God Clearly Defined Who Could Speak For Him

[JustTheFacts]

Are you saying that prophecy only happened in the OT?
Are you saying that Speaking God's Words is the definition of prophecy and that Paul was thus pretending to be a prophet?
Are you saying that nobody after Jesus birth spoke for God, unless Jesus himself?
Are you discrediting almost the entire New Testament?

If you are truthful about the time spent studying and your expertise and so on, you should consider the possibility that your false assumptions run your whole line of reasoning. That is what a good logician does. When one seeks to discredit what one does not believe, it may be because their line of reasoning has exalted them above Scripture. —Must be a heady feeling, that!

Connecting the dots is great, but when one is blind to their own self-exaltation, they cannot see all the dots.

(Yes, I know, I will be measured by my own standard.)

There you go into a long discourse. You ask a few questions, then you go and start objecting to whatever I might conclude. All I'm asking you is what does that mean without considering the impacts of it. It's pretty clear to me that an OT prophet who prophesied the Messiah spoke for God. That's what the Law says. @Josheb didn't like the Law so he wanted me to find something else. I told @Josheb to find something else because haven't found anything beyond what I've presented But you have the same book I do, so maybe you should find additional criteria. Fact is, it the Bible is the inerrant infallible word of God as you believe you have to believe what is written.

No long discussion is needed--what does that say?

 

[Hazelelponi]

YEs and I am not a prophet so I wish you would get off that kick of claiming to speak for God. I don't meet the criteria.

Actually, what you actually claim is far worse than a claim to being a prophet. Let me expound as to why.

In response to @Josheb stating this::

Not sure how that is relevant. I do spend a lot of time reading and exegeting the contents of the Bible but I do not call myself and "expert." The testimony of most here, however, will be that I do parse scripture well on most occasions. I will let them be my witnesses .

.
You replied with this:

Just like any investigation I've done, by the time I'm wrapping up the details, I am an expert in subject.

So, by your own words, you are "expert", a man far above brother @Josheb here - since you claim to exceed him in the knowledge and understanding of God (you claim to be an expert as opposed to someone who simply might parse Scripture well sometimes - and are telling him through your demeanor below that it is required of him to bow to your understanding and interpretation.

by your own words below:

I'm getting a little tired of you inability to understand what is written in the Law of God.

When, as an "expert" who is "expert" by his own witness (not the witness of the church through whom the Holy Spirit resides and operates as means) expresses anger and/or frustration with those who are "unable to understand what is written in the law of God" - specifically as defined by you, instead of the Church - we have a person before us who is essentially making messianic claims.

Prove me wrong through the word of God given to us by God.

Sure!

In the thread created to welcome you, when asked the following by @DialecticSkeptic :

"If you are not a member of a local church, have you ever been? If so, (a) how was it identified denominationally, (b) why did you leave, (c) and how long ago?"

the following response was given by yourself,:

"God has proven to me that he was with me. Throughout my life, there have been events that could only come from God. Five years ago I had an NDE that was shocking. God was showing me hell. About twenty years before God had shown me a spirit of a friend that had just died 1300 miles away. I knew God existed but had questions about Jesus because I'm an analyst and fraud investigator. There are many unsettled issues in the Bible."

Then, in response to the probing request again made by @DialecticSkeptic :

If you have never been a member of a local church, briefly state why not.

The following response was given by yourself:

Throughout my career, I've had audiences that objected to my findings, but the the religious group has by far been the worst. The Lord has blessed me and I've eliminated my doubts with the truth, but I can't find anyone in the Church to discuss results with. I even have pastor friends and when I start mentioning evidence that rejects some of their theology, they panic because their faith is built on theology. Through my NDE and five-year investigation God showed me that he wants people to believe through the evidence, not theology"

This a grievous matter that must be addressed with sober judgment, clarity of doctrine, and zeal for the honor of Christ and the purity of His gospel.

Here laid before us is a series of statements wherein a man—by his own testimony—rejects the apostolic witness, stands outside the communion of the Church, and elevates private experience and personal investigation above the revealed Word of God.

The matter is not merely heterodox—it could be considered blasphemy and the spirit of antichrist. Let's examine and expose this claim, not with malice, but with the precision of the Word and the confessional theology handed down by faithful men.


