You're not a prophet? Then you're not mature!

JAL · Sep 15, 2019

@A_Thinker,

Ok I hope I edited sufficiently.

Brief review. Paul gave the Corinthians babe's milk (Scripture) because he couldn't give them the solid food of the apostles (2:6-3:2). By all accounts he obtained this solid food by direct revelation (2:10-2:16). Like Hebrews 5, he intimated that this solid food (these premium revelations) were FOR THE MATURE. But he also used another term for mature in that passage (2:10-2:16). He used the term 'spiritual'. Then in chapter 12 he gives us a list of 'spiritual' things (mostly revelatory gifts) and classified prophecy as chief priority among them (compare 12:31 and 14:1).

At 2:15-16, in particular, he described a 'spiritual man' as fully one-minded with the Lord and thus beyond human correction. (That at least fits MY definition of a prophet anyway). And he confirmed this association between the terms 'spiritual' and 'prophetic' at 14:37 whose common denominator, admitted conservative evangelical Phillip Schaff, is inspiration (to use Shaff's term). And at 13:8-12 Paul further confirmed that maturity temporally coincides with maturity in prophecy. None of these arguments have been refuted.

JAL · Sep 15, 2019

Strong in Him said:
When I was training as a preacher I was told that prophets forth-tell the word of God. So you could say that anyone who teaches, tells or explains the Gospel or Bible is a prophet.

Are you saying that the meaning of the word prophet is different in the NT? I'm pretty sure that wasn't the OT definition.

By your definition, Jesus should have referred to the teachers of the law as prophets? But they didn't even call themselves prophets. They distinguished exegesis and direct revelation. Shouldn't you do the same? Paul wrote:

"Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said. And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop. For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged" (14:30-31)

Notice Paul did not say, 'If someone has a good exegesis of the text, he can prophesy".

Even the cessationist movement would disagree with you on this. They oppose prophecy today because they oppose present-day direct revelation. If prophecy were merely exposition of the text, they wouldn't bother oppose it.

But it still has little to do with maturity.
A person who has been a Christian for a week or so can proclaim the Gospel; it doesn't mean they are mature in the faith.

For the 20 millionth time, that has NOTHING to do with my position. My claim is that if you find a person who IS mature in the faith (regardless of how he got there), you have also found a person saturated with direct revelation.

JAL · Sep 15, 2019

Strong in Him said:
I don't believe that spiritual maturity has anything to do with whether or not someone has received the gift of prophecy, see Ephesians 4:13, Philippians 3:15, Colossians 4:12, James 1:4.

Paul wasn't obsessed with gifts, he was teaching about the gifts of the Holy Spirit and the different, and varied, gifts that he gives to believers who are the body of Christ. Ephesians 4:11 also says that the gifts of the Spirit are to build up the church.

I don't know about you but I value spiritual gifts because they are gifts that God gives to me.

Saying that one gift is to be valued more than others, or defines a Christian or is evidence of baptism in the Spirit - which some have said about the gifts of tongues, and seemed to be what the Corinthians themselves believed - is incorrect. And it's true that boasting about having such a gift, or insisting that it made someone a "better" Christian, would not be very mature.
But I don't know of anyone who does that.

But most of your argument is based on your 'general sense' of what the word 'gift' generally means today in common usage. In ordinary life, for example, the mere receipt of a gift doesn't make someone mature, right? I would agree and I have addressed that point at length on this thread. For one thing I've talked about ambiguities in the word gift.

There is yet another nuance/ambiguity in gift that I haven't covered yet. I'll address the next post to both you and A_Thinker.

JAL · Sep 15, 2019

@A_Thinker and also @Strong in Him,

I realize that the granting a gift, in ordinary life, doesn't make someone mature. And in fact, even in spiritual matters it's a moot argument because my claim is the converse of that argument.

But even though it's a moot point, you should not presume to read the nuances of the English word 'gifts' into Paul's Greek terms. I don't have any Greek tools in front of me right now, but at least in all the key verses I've been debating, Paul didn't actually use the Greek term for 'gift'. Rather he used two terms:
- charismata. Means grace,supernatural power, divine favor, etc. When Acts tells us that the apostles healed the sick because much grace was upon them, this is the term used as I recall. It has NOTHING TO DO with the English word gift, as far as I know. (Greek has a different term for that).
- pneumatika. Spiritual things.

