Why do Christians think God talks with them?

[Albion]

Do you think God has stopped being involved in His creation then? Surely our good and loving God would want to communicate with us. Why would He remain silent for thousands of years?


Pete from Peterborough UK

Why must I think that a lot of people today have actually heard God speaking to them in a human voice and with a human language...in order for me to agree with you that God continues to be 'involved with his creation??'

 

[MoreCoffee]

The passage says
Therefore, while the promise of entering his rest remains, let us fear lest any of you be judged to have failed to reach it. For good news came to us just as to them; but the message which they heard did not benefit them, because it did not meet with faith in the hearers. For we who have believed enter that rest, as he has said, "As I swore in my wrath, 'They shall never enter my rest,'" although his works were finished from the foundation of the world. For he has somewhere spoken of the seventh day in this way, "And God rested on the seventh day from all his works." And again in this place he said, "They shall never enter my rest." Since therefore it remains for some to enter it, and those who formerly received the good news failed to enter because of disobedience, again he sets a certain day, "Today," saying through David so long afterward, in the words already quoted, "Today, when you hear his voice, do not harden your hearts." For if Joshua had given them rest, God would not speak later of another day. So then, there remains a sabbath rest for the people of God; for whoever enters God's rest also ceases from his labors as God did from his.

Let us therefore strive to enter that rest, that no one fall by the same sort of disobedience. For the word of God is living and active, sharper than any two-edged sword, piercing to the division of soul and spirit, of joints and marrow, and discerning the thoughts and intentions of the heart. And before him no creature is hidden, but all are open and laid bare to the eyes of him with whom we have to do. Hebrews 4:1-13

The subject of the underlined portion is "The word of God" and the reference to "him" is to "the word of God"

 

[faramir.pete]

Why must I think that a lot of people today have actually heard God speaking to them in a human voice and with a human language...in order for me to agree with you that God continues to be 'involved with his creation??'

You continue to focus on the audible voice part of this issue, can I draw your attention to Acts and the conversion of Saul outside of Damascus.

According to my understanding (which I accept may be flawed, as it is based upon a reading of the modern translation of a text written many years following the actual event which in any case is based upon heresay any way as the writer was not an eye witness) Saul heard Jesus speak but his companions only heard a wind.

Clearly Saul thought he heard God (assuming we accept that Jesus is God here) speak audibly, because apparently he responded audibly, but his companions did not hear a voice.

This is a clear example of God speaking in scriptural times.

My question above, to which you seem to have taken exception, is why would God stop using this scripture supported method?


Pete from Peterborough UK

 

[faramir.pete]

God is Sovereign over all. He is active in all parts of his creation.

Is God's revelation in scripture incomplete? Does he need to give more revelation to his children?

Yes! Because his children are not complete yet and God is still working to finish the work He began in us!


Pete from Peterborough UK

 

[MennoSota]

Yes! Because his children are not complete yet and God is still working to finish the work He began in us!


Pete from Peterborough UK

Because we are still rebels...God's revelation to rebels is incomplete?

It seems you confuse our sanctification with God's revelation.

Would you accept a new book being added to the canon of the Bible? We're in a new technology age. Perhaps God has a video presentation that he needs to give us.

faramir, your view seems ripe for accepting antichrist when he speaks since he will bring a new revelation...seemingly from God...

 

[YESLORDIWILL]

Do you believe God spoke post resurrection words that are unlawful to be uttered? Why do you believe that? And if He spoke then where's the proof that He stopped there?

Let's get back to the topic here. What evidence is there that all the people these days who claim to have heard God's voice speaking to them, audibly, in a language that they understand...are correct about it. Citing what God did to or with someone in Bible times does not prove that these people today are correct about their claims.

It is something that should be considered and isn't off topic.

 

[faramir.pete]

Because we are still rebels...God's revelation to rebels is incomplete?

It seems you confuse our sanctification with God's revelation.

Would you accept a new book being added to the canon of the Bible? We're in a new technology age. Perhaps God has a video presentation that he needs to give us.

faramir, your view seems ripe for accepting antichrist when he speaks since he will bring a new revelation...seemingly from God...

So we are only abe to hear from God in a way that is acceptable to you then, is that your view?

Suggesting that I am likely to be deceived is rude and unnecessary, and I shall not join you in decrying a fellow believer, so I am going to leave this debate, as you seem content with your own opnion and unwilling to accept that we do not follow a God who is silent and has not spoken since men decided the canon of scripture was complete.

Personally I like to believe He speaks still and in whatever manner He chooses.

Be blessed.


Pete from Peterborough UK

 

[MennoSota]

So we are only abe to hear from God in a way that is acceptable to you then, is that your view?

Suggesting that I am likely to be deceived is rude and unnecessary, and I shall not join you in decrying a fellow believer, so I am going to leave this debate, as you seem content with your own opnion and unwilling to accept that we do not follow a God who is silent and has not spoken since men decided the canon of scripture was complete.

Personally I like to believe He speaks still and in whatever manner He chooses.

Be blessed.


Pete from Peterborough UK

You make my point.

You like to believe God uses audible speech today. There is no biblical proof that God does so, but people "feel" that God does so.

My question is this.

If God audibly speaks, does that remove the need for faith? Is there no need to read the Bible or seek out God in scripture when God will simply talk to us?

It seems like that is living by sight and not by faith.

 

[MoreCoffee]

Leave your recorder on all night (every night) and see if you get any angels talking or if you record God speaking to them or to you.