I. CLAIM TO DIVINE AUTHORITY: A Functional Self-Anointed Messiah

This man speaks as one who has received exclusive divine reveation and ascribes to himself a mediatorial role by which others are to believe—not through the Scripture, nor through the teaching of Christ’s Church, but through him and his experiences.

Key Red Flags Indicating a Messianic Claim:

Exclusive Revelation Through NDE and Private Visions:

He states that God showed him hell, and a spirit of a friend, and taught him directly over a five-year “investigation.”

He claims these experiences constitute divine proof, a revelation superior to theology or Scripture.

This is a prophetic and mediatorial claim—he is not merely testifying, he is claiming divine insight to correct the Church.

Rejection of the Apostles and Scripture:

He calls the Apostles and disciples false teachers. This is no minor error—it is to sit in judgment upon Christ Himself, who chose, commissioned, and confirmed the apostles (John 15:16; Luke 6:13; Acts 1:2–8).

He thereby claims a superior authority to Christ’s appointed messengers, which is precisely what false prophets and cult founders have always done (see Galatians 1:8–9).

Condemnation of Theology:

He declares that faith should be built on “evidence, not theology,” implying that God prefers empiricism to divine revelation.

This strikes at the very heart of the Reformation principle of Sola Scriptura—that Scripture is the sole infallible authority for faith and practice.

Theological Diagnosis:

Such a one, even if sincere, walks in the spirit of Korach, who rose up against Moses, saying: “You have gone too far! For all in the congregation are holy...” (Numbers 16:3). But the Lord judged him, because he refused God’s appointed mediator.

He also walks in the way of Diotrephes, who “loves to put himself first and does not acknowledge our authority” (3 John 9).

II. SCRIPTURAL RESPONSE TO CLAIMS OF PRIVATE AUTHORITY


1. Revelation Is Complete in Christ and the Apostolic Witness

“Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke... by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son” (Hebrews 1:1–2).

“Contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3).

God’s final Word has come in Christ. The Apostles bore witness to Him. To claim new revelation that corrects or supersedes theirs is to deny Christ’s Word and to declare the canon incomplete.


2. The Church Is the Pillar and Buttress of Truth

“If I delay, you may know how one ought to behave... in the church of the living God, a pillar and buttress of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15).

To stand outside the church and claim to be the sole bearer of divine truth is to defy Christ’s own institution.

3. False Prophets Are Known by Their Fruit and by Their Doctrine

“Many false prophets have gone out into the world” (1 John 4:1).

“If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house” (2 John 10).

This man’s fruit is the division of the Church and the defamation of Christ’s apostles. His doctrine places personal revelation above Scripture. These are the marks of a deceiver.

III. THE REFORMED CONFESSIONAL WITNESS

The Westminster Confession of Faith speaks clearly:

“The whole counsel of God... is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture; unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men” (WCF 1.6).

And further:

“9: The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself: and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly. 2 Peter 1:20–21; Acts 15:15–16 (WCF 1.9).

“The visible Church, which is also catholic or universal under the gospel (not confined to one nation, as before under the law), consists of all those throughout the world, that profess the true religion, together with their children; and is the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ, the house and family of God, out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation."
(WCF 25.5, 2).

IV. CONCLUSION AND WARNING

This man lays claim to divine authority while rejecting God’s Word, God’s Church, and God’s appointed messengers. That is not enlightenment—that is rebellion. It is to place oneself above the apostles, above Christ, and functionally as a messianic figure who brings the “true” gospel through personal insight.

Let the Church be warned. As Paul declares:

“Even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.” (Galatians 1:8)

May we cling not to private visions or personal wisdom, but to Christ, who is the prophet, priest, and king, revealed in the Scriptures, known through faith, and exalted by the Church.

 

[JustTheFacts]

Actually, what you actually claim is far worse than a claim to being a prophet. Let me expound as to why.

In response to @Josheb stating this::


.
You replied with this:



So, by your own words, you are "expert", a man far above brother @Josheb here - since you claim to exceed him in the knowledge and understanding of God (you claim to be an expert as opposed to someone who simply might parse Scripture well sometimes - and are telling him through your demeanor below that it is required of him to bow to your understanding and interpretation.

those are your words not mine. In fact I'm impressed with @Joshebs responses and depth of Bible knowledge.

by your own words below:



When, as an "expert" who is "expert" by his own witness (not the witness of the church through whom the Holy Spirit resides and operates as means) expresses anger and/or frustration with those who are "unable to understand what is written in the law of God" - specifically as defined by you, instead of the Church - we have a person before us who is essentially making messianic claims.