This flies in the face of your assumption that a supernatural charism cannot be a mark of maturity and/or favor with God. A while back I challenged you on this point A_Thinker by painting a scenario of how you'd recognize 'a man of God'. As expected, you side-stepped that challenge. You never gave a fully direct, fully candid answer to the question.

Strong in Him · Sep 15, 2019

JAL said:
Are you saying that the meaning of the word prophet is different in the NT? I'm pretty sure that wasn't the OT definition.

No, I was responding to a comment about prophecy being about forth-telling the word of God.
If you look at OT prophecies they often had an immediate, as well as a future, application. For example, in Isaiah, chapters 40 - about 45 speak about the servant of the Lord. That was the nation of Israel; THEY were the servant of the Lord. But they also look ahead to someone else who would come and perfectly fulfil the Servant of the Lord role - Jesus; God's anointed, chosen but suffering servant.
There are many other OT prophecies that would have had an immediate fulfilment - but they also look ahead to the coming of Jesus; he quoted a number of them in his ministry. OT prophets were telling forth the word of God; "thus saith the Lord" - but it often had immediate AND long term applications.

JAL said:
By your definition, Jesus should have referred to the teachers of the law as prophets? But they didn't even call themselves prophets. They distinguished exegesis and direct revelation. Shouldn't you do the same?

Scripture is our guide; a prophecy will not contract Scripture.
Direct, and supernatural, revelation happens - but we are told to test prophecies, and spirits. Anyone can say "God told me you must do .......", but if it the proposed action is not Scriptural, we can and should reject it. That's how cults happen; someone comes along and says "God told me ......." and people who don't know their Bibles well, or at all, or who are vulnerable get sucked in.

JAL said:
"Two or three prophets should speak, and the others should weigh carefully what is said. And if a revelation comes to someone who is sitting down, the first speaker should stop. For you can all prophesy in turn so that everyone may be instructed and encouraged" (14:30-31)

Notice Paul did not say, 'If someone has a good exegesis of the text, he can prophesy".

No, because he is talking about the gifts that the Holy Spirit gives.
There are people who have a gift of prophecy; speaking a direct word from God to a particular person or situation of which they have no knowledge; the word is revealed to their minds and they speak out. That is the gift of prophecy.
But God has already spoken to us through his word and his Son - his Son IS the Word; God's last word. Telling others about Jesus, about what God has said, what his word means or how it might apply to our lives, is also speaking out the word of God.

JAL said:
For the 20 millionth time, that has NOTHING to do with my position.

Well you need to change the title of your thread then, because it makes a direct link between maturity and prophecy. When you quote 1 Corinthians and talk of prophecy, most people will think of the gift of prophecy - someone who stands up in a service and says "the Lord is saying .......". And you have linked this with maturity - so the implication is "if you don't prophesy, you're not mature; if you claim to be mature, you are a prophet or have this gift."

If the title of the thread was, "to be spiritually mature then you need to be close to God and listen when he speaks", I don't think they'd be much argument.

JAL said:
My claim is that if you find a person who IS mature in the faith (regardless of how he got there), you have also found a person saturated with direct revelation.

Not necessarily.
God doesn't give NEW revelation today about salvation, being his children, living for him, heaven, the future etc because he's said it all, in his word and his Son. The way of salvation will never change; the word of God cannot be added to.

God still speaks today; we can certainly hear God speak, and recognise the voice of the shepherd, if we are close enough to him and listen to him. The Holy Spirit can certainly enlighten us, cause us to understand Scripture in ways we had not done before or apply it directly to our lives, or he could give us a direct word of encouragement; but that is not prophecy. That is prayer; a conversation between a Christian and his, or her, heavenly Father.
Of course we can have this relationship with God and should be this close to him, and of course he can speak to us directly. But he can also guide Christians through his word; verses that "just happen" to appear, be read or preached on at a relevant time. Or a verse that may "jump out at" you, which is later repeated by another person/written in a letter/seen on a poster or whatever.
I am also pretty sure that someone can be mature in the faith and close to God without ever having heard his "voice".