 

[Imalive]

Leave your recorder on all night (every night) and see if you get any angels talking or if you record God speaking to them or to you.

I do that every night, I have tapes full of em but I'm not gonna give em to you ppl.

 

[Imalive]

Because we are still rebels...God's revelation to rebels is incomplete?

It seems you confuse our sanctification with God's revelation.

Would you accept a new book being added to the canon of the Bible? We're in a new technology age. Perhaps God has a video presentation that he needs to give us.

faramir, your view seems ripe for accepting antichrist when he speaks since he will bring a new revelation...seemingly from God...

As long as it doesnt go against the Bible what God says its no problem. A new anti Biblical canon, yes of course someone is mislead if they say God spoke to me about a new revelation that doesn't confirm Scripture. 'God loves aunt so and so' is just a specification of 'God loves the world', so thats no problem if someone says God said that, even if they mistake and it was their own thought. 'God has this new anti Biblical revelation revealed especially to me to teach all you dumbo's out there who can't hear God' yeah that rings some bells.

 

[MoreCoffee]

I do that every night, I have tapes full of em but I'm not gonna give em to you ppl.

:smirk:

Too much snoring?

 

[psalms 91]

I have a new thread for only those who believe God speaks today looking for your experiences and where we can discuss without the doubt

 

[MennoSota]

As long as it doesnt go against the Bible what God says its no problem. A new anti Biblical canon, yes of course someone is mislead if they say God spoke to me about a new revelation that doesn't confirm Scripture. 'God loves aunt so and so' is just a specification of 'God loves the world', so thats no problem if someone says God said that, even if they mistake and it was their own thought. 'God has this new anti Biblical revelation revealed especially to me to teach all you dumbo's out there who can't hear God' yeah that rings some bells.

It's still just a comment from you or your mind then because the Bible, God's written word, determines the truth of the words. Your words, while they may be true, are not inspired words from God.

 

[MoreCoffee]

I have a new thread for only those who believe God speaks today looking for your experiences and where we can discuss without the doubt

You created an echo chamber. Why bother?

 

[psalms 91]

You created an echo chamber. Why bother?

To avoid the doubt and outright disbelief and the remarks. It is refreshing to talk to believers who are like minded. I for one do not like the back and forth all the time.

 

[MoreCoffee]

To avoid the doubt and outright disbelief and the remarks. It is refreshing to talk to believers who are like minded. I for one do not like the back and forth all the time.

Fair enough. I hope you have a good chat with those of like mind.

God bless.

 

[Albion]

You continue to focus on the audible voice part of this issue...

Indeed. And the reason for that is that this was what we were asked in the original post that kicked off this discussion. In other words, I am keeping on-topic.

... can I draw your attention to Acts and the conversion of Saul outside of Damascus.

As has been noted several times already, just because something miraculous occurred (once in this case) to someone in Bible times DOES NOT MEAN that everyone and anyone who, today, claims to have had the same experience must be correct about that.

My question above, to which you seem to have taken exception, is why would God stop using this scripture supported method?


Pete from Peterborough UK

The more relevant question would be, "what evidence is there that God is replicating this miracle constantly, and with many different people, from Paul's time until our own?" And, by the way, you selected only the part that you wanted to promote--the voice being heard. According to your reasoning, you should be arguing that the man down the street was knocked backwards from his horse and told by God to become a missionary. That part of the Bible account of course was conveniently not said to be the same.

In short, the argument that goes something like this--"It happened once, so everyone today who claims it (or something similar) happened to him also MUST be right about that." No, that's not the case. God can do anything, but we are fooling ourselves to insist that every claim of a miracle from anyone today just cannot be mistaken--for no other reason than that God performed a miracle on someone else, for a different reason, at a different time.

 

[Josiah]

I think this entire issue basically boils down to a need to evade accountability.....

Some thoughts...


1. Experience is always very difficult to evaluate..... I don't deny that God CAN "speak" directly and individually to people (there are biblical examples.... and I tend to hesitate to declare what God cannot do). But just because He has and can doesn't mean He did and does. IMO, the "proof is in the pudding" in most cases; I'd tend to evaluate things in terms of what is CLAIMED was "said." Example: Those girls and their vision and message from Mary. Can I prove it didn't happen? Nope! Does that mean it did? Nope! But the "message" seems harmless.


2. I think individual persons, churches, denominations, cults, etc. tend to do this to evade accountability. "God only (or especially) leads ME!" (with "me" being that individual person, church, denomination or cult). "God told ME (just little ole special ME) and now I'm insisting that I'm the Mouth of God and I'm telling you - thank me very much." It's a pretty big red flag or me.....


3. Now, all that said (and meant).... I separate that from what I refer to as "leanings." There are times when, in my heart and soul, I "felt" God leading me - in my doing and (very rarely) in my thinking. But I "take" that as a personal thing, God "leading" me - and that has no significance to anyone else (thus, not need to share it), and I certainly don't "take" that in any dogmatic sense (cuz I've been wrong about God's leading before!).



.

- Josiah

 

[Albion]

Possibly. I would put it differently and say that some people believe what they want to believe.

Several of the posters on this thread have, in fact, said almost exactly that--It was wonderful to contemplate, brought me closer to God, or strengthened by faith, so...I'm gonna believe it was a miracle!

They are entitled to do that, of course, so long as it doesn't involve a heresy; but when they follow it up by insisting that there is something wrong with anyone else who doesn't agree with them, the routine becomes less defensible.