Again your words, I've made no such claims. I'm an expert in systems analysis, accident and fraud investigations, and have a God-given uncanny ability to sort through mounds of documentation to understand them, but you are way off base claiming I've made messianiac claims. Feel free to provide me even one example.

Sure!

In the thread created to welcome you, when asked the following by @DialecticSkeptic :



the following response was given by yourself,:



Then, in response to the probing request again made by @DialecticSkeptic :




The following response was given by yourself:



This a grievous matter that must be addressed with sober judgment, clarity of doctrine, and zeal for the honor of Christ and the purity of His gospel.

Here laid before us is a series of statements wherein a man—by his own testimony—rejects the apostolic witness, stands outside the communion of the Church, and elevates private experience and personal investigation above the revealed Word of God.

The matter is not merely heterodox—it could be considered blasphemy and the spirit of antichrist. Let's examine and expose this claim, not with malice, but with the precision of the Word and the confessional theology handed down by faithful men.

I'm not going to go through all that for you. If blasphemy is proclaiming my faith and trust in Jesus as my Lord and savior, then I am guilty.

I. CLAIM TO DIVINE AUTHORITY: A Functional Self-Anointed Messiah

This man speaks as one who has received exclusive divine reveation and ascribes to himself a mediatorial role by which others are to believe—not through the Scripture, nor through the teaching of Christ’s Church, but through him and his experiences.

Key Red Flags Indicating a Messianic Claim:

Exclusive Revelation Through NDE and Private Visions:

He states that God showed him hell, and a spirit of a friend, and taught him directly over a five-year “investigation.”

He claims these experiences constitute divine proof, a revelation superior to theology or Scripture.

This is a prophetic and mediatorial claim—he is not merely testifying, he is claiming divine insight to correct the Church.

Rejection of the Apostles and Scripture:

He calls the Apostles and disciples false teachers. This is no minor error—it is to sit in judgment upon Christ Himself, who chose, commissioned, and confirmed the apostles (John 15:16; Luke 6:13; Acts 1:2–8).

He thereby claims a superior authority to Christ’s appointed messengers, which is precisely what false prophets and cult founders have always done (see Galatians 1:8–9).

Condemnation of Theology:

He declares that faith should be built on “evidence, not theology,” implying that God prefers empiricism to divine revelation.

This strikes at the very heart of the Reformation principle of Sola Scriptura—that Scripture is the sole infallible authority for faith and practice.

Theological Diagnosis:

Such a one, even if sincere, walks in the spirit of Korach, who rose up against Moses, saying: “You have gone too far! For all in the congregation are holy...” (Numbers 16:3). But the Lord judged him, because he refused God’s appointed mediator.

He also walks in the way of Diotrephes, who “loves to put himself first and does not acknowledge our authority” (3 John 9).

II. SCRIPTURAL RESPONSE TO CLAIMS OF PRIVATE AUTHORITY


1. Revelation Is Complete in Christ and the Apostolic Witness

“Long ago, at many times and in many ways, God spoke... by the prophets, but in these last days he has spoken to us by his Son” (Hebrews 1:1–2).

“Contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints” (Jude 3).

God’s final Word has come in Christ. The Apostles bore witness to Him. To claim new revelation that corrects or supersedes theirs is to deny Christ’s Word and to declare the canon incomplete.


2. The Church Is the Pillar and Buttress of Truth

“If I delay, you may know how one ought to behave... in the church of the living God, a pillar and buttress of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15).

To stand outside the church and claim to be the sole bearer of divine truth is to defy Christ’s own institution.

3. False Prophets Are Known by Their Fruit and by Their Doctrine

“Many false prophets have gone out into the world” (1 John 4:1).

“If anyone comes to you and does not bring this teaching, do not receive him into your house” (2 John 10).

This man’s fruit is the division of the Church and the defamation of Christ’s apostles. His doctrine places personal revelation above Scripture. These are the marks of a deceiver.