As for direct revelation, I, personally, have never had a direct revelation about about person or situation. Again, that has nothing to do with maturity.

JAL · Sep 15, 2019

Strong in Him said:
No, I was responding to a comment about prophecy being about forth-telling the word of God.
If you look at OT prophecies they often had an immediate, as well as a future, application. For example, in Isaiah, chapters 40 - about 45 speak about the servant of the Lord. That was the nation of Israel; THEY were the servant of the Lord. But they also look ahead to someone else who would come and perfectly fulfil the Servant of the Lord role - Jesus; God's anointed, chosen but suffering servant.
There are many other OT prophecies that would have had an immediate fulfilment - but they also look ahead to the coming of Jesus; he quoted a number of them in his ministry. OT prophets were telling forth the word of God; "thus saith the Lord" - but it often had immediate AND long term applications.

You said that prophecy is basically ordinary preaching, I responded No it's actually direct revelation, and now you seem to be rambling.

Scripture is our guide...

Sola Scriptura makes for an unacceptable epistemology, but that's not the central issue on this thread. I'd prefer you debate it on my other other thread.

...a prophecy will not contract Scripture.
Direct, and supernatural, revelation happens - but we are told to test prophecies, and spirits....

Yes, John said to test, but the test in his purview was itself direct revelation, as I already mentioned on even the current thread. Again, this is primarily a matter for my epistemology thread.

...Anyone can say "God told me you must do .......", but if it the proposed action is not Scriptural, we can and should reject it. That's how cults happen; someone comes along and says "God told me ......." and people who don't know their Bibles well, or at all, or who are vulnerable get sucked in.

See above.

No, because he is talking about the gifts that the Holy Spirit gives.
There are people who have a gift of prophecy; speaking a direct word from God to a particular person or situation of which they have no knowledge; the word is revealed to their minds and they speak out. That is the gift of prophecy.
But God has already spoken to us through his word and his Son - his Son IS the Word; God's last word. Telling others about Jesus, about what God has said, what his word means or how it might apply to our lives, is also speaking out the word of God.

You seem to be tossing around key terms somewhat indiscriminately. For example you mention the Word of God but it's not clear whether divine Word or written Word, or whether exegeis or direct revelation. If you agree that prophecy is direct revelation, let's stop debating this point.

Well you need to change the title of your thread then, because it makes a direct link between maturity and prophecy. When you quote 1 Corinthians and talk of prophecy, most people will think of the gift of prophecy - someone who stands up in a service and says "the Lord is saying .......". And you have linked this with maturity - so the implication is "if you don't prophesy, you're not mature; if you claim to be mature, you are a prophet or have this gift."

Yes that is in fact what my title insinuates but, as I've said a million times, the core of my position is that a mature person receives copious amounts of premium revelation. Except I don't know why you'd confine the prophets to a Sunday service.

That wasn't what I was objecting to. I object to any insinuations of the CONVERSE, that is, the claim that every prophet is mature. That's basically the opposite of my position and yet I've been falsely accused of it throughout this thread.

Not necessarily.

Nothing is necessarily true. I can 't even prove that you exist. The issue is, where does the bulk of the evidence SEEM to lie. Meaning:
(1) Does scripture seem to make it abundantly clear that direct revelation is NOT a concomitant of maturity?
(2) Or, does scripture seem to make it abundantly clear that direct revelation IS INDEED a concomitant of maturity?

In regard to #1, I do not know of any Scripture that positively states, 'You can be as mature as Elijah or Moses, but don't expect to have any direct revelation.'

In regard to #2, I've provided copious amounts of biblical evidence for it. None of which you've addressed by the way. You just keep airing your own opinions.

God doesn't give NEW revelation today about salvation.

Gratuitous claim (it's just your opinion). Also unclear. Also,not terribly relevant, as far as I can see.

