
...
✟1,194,503.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Here's what I tell everyone. Exegesis is difficult (that's why we need Direct Revelation). And due to this complexity, I'll prefer a simple tautology (such as my maxim) over exegesis 10 times out of 10.

You can't refute the maxim because you'd be left with a logical contradiction - the maxim defines justice (as explained recently) and God is not unjust. Therefore it is obvious to me that any exegesis which SEEMS to contradict the maxim must be an error - all we have to do is find another possible interpretation of the passage. Here's the verse.

"He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my sayings, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I spake, the same shall judge him in the last day."

In my metaphysics, the divine Word exudes from the human body in proper preachinig and evangelism. Example, "Jesus breathed in them and said, Receive ye the Holy [Breath]" (usually mistranslated the 'Holy Spirit').

In several cases, Jesus alluded to the words from His mouth being the actual divine Word, e.g, "You are already clean because of the Word spoken to you" (Jn 15).

Thus going back to your verse, "the [divine] Word that I spake, the same shall judge him in the last day." That takes care of the latter part of the verse. Let's now consider the first part:

"He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my sayings..."

If our only judge is conscience, how can Jesus claim that it is necessary to know and obey Jesus? A couple of factors here. First, no one will get to heaven by obeying conscience - only because we're already fallen in Adam (can't discuss Original Sin here, and my version isn't the traditional one). Secondly, a person who is obey ALL of his conscience would not reject Jesus. How so? Imagine a person on a remote island who has never heard the name Jesus - has no idea who He is. Still, everyone ha General Revelation (Romans 1 and 2) which paints a primordial picture of God. If he submit to THAT God, he will get special revelation, in my view (he'll be born again and will receive the Holy Spirit). Now he has the Inward Witness, so if somene comes preaching "Jesus" to him he won't reject it - he will accept it by virtue of the influence of the Inward Witness.

John 12:48 is talking about literal words of Jesus that a person will reject and not some inner witness, or some new audible voice, or some new vision, or new dream, etc.

Jesus says to the Father,
"Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth." (John 17:17).

Back in John 12:

"For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, what I should say, and what I should speak." (John 12:49).

So Jesus was speaking literal words of what He was to say by the Father. These are the words that Jesus is is referring to in John 12:48.

Back in John 8, Jesus was talking with some Pharisees;
Jesus said to them:
43 "Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word.
44 Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him." (John 8:43-44).

Jesus was not speaking of some divine inner voice that they were not listening to. They were not listening to His actual words and did not understand them because they justified sin or the lusts of their father (the devil). Sin is what prevented them from understanding our Lord's literal and real speech to them.

1 Timothy 6:3-4 says,
3 "If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;
4 He is proud, knowing nothing, ..."

So it is because of sin that a person does not know anything (Hence, they are not able to understand Jesus' speech).

Also, here we see in 1 Timothy 6 that there are wholesome words AND words of our Lord Jesus Christ AND the doctrine (teachings) which is according to godliness. I have done a study on the commands in the New Testament, and there are close to 400 or so direct commands in the New Testament for all. This is the doctrine. These are the teachings that is according to godliness. We got plenty of info. in the Bible to guide our lives. There is no need for extra divine knowledge or holy words, etc.; That is how cults are formed.

Jesus talked literally with many and He did not refer to some hidden voice or inner witness. The Spirit convicts the world of sin (John 16:8-9). So while we do have a conscience that can respond to God's Word, our conscience is not the sole guiding factor to give us new information about the faith in the Bible, and be a more accurate guide for our life spiritually. Titus 1:15 says the conscience can be defiled so it is not trustworthy like the Word of God. 1 John 4:1-3 says we are not to believe every spirit but we are to test the spirits to see if they are of God, and it says that any spirit that does not confess that Jesus Christ has come in the flesh is antichrist.

See: I am going back to the Word to prove my case to you.
I am not appealing to some voice.
I am not appealing to some limited conscience.
I am not appealing to some new vision.
I am not appealing to some near death experience.
I am appealing to the Bible.
That is our final word of authority.
The Bible is our ultimate guide.
If you scoff at such a thing, I am afraid for you.
Jesus says that if a person does not receive His words, those words will judge them on the last day (John 12:48). Yet, you think these are not literal words that He once spoke and are recorded in Scripture? If that is so, then I hope that works out for you, but I know it will not. For Jesus was referring to His literal actual words that we can read in Scripture. For Jesus was commanded to speak only what His Father told Him to say. These are the words He was referring to.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Der Alte

This is me about 1 yr. old.
Site Supporter
Aug 21, 2003
28,578
6,064
EST
✟993,185.00
Country
United States
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Much as I disagree with that translation, I don't want to derail this thread onto that topic.
ἴσθι πεποιθὼς ἐν ὅλῃ καρδίᾳ ἐπὶ θεῷ, ἐπὶ δὲ σῇ σοφίᾳ μὴ ἐπαίρου·
 
Upvote 0