III. THE REFORMED CONFESSIONAL WITNESS

The Westminster Confession of Faith speaks clearly:

“The whole counsel of God... is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary consequence may be deduced from Scripture; unto which nothing at any time is to be added, whether by new revelations of the Spirit, or traditions of men” (WCF 1.6).

And further:

“9: The infallible rule of interpretation of Scripture is the Scripture itself: and therefore, when there is a question about the true and full sense of any Scripture (which is not manifold, but one), it must be searched and known by other places that speak more clearly. 2 Peter 1:20–21; Acts 15:15–16 (WCF 1.9).

“The visible Church, which is also catholic or universal under the gospel (not confined to one nation, as before under the law), consists of all those throughout the world, that profess the true religion, together with their children; and is the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ, the house and family of God, out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation."
(WCF 25.5, 2).

IV. CONCLUSION AND WARNING

This man lays claim to divine authority while rejecting God’s Word, God’s Church, and God’s appointed messengers. That is not enlightenment—that is rebellion. It is to place oneself above the apostles, above Christ, and functionally as a messianic figure who brings the “true” gospel through personal insight.

Let the Church be warned. As Paul declares:

“Even if we or an angel from heaven should preach to you a gospel contrary to the one we preached to you, let him be accursed.” (Galatians 1:8)

May we cling not to private visions or personal wisdom, but to Christ, who is the prophet, priest, and king, revealed in the Scriptures, known through faith, and exalted by the Church.

If you have a specific verse that you'd like to discuss and compare notes, I'm open to having an exchange with you. Blessings.

 

[makesends]

There you go into a long discourse. You ask a few questions, then you go and start objecting to whatever I might conclude. All I'm asking you is what does that mean without considering the impacts of it. It's pretty clear to me that an OT prophet who prophesied the Messiah spoke for God. That's what the Law says. @Josheb didn't like the Law so he wanted me to find something else. I told @Josheb to find something else because haven't found anything beyond what I've presented But you have the same book I do, so maybe you should find additional criteria. Fact is, it the Bible is the inerrant infallible word of God as you believe you have to believe what is written.

No long discussion is needed--what does that say?

Not an answer to my questions. Let me ask it differently.

Is there legitimate prophecy in the NT that is not about Jesus birth?
Is there, besides Jesus' own words, infallibility in the NT in the originals?

A note —a repetitious note: You are the outlier here. You have to prove to us, your thesis. We are not players in your court. We are not going to follow your lead. I'm not calling you a JW, but that is their method. We don't put up with it here. Asking us questions doesn't do what you want here.

 

[JustTheFacts]

Are you saying that prophecy only happened in the OT?
Are you saying that Speaking God's Words is the definition of prophecy and that Paul was thus pretending to be a prophet?
Are you saying that nobody after Jesus birth spoke for God, unless Jesus himself?
Are you discrediting almost the entire New Testament?

If you are truthful about the time spent studying and your expertise and so on, you should consider the possibility that your false assumptions run your whole line of reasoning. That is what a good logician does. When one seeks to discredit what one does not believe, it may be because their line of reasoning has exalted them above Scripture. —Must be a heady feeling, that!

Connecting the dots is great, but when one is blind to their own self-exaltation, they cannot see all the dots.

(Yes, I know, I will be measured by my own standard.)

Sorry @makesensds I didn't realize I hadn't communicated with you yet. All I'm doing is finding God's requirements for being able to speak for God. I presented the Deuteronomy Law as a starting point, and thus far I haven't had agreement with it or not.

In answer to your comment about prophecy only happening in the OT, that is what Deuteronomy addresses. If we can't agree on that section of the Bible and mover forward, we'll never make any progress to get to your questions.

 

[Arial]

20 But the prophet who speaks a word presumptuously in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.” You may say in your heart, “How shall we know the word which Yahweh has not spoken?” When a prophet speaks in Yahweh’s name, if the thing doesn’t follow, nor happen, that is the thing which Yahweh has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You shall not be afraid of him. (Deuteronomy 18:20-22)

A prophet will be proven to be from God if he has predicted the future and it comes true. There is only one prediction that matters in the OT--the Messiah. Seems pretty clear to me. Paul cannot meet that criteria because Jesus has already been born.