God still speaks today; we can certainly hear God speak, and recognise the voice of the shepherd, if we are close enough to him and listen to him. The Holy Spirit can certainly enlighten us, cause us to understand Scripture in ways we had not done before or apply it directly to our lives, or he could give us a direct word of encouragement; but that is not prophecy. That is prayer; a conversation between a Christian and his, or her, heavenly Father.
Of course we can have this relationship with God and should be this close to him, and of course he can speak to us directly. But he can also guide Christians through his word; verses that "just happen" to appear, be read or preached on at a relevant time. Or a verse that may "jump out at" you, which is later repeated by another person/written in a letter/seen on a poster or whatever.
I am also pretty sure that someone can be mature in the faith and close to God without ever having heard his "voice".

As for direct revelation, I, personally, have never had a direct revelation about about person or situation. Again, that has nothing to do with maturity.

Thanks for sharing your opinion. I'll follow Paul for the moment.

JAL · Sep 15, 2019

@A_Thinker,

Paul commanded:

"Eagerly desire the greater gifts" (12:31).

"Follow the way of love and eagerly desire spiritual things, especially prophecy" (14:1).

"Therefore my brothers, be eager to prophesy, and don't forbid speaking in tongues" (14:39).

So here's what I don't get. Imagine a person who is mature. For ages he has complied with Paul's command and pretty blamelessly with everything else that God wanted him to do.

Would his pursuit of prophesy likely be an exercise in futility? Paul commanded us to pursue prophecy, but it's a bit of a wild goose chase because God never had any real commitment to granting it? Is that your position?

In a nutshell I don't see why I need anything more than 14:1 to legitimize my fundamental claim.

A_Thinker · Sep 15, 2019

JAL said:
In a nutshell I don't see why I need anything more than 14:1 to legitimize my fundamental claim.

That you CAN'T be spiritually mature ... and not have the gift of prophecy ?

Paul didn't say that.

Though ... using the broader definition of prophecy as forth-telling, this can be as simple as encouraging believers to "say a word for the Lord" .... particularly at church gatherings ...

JAL · Sep 15, 2019

A_Thinker said:
That you CAN'T be spiritually mature ... and not have the gift of prophecy ?

Paul didn't say that.

Though ... using the broader definition of prophecy as forth-telling, this can be as simple as encouraging believers to "say a word for the Lord" .... particularly at church gatherings ...

Not a direct answer to the question. As expected.

JAL · Sep 15, 2019

@EVERYONE.

John wrote:

"As for you, the anointing you received from him remains in you, and you do not need anyone to teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about all things and as that anointing is real, not counterfeit—just as it has taught you, remain in him" (1 Jn 2:27).

Therefore the Holy Spirit is supposed to be your Teacher. It stands to reason, then, that maturity is impossible without copious amounts of direct revelation.

I'm not claiming this argument apodictic. Like I said, I can't even prove that you exist. But it certainly harmonizes quite well with the text, if we are going to be perfectly honest about it. It also fits well with the discussion of direct revelation at 1Cor 2:6 - 3:2.

JAL · Sep 15, 2019

@EVERYONE,

And I can reinforce that last argument with a post from my epistemology thread. That post makes it pretty clear that the Holy Spirit teaches us via direct revelation, not via exegesis, even when we're reading the Bible.

Strong in Him · Sep 16, 2019

JAL said:
You said that prophecy is basically ordinary preaching, I responded No it's actually direct revelation, and now you seem to be rambling.

1) No, I said that prophecy is FORTH telling the word of God. Preachers do this, yes, but so does almost every Christian at some point, when explaining the Gospel.
2) I'm sorry if you take my explanation about prophecy in the OT to be rambling; I thought you might have been interested in Scripture; my mistake.

JAL said:
Sola Scriptura makes for an unacceptable epistemology, but that's not the central issue on this thread. I'd prefer you debate it on my other other thread.

I'm not talking about Sola Scriptura, whatever that is; I'm talking about the fact that Scripture is the ultimate authority and way of testing the spirits and those who claim to have had a direct word from God. Otherwise anyone could say "God told/revealed to me .....", and we'd have no way of discerning the truth. "Rev" Moon did this when he told all his followers that he had seen a vision of Jesus, who told him that he (Moon) was to be the 2nd Messiah and do the things that Jesus had failed to do while on earth. That was a man claiming direct revelation - but it was unscriptural. Which is why the Unification church (Moonies) is a cult and not a Christian denomination.

JAL said:
Yes, John said to test, but the test in his purview was itself direct revelation, as I already mentioned on even the current thread.

And the way of testing the spirits, and claims of direct revelation, is Scripture.
In John's day, there may not have been much written Scripture, but there was the Apostles' teaching. Those men who had seen and heard Jesus and been with him, were teaching the things that he had taught them. So when people came along and tried to say that Jesus was not really God, or only became God at a certain point, or did not really die on the cross - the Apostles knew otherwise because they had seen, heard and touched him 1 John 1:1.

JAL said:
You seem to be tossing around key terms somewhat indiscriminately. For example you mention the Word of God but it's not clear whether divine Word or written Word,

Jesus is THE Word of God, John 1:1-3, John 1:14. Jesus said and did everything that his Father told him to say and do. Jesus was, is and always will be, God; he showed people, by his life and his words, what God is like.
The Bible is the written word of God. It is a collection of all the OT prophecies which started with the words "this is what the Lord says", all Jesus' teachings, the ways in which the Holy Spirit worked through the Apostles to proclaim the Gospel and establish the church, and the revelations that John, and others, were given about end times.

JAL said:
If you agree that prophecy is direct revelation, let's stop debating this point.

Revelation of what, though?
Revelation of a new truth/doctrine that is not found in Scripture; e.g that Jesus will return on a certain date or that the way of salvation has changed because it became out of date? No.
A word of personal guidance - e.g "this is the place I want you to live in/the job that is right for you/the place of worship that you should attend"? Yes.
God can certainly enable someone to understand him, and/or the Scriptures in a new way; which may cause someone to say "I've had a revelation". But the reason the Christian church denied the claims of Mr Moon when he claimed to have seen a vision of Jesus and received teaching from him, is that that goes against Scripture. Jesus did not fail when he was on earth; he did his Father's will and spoke the words "it is finished" on the cross. So whatever direct revelation Moon was claiming, was wrong.

JAL said:
Yes that is in fact what my title insinuates

It doesn't insinuate it, it says it - "if you are not a prophet then you are not mature"; your words.

JAL said:
but, as I've said a million times, the core of my position is that a mature person receives copious amounts of premium revelation.

What do you mean by "premium revelation"?

JAL said:
That wasn't what I was objecting to. I object to any insinuations of the CONVERSE, that is, the claim that every prophet is mature. That's basically the opposite of my position and yet I've been falsely accused of it throughout this thread.

Like I said, that is how the title of your thread reads. You have linked prophecy and maturity. You said that if you are NOT a prophet, you are NOT mature - obviously then the inference is that if a Christian claims to be mature, they must be a prophet.
If everyone who has posted in this thread has read the title in that way and believed that this is what you are saying, don't you think that, maybe, you have not explained it too well - rather that implying that everyone is against you and has accused you falsely?

JAL said:
Nothing is necessarily true. I can 't even prove that you exist. The issue is, where does the bulk of the evidence SEEM to lie. Meaning:
(1) Does scripture seem to make it abundantly clear that direct revelation is NOT a concomitant of maturity?
(2) Or, does scripture seem to make it abundantly clear that direct revelation IS INDEED a concomitant of maturity?

Before going any further with this, I'd like to know what you mean by direct revelation. Sorry if you have explained it before; if so, just point me to the relevant post.

My own belief is that God certainly speaks to us today - through prayer, through Scripture, through the words of a song/poem. When this happens, this is the work of the Spirit who is enabling us to understand God, his works and his will for our lives in a new way. We may read a verse we have read dozens of times before and be struck by a new thought or see a new aspect of God's character. This can, indeed, feel like a revelation. If this is the kind of thing you are talking about, I would agree that mature Christians are those who have heard from God like this, and have this kind of relationship with him.
But if you are talking about people - like Mr Moon who I mentioned earlier - coming along and saying "God has directly told me a NEW truth that is not in the Bible" or "God has changed his mind about what he said earlier and the truth is now ......", that is entirely different.
Like I said, anyone can claim, "God spoke to me" , when in fact it wasn't God at all.