First of all the apostles were not prophets. They did speak of things to come in the last days, but only according to what either Jesus or the Holy Spirit revealed to them. Those things that do not come to pass until Christ returns. So, you cannot say they will not come to pass. If you have doubts about it, and you should if you doubt the words of the apostles are not from God, then I would get on my knees in repentance.

The passage from Deut that you quote is speaking of authority to speak for God that was given to Moses as the mediator of the Old Covenant, and that there will be another greater than he, who will be mediator of the New Covenant....Jesus. There were many other prophets in the OT and even in the NT, but none were covenant mediators. The gift of prophecy was given to some for the edification of the church. (Eph 4:11-12) There's was Agabus (Acts 11:27-30; Acts 21:10-11) Phillip the evangelist had four daughters who were prophetesses (Acts 21:9) and Silas (Acts 15:32).

The model for prophecy changed with the NT church because of the transformation in the relationship between God and his people. All have the indwelling Holy Spirit, whereas it was exclusive in the OT. And you have restricted prophecy to only one aspect; that of telling the future. Prophecy is hearing from God and repeating his message to others. So in a sense anyone teaching correctly from the Bible and according the what God meant, is doing that. That is what Paul and the other apostles were doing, both from the OT and its revealed fullness by God to them.

To say, as you did, that there is only one prophecy that matters in the OT and that is Messiah, you completely wipe out the importance and value of more that half of God's book---his story of redemption played out in our history, and that is being played out even now. So the passages do not support anything as proof, other than you make things say what you want them to say. And you did not actually use them in any supportive way. Just quoted them and then made the statement that the only prophecy that mattered was Messiah and then to say Paul can't be a prophet because Jesus has already been born, which makes absolutely no sense at all.

 

[Arial]

I'm an expert in systems analysis, accident and fraud investigations, and have a God-given uncanny ability to sort through mounds of documentation to understand them, but you are way off base claiming I've made messianiac claims. Feel free to provide me even one example.

Well you are certainly no expert in systematic biblical analysis. So why don't you bring that "God-given" uncanny ability to sort through mounds of documentation and understanding them into the subject you are claiming to be an expert in? I am guessing because you are attempting to prove fraud in the word of God? Something no one can do, and in an attempt to do so, end up calling God a fraud and impotent in the matter, so you just try to pull the wool over our eyes. Hoping we will rely on that word, "expert." You grossly underestimate the people of God and his ability to protect them. You may have been in forums where most were no more grounded than you appear to be---but surprise, surprise. This is a whole different ball game.

 

[JustTheFacts]

Not an answer to my questions. Let me ask it differently.

Is there legitimate prophecy in the NT that is not about Jesus birth?
Is there, besides Jesus' own words, infallibility in the NT in the originals?

A note —a repetitious note: You are the outlier here. You have to prove to us, your thesis. We are not players in your court. We are not going to follow your lead. I'm not calling you a JW, but that is their method. We don't put up with it here. Asking us questions doesn't do what you want here.

My point is, I've summarized what I can find that describes authority from God to speak for God. I don't find anything in there about apostles, so without accusing me of being a demon, as some have, where did apostles get the authority to speak for God?

1. Jesus spoke for God

“He who doesn’t love me doesn’t keep my words. The word which you hear isn’t mine, but the Father’s who sent me.” (John 14:24)
“I and the Father are one.” (John 10:30)

2. God gave prophets the authority to speak for God if they prophesied the Messiah:

But the prophet who speaks a word presumptuously in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.” You may say in your heart, “How shall we know the word which Yahweh has not spoken?” When a prophet speaks in Yahweh’s name, if the thing doesn’t follow, nor happen, that is the thing which Yahweh has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You shall not be afraid of him. (Deuteronomy 18:20-22)

3. Jesus validated that Moses spoke for God because Moses prophesied about Jesus:

“For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote about me.” (John 5:46)

4. Jesus validated the OT prophets speaking for God because they prophesied him as the Messiah:

“Don’t think that I came to destroy the law or the prophets. I didn’t come to destroy, but to fulfill.” (Matthew 5:17)
“But all this has happened that the Scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled.” (Matthew 26:56)