JAL · Sep 16, 2019

Strong in Him said:
1) No, I said that prophecy is FORTH telling the word of God.

As I said, because you insinuated that 'word of God' means Scripture, which thereby reduces prophecy to ordinary preaching exposition. Then at times you vacillate and equate prophecy with direct revelation. You need to be clear on your terminology, all I see in you so far as indiscriminate tossing around of words.

2) I'm sorry if you take my explanation about prophecy in the OT to be rambling; I thought you might have been interested in Scripture; my mistake.

See above

I'm not talking about Sola Scriptura, whatever that is;

Again, since you don't seem very clear on basic terminology, I don't think I'll have the time to attempt a discussion with you.

I'm talking about the fact that Scripture is the ultimate authority and way of testing the spirits and those who claim to have had a direct word from God.

That would be Sola Scriptura, and I linked you to a thread explaining why that concept makes zero sense. (And I frankly don't care if a million seminaries have preaching it for 2,000 years).

And the way of testing the spirits, and claims of direct revelation, is Scripture.
In John's day, there may not have been much written Scripture, but there was the Apostles' teaching. Those men who had seen and heard Jesus and been with him, were teaching the things that he had taught them. So when people came along and tried to say that Jesus was not really God, or only became God at a certain point, or did not really die on the cross - the Apostles knew otherwise because they had seen, heard and touched him 1 John 1:1.

Exactly. The apostles refuted false doctrine based on truths gleaned from direct revelation (directly seeing and hearing Christ for example).

Jesus is THE Word of God, John 1:1-3, John 1:14. Jesus said and did everything that his Father told him to say and do. Jesus was, is and always will be, God; he showed people, by his life and his words, what God is like.
The Bible is the written word of God. It is a collection of all the OT prophecies which started with the words "this is what the Lord says", all Jesus' teachings, the ways in which the Holy Spirit worked through the Apostles to proclaim the Gospel and establish the church, and the revelations that John, and others, were given about end times.

Sure. So please desist, when were's talking about prophecy, from applying the term 'Word' univocally at times, and equivocally at other times.

Revelation of what, though?

Direct revelation is the voice of God speaking ANYTHING directly to you (with voice defined rather broadly and thus allowing for any kind of sensation) as opposed to, say, studying Greek and Hebrew in a seminary. If you read a letter that I wrote to you five years ago, that's not really fellowship. Studying letters written 2,000 years ago is thus very different than literally hearing God's voice today. This is direct revelation.

Revelation of a new truth/doctrine that is not found in Scripture; e.g that Jesus will return on a certain date or that the way of salvation has changed because it became out of date? No.
A word of personal guidance - e.g "this is the place I want you to live in/the job that is right for you/the place of worship that you should attend"? Yes.
God can certainly enable someone to understand him, and/or the Scriptures in a new way; which may cause someone to say "I've had a revelation". But the reason the Christian church denied the claims of Mr Moon when he claimed to have seen a vision of Jesus and received teaching from him, is that that goes against Scripture. Jesus did not fail when he was on earth; he did his Father's will and spoke the words "it is finished" on the cross. So whatever direct revelation Moon was claiming, was wrong.

You're discussing epistemology. I linked you to my thread on that. I just don't have a lot of time right now to repeat that material here.

It doesn't insinuate it, it says it - "if you are not a prophet then you are not mature"; your words.

Correct. I haven't backed down from that.

My own belief is that God certainly speaks to us today - through prayer, through Scripture, through the words of a song/poem. When this happens, this is the work of the Spirit who is enabling us to understand God, his works and his will for our lives in a new way. We may read a verse we have read dozens of times before and be struck by a new thought or see a new aspect of God's character. This can, indeed, feel like a revelation. If this is the kind of thing you are talking about, I would agree that mature Christians are those who have heard from God like this, and have this kind of relationship with him.
But if you are talking about people - like Mr Moon who I mentioned earlier - coming along and saying "God has directly told me a NEW truth that is not in the Bible" or "God has changed his mind about what he said earlier and the truth is now ......", that is entirely different.
Like I said, anyone can claim, "God spoke to me" , when in fact it wasn't God at all.

Like Moses? These are epistemology questions.

Strong in Him · Sep 17, 2019

JAL said:
As I said, because you insinuated that 'word of God' means Scripture, which thereby reduces prophecy to ordinary preaching exposition. Then at times you vacillate and equate prophecy with direct revelation. You need to be clear on your terminology, all I see in you so far as indiscriminate tossing around of words.

I have been.
I said that Jesus is the Word of God; showing, and telling, us all that God says, does and is.
The Bible is the written word of God; a collection of all the utterances that God has spoken, through the prophets and Jesus. And also the revelation of who he is.

As to the rest of your reply: it appears that you value direct revelation above Scripture. That suggests that if I said to you "God spoke to me this morning and told me that he is love", you'd be more impressed by that testimony than by the fact that Scripture says, and shows, the same thing.
If I said to you, "God told me, very clearly, that Jesus will return on March 30th 2021", you'd believe that direct revelation, even though that is found nowhere in the Bible.
If this is your position it suggests that you are, indeed, prepared to believe anyone who says "God told me/revealed to me directly"; which I would think must be rather unsettling and confusing - there are plenty of people in the world who say that God told them to kill, for example. As well as the example I gave of Mr Moon, who claimed that Jesus told him that Moon was to be the 2nd Messiah because Jesus had failed while he was on earth.

I've also asked you how you know what to believe; which direct revelation do you accept, and what if what someone claims that God told them contradicts what God has said in the Bible? For Christians, Scripture is the final authority - God can, and does, speak though people, circumstances and directly, but the point is that he does not contradict what has already been revealed in Scripture.
If I answer your post with Scripture, but you value direct revelation above Scripture, dismiss Sola Scriptura and say you don't care if seminaries teach a view which is contrary to your own; what is there to discuss?

JAL · Sep 17, 2019

Strong in Him said:
I have been.
I said that Jesus is the Word of God; showing, and telling, us all that God says, does and is.
The Bible is the written word of God; a collection of all the utterances that God has spoken, through the prophets and Jesus. And also the revelation of who he is.

Yet again, conflating terms indiscriminately. Even where the Bible itself neglected to disambiguate, a theology discussion needs to.

As to the rest of your reply: it appears that you value direct revelation above Scripture. That suggests that if I said to you "God spoke to me this morning and told me that he is love", you'd be more impressed by that testimony than by the fact that Scripture says, and shows, the same thing.

If I said to you, "God told me, very clearly, that Jesus will return on March 30th 2021", you'd believe that direct revelation, even though that is found nowhere in the Bible.
If this is your position it suggests that you are, indeed, prepared to believe anyone who says "God told me/revealed to me directly"; which I would think must be rather unsettling and confusing - there are plenty of people in the world who say that God told them to kill, for example. As well as the example I gave of Mr Moon, who claimed that Jesus told him that Moon was to be the 2nd Messiah because Jesus had failed while he was on earth.

Then you obviously haven't read post 1 of my epistemology that I linked you to, or you didn't understand it. I'd suggest reading my first three posts on that thread (the OP plus my next two posts) and then please ask any epistemology questions on that thread.

I've also asked you how you know what to believe; which direct revelation do you accept, and what if what someone claims that God told them contradicts what God has said in the Bible? For Christians, Scripture is the final authority - God can, and does, speak though people, circumstances and directly, but the point is that he does not contradict what has already been revealed in Scripture.
If I answer your post with Scripture, but you value direct revelation above Scripture, dismiss Sola Scriptura and say you don't care if seminaries teach a view which is contrary to your own; what is there to discuss?