5. Testimony is required to prove Jesus as the Messiah:

On the testimony of two or three witnesses a person is to be put to death, but no one is to be put to death on the testimony of only one witness. (Deuteronomy 17:6 –NIV)
One witness is not enough to convict anyone accused of any crime or offense they may have committed. A matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses. (Deuteronomy 19:15 –NIV)

6. Jesus validated that the testimony requirements applied to him:

“If I testify about myself, my witness is not valid.” (John 5:31)
“But the testimony which I receive is not from man. However, I say these things that you may be saved.” (John 5:34)
“Here you are, appearing as your own witness; your testimony is not valid. (John 8:13 –NIV)
"In your own Law it is written that the testimony of two witnesses is true. I am one who testifies for myself; my other witness is the Father, who sent me." (John 8:17-18 –NIV)

7. Then Jesus put in place his eyewitness testimony. First Jesus promised the disciples the Holy Spirit to get all the details right:

25 “I have said these things to you while still living with you. 26 But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things, and will remind you of all that I said to you. (John 14:25-26)

8. Jesus selected four disciples to be his eyewitnesses:
As he sat on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John, and Andrew asked him privately, (Mark 13:3)

9. The testimony will be documented prior to the persecution then executions of the disciples:

9 “But watch yourselves, for they will deliver you up to councils. You will be beaten in synagogues. You will stand before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony to them. 10 The Good News must first be preached to all the nations. 11 When they lead you away and deliver you up, don’t be anxious beforehand or premeditate what you will say, but say whatever will be given you in that hour. For it is not you who speak, but the Holy Spirit. (Mark 13:9-11)

10. Jesus took his selected eyewitnesses everywhere he went so they would observe everything"

• The synagogue ruler’s daughter raised back to life from the dead (Mark 5:36-43)
• The transfiguration of Jesus when he appeared with Moses and Elijah proving that there is eternal life. (Mark 9:2-4)
• Jesus through his Olivet Discourse prophesying those four disciples’ future and assigning them to be his chosen eyewitnesses (Mark 13:1-37)
• Jesus preparing for his execution (Mark 14:32-42)

11. Jesus provided his eyewitnesses the Holy Spirit as promised the first day of his resurrection:

21 Jesus therefore said to them again, “Peace be to you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.” 22 When he had said this, breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit! (John 20:21-22)

12. The testimony of Jesus will be documented between 30-35 AD:
Saul was consenting to his death. A great persecution arose against the assembly which was in Jerusalem in that day. (Acts 8:1)

13. Jesus words will not be affected by time nor translations:
Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away. (Mark 13:31)

 

[makesends]

My point is, I've summarized what I can find that describes authority from God to speak for God. I don't find anything in there about apostles, so without accusing me of being a demon, as some have, where did apostles get the authority to speak for God?

1. Jesus spoke for God

“He who doesn’t love me doesn’t keep my words. The word which you hear isn’t mine, but the Father’s who sent me.” (John 14:24)
“I and the Father are one.” (John 10:30)

2. God gave prophets the authority to speak for God if they prophesied the Messiah:

But the prophet who speaks a word presumptuously in my name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or who speaks in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.” You may say in your heart, “How shall we know the word which Yahweh has not spoken?” When a prophet speaks in Yahweh’s name, if the thing doesn’t follow, nor happen, that is the thing which Yahweh has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously. You shall not be afraid of him. (Deuteronomy 18:20-22)

3. Jesus validated that Moses spoke for God because Moses prophesied about Jesus:

“For if you believed Moses, you would believe me; for he wrote about me.” (John 5:46)

4. Jesus validated the OT prophets speaking for God because they prophesied him as the Messiah:

“Don’t think that I came to destroy the law or the prophets. I didn’t come to destroy, but to fulfill.” (Matthew 5:17)
“But all this has happened that the Scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled.” (Matthew 26:56)

5. Testimony is required to prove Jesus as the Messiah:

On the testimony of two or three witnesses a person is to be put to death, but no one is to be put to death on the testimony of only one witness. (Deuteronomy 17:6 –NIV)
One witness is not enough to convict anyone accused of any crime or offense they may have committed. A matter must be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses. (Deuteronomy 19:15 –NIV)