There's nothing to discuss. How can we have a discussion when every time you raise the same epistemology issues over and over and over and over again, and I point you to my clear answers, you won't even read one post? Much easier to just keep misrepresenting me,isn't it? (Sigh) Since you won't even read one post, I'll give you a hint. My epistemology is based on one clear rule - and I challenged everyone to find one exception to that rule in everyday life. That thread was 300 posts long, sprung from another (closed by staff) 135 posts long. Not one person has found an exception - neither on that thread nor in all the years I've been on this forum, nor in 30 years as a Christian. Can you realistically expect me to easily abandon a principle that both I myself - and everyone else on planet Earth as far as I know - finds to be incontrovertibly true at all times and in all circumstances? If you want to persist in your Sola-Scriptura contradictions, you are free to do so, but I promise that you'll feel embarassed,ashamed, and grieved about it on judgment day because it is incredibly damaging to both evangelism and personal sanctification.

topher694 · Sep 17, 2019

Do you see a man wise in his own eyes?
There is more hope for a fool than for him.

JAL · Sep 17, 2019

topher694 said:
Do you see a man wise in his own eyes?
There is more hope for a fool than for him.

Targeted disrespectfully at me, as usual? I guess that's how you feel about Andrew Murray, then. Because he's my mentor.

JAL · Sep 17, 2019

I am so fond of Andrew Murray. If I tried to put into words his impact on my life, it would probably go something like this. 'Evangelists introduced me to salvation from hell. Andrew Murray introduced me to Jesus.'

topher694 · Sep 17, 2019

JAL said:
Targeted disrespectfully at me, as usual? I guess that's how you feel about Andrew Murray, then. Because he's my mentor.

I don't see where I targeted anything at you. Everything is not always about you. I think it is a fitting scripture for everyone to keep in mind in discussions of this kind.

But it is fascinating that you think scripture is disrespectful. Or perhaps just the ones that don't fit your narrative, as usual.

Strong in Him · Sep 17, 2019

JAL said:
Then you obviously haven't read post 1 of my epistemology that I linked you to, or you didn't understand it. I'd suggest reading my first three posts on that thread (the OP plus my next two posts) and then please ask any epistemology questions on that thread.

Sorry but I'm not interested in reading other threads started, and promoted, by you.
You started THIS one, and you ought to be able to contain the discussions to the posts written in this thread - especially when they've been written by you.
You're clearly very keen on the word "epistemology", whatever that is; I'm more interested in Scriptural discussions.

JAL said:
There's nothing to discuss. How can we have a discussion when every time you raise the same epistemology issues over and over and over and over again, and I point you to my clear answers, you won't even read one post?

Like I said; not interested in you promoting other things you have written elsewhere.
You started this thread on this subject; it shouldn't be too hard to stick to the topic that you chose.

JAL said:
(Sigh) Since you won't even read one post, I'll give you a hint. My epistemology is based on one clear rule - and I challenged everyone to find one exception to that rule in everyday life. That thread was 300 posts long, sprung from another (closed by staff) 135 posts long. Not one person has found an exception - neither on that thread nor in all the years I've been on this forum, nor in 30 years as a Christian. Can you realistically expect me to easily abandon a principle that both I myself - and everyone else on planet Earth as far as I know - finds to be incontrovertibly true at all times and in all circumstances? If you want to persist in your Sola-Scriptura contradictions, you are free to do so, but I promise that you'll feel embarassed,ashamed, and grieved about it on judgment day because it is incredibly damaging to both evangelism and personal sanctification.

Sorry again, you're clearly well educated; I'm not thick, but I don't do long words or abstract concepts - so I don't understand what you are talking about.
The thread that you started is on the subject of prophecy, divine revelation and maturity, and I've been attempting to answer that, using Scripture. Not only do you not seem to think much of Scripture, you have now wandered off on to some philosophical concept or idea. If you're not going to take Scripture as your starting point and ultimate authority, I suppose it's natural to quote, and include references to, other sources. But they don't interest me; I want to know what God says on this subject and whether you can back your claims from the Bible.

You're not a prophet? Then you're not mature!

Veteran

Veteran

Veteran

Veteran

Great is thy faithfulness

Veteran

Veteran

Well-Known Member

Veteran

Veteran

Veteran

Great is thy faithfulness

Veteran

Great is thy faithfulness

Veteran

Go Turtle!

Veteran

Veteran

Go Turtle!

Great is thy faithfulness

Similar threads