6. Jesus validated that the testimony requirements applied to him:

“If I testify about myself, my witness is not valid.” (John 5:31)
“But the testimony which I receive is not from man. However, I say these things that you may be saved.” (John 5:34)
“Here you are, appearing as your own witness; your testimony is not valid. (John 8:13 –NIV)
"In your own Law it is written that the testimony of two witnesses is true. I am one who testifies for myself; my other witness is the Father, who sent me." (John 8:17-18 –NIV)

7. Then Jesus put in place his eyewitness testimony. First Jesus promised the disciples the Holy Spirit to get all the details right:

25 “I have said these things to you while still living with you. 26 But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, will teach you all things, and will remind you of all that I said to you. (John 14:25-26)

8. Jesus selected four disciples to be his eyewitnesses:
As he sat on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple, Peter, James, John, and Andrew asked him privately, (Mark 13:3)

9. The testimony will be documented prior to the persecution then executions of the disciples:

9 “But watch yourselves, for they will deliver you up to councils. You will be beaten in synagogues. You will stand before rulers and kings for my sake, for a testimony to them. 10 The Good News must first be preached to all the nations. 11 When they lead you away and deliver you up, don’t be anxious beforehand or premeditate what you will say, but say whatever will be given you in that hour. For it is not you who speak, but the Holy Spirit. (Mark 13:9-11)

10. Jesus took his selected eyewitnesses everywhere he went so they would observe everything"

• The synagogue ruler’s daughter raised back to life from the dead (Mark 5:36-43)
• The transfiguration of Jesus when he appeared with Moses and Elijah proving that there is eternal life. (Mark 9:2-4)
• Jesus through his Olivet Discourse prophesying those four disciples’ future and assigning them to be his chosen eyewitnesses (Mark 13:1-37)
• Jesus preparing for his execution (Mark 14:32-42)

11. Jesus provided his eyewitnesses the Holy Spirit as promised the first day of his resurrection:

21 Jesus therefore said to them again, “Peace be to you. As the Father has sent me, even so I send you.” 22 When he had said this, breathed on them, and said to them, “Receive the Holy Spirit! (John 20:21-22)

12. The testimony of Jesus will be documented between 30-35 AD:
Saul was consenting to his death. A great persecution arose against the assembly which was in Jerusalem in that day. (Acts 8:1)

13. Jesus words will not be affected by time nor translations:
Heaven and earth will pass away, but my words will not pass away. (Mark 13:31)

I suppose then, your answer to my questions is that yes, there is genuinely Holy Spirit-inspired Scripture, in the NT.

Please show how your listed points demonstrate logically that Paul's written words, post conversion, are not by plenary verbal inspiration. You give points, but you jump from one to the next, as though we followed. Oh, and the obvious facts don't need expanded on, unless that expansion is relevant. For example, in point 10, there is no need for the bullet points below them; unless I miss something, anyway, they don't bridge any gap in reasoning that demonstrates that Paul was not legitimate.

Maybe, to make it simpler: Give logical implications of each point, and if necessary, defeat 'inferences' we may come up with as you go.

 

[makesends]

Sorry @makesensds I didn't realize I hadn't communicated with you yet. All I'm doing is finding God's requirements for being able to speak for God. I presented the Deuteronomy Law as a starting point, and thus far I haven't had agreement with it or not.

I'm not going to say I've read all the posts, nor even all your posts, related to this question of inspiration. But so far, it has seemed presented that OT (i.e. "Deuteronomy Law") has been invoked as THE standard for all prophecy, not just in questions of legitimacy, but in subject matter (birth of the Messiah) of each purported prophecy. If that subject matter is definitive to legitimacy, it would seem to me that you must conclude that most of the OT prophets are disqualified too.

In answer to your comment about prophecy only happening in the OT, that is what Deuteronomy addresses. If we can't agree on that section of the Bible and mover forward, we'll never make any progress to get to your questions.

I guess then, I'll wait for your answers concerning validity of OT prophecy that is NOT about the birth of the Messiah, since you used that to disqualify NT writings.

Also, I must wait to see if you are, or are not, defining any speaking for God, as prophecy. If one or two of the Gospels, for example, are true, are they prophecy? Are the books of Kings or Chronicles or any historical accounts disqualified by not being prophecy?

 

[JustTheFacts]

I suppose then, your answer to my questions is that yes, there is genuinely Holy Spirit-inspired Scripture, in the NT.

Yes, according to the word of God it is from the eyewitnesses of Jesus. Their testimony is needed to prove Jesus to all nations and people.

Please show how your listed points demonstrate logically that Paul's written words, post conversion, are not by plenary verbal inspiration. You give points, but you jump from one to the next, as though we followed.

I can't prove Paul's words are the word of God (from the proven word of God through the Gospels and the OT prophets). That seems to be the hang up for many that cause them to say I'm demon possessed. In reality, I'm just reporting what I find. No emotions attached, just digging for answers.

Oh, and the obvious facts don't need expanded on, unless that expansion is relevant. For example, in point 10, there is no need for the bullet points below them; unless I miss something, anyway, they don't bridge any gap in reasoning that demonstrates that Paul was not legitimate.

Jesus knew he needed eyewitness testimony for future generation so he prepared for it. The bullets in 10 are important because they validate through scripture that Jesus had appointed those four men to be eyewitnesses--James, Andrew, Peter, and John.

Maybe, to make it simpler: Give logical implications of each point, and if necessary, defeat 'inferences' we may come up with as you go.

The logical implication is the authority for apostles words to be considered the word of God. Where did their authority come from if it didn't come from Jesus?

I'm not saying their words are worthless, I'm saying the Church treats them as the word of God but I cannot find where God authorized this.

 

[JustTheFacts]

I'm not going to say I've read all the posts, nor even all your posts, related to this question of inspiration. But so far, it has seemed presented that OT (i.e. "Deuteronomy Law") has been invoked as THE standard for all prophecy, not just in questions of legitimacy, but in subject matter (birth of the Messiah) of each purported prophecy. If that subject matter is definitive to legitimacy, it would seem to me that you must conclude that most of the OT prophets are disqualified too.

What other prophecy is there besides Revelation written by John and Jesus--and those don't need a qualifier because through the Law they are the word of God.

I guess then, I'll wait for your answers concerning validity of OT prophecy that is NOT about the birth of the Messiah, since you used that to disqualify NT writings.

OT prophecy is all about Jesus. In fact I started another thread about the seventy sevens misinterpretation. The seventy sevens is the complete prophecy about Jesus; the exact timing of his birth, the complete details of his mission, and the introduction to a seven year mission for him:3-1/2 years teaching and performing works, a sacrifice in the middle, then 3-1/2 years for the eyewitnesses to document their testimony. Revelation chapter 12 validates God protecting them during the seven years.

Also, I must wait to see if you are, or are not, defining any speaking for God, as prophecy. If one or two of the Gospels, for example, are true, are they prophecy? Are the books of Kings or Chronicles or any historical accounts disqualified by not being prophecy?

Jesus gave us prophecy in the Gospels. For example, the Olivet Discourse is all about the future the disciples will face. In regards to the books of Kings, or Chronicles, I haven't examined them for meeting the Deuteronomy requirement. But what is the impact if they are not the word of God? They are historical documents.

 

[makesends]

I'm not saying their words are worthless, I'm saying the Church treats them as the word of God but I cannot find where God authorized this.

OH, ok, so you aren't saying that accepted Canon any of it false —you are only saying that so far you have not been able to prove much of it true? This is just off the cuff; I will try to get to the rest of your response when I have time.

Do you take Peter's implication (quoted below) that Paul's letters are "scriptures" as simply referring to 'writings, letters', and not designating them as equally valid as those "other Scriptures"?

"He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction."

 

[Arial]

I'm not saying their words are worthless, I'm saying the Church treats them as the word of God but I cannot find where God authorized this.

The entire Bible, both OT and NT claims to be the word of God. The church accepts that. And the only way any of it is trustworthy and reliable is if all of it is the word of God. If every word in it is the true word of God given to us for our knowledge of him and of redemption, and that too being declared by God himself. Scripture interprets scripture. It must be its own internal evidence and it is. If it is not, which parts do we trust and which parts might not be true? Maybe the parts you say are true, are not true. See what I mean? We are meant above all to trust him (which produces obedience) and the Bible is the only reference book on who he is, what he says, what he is doing, that anyone has.

 

[Carbon]

I am an expert on evidence. I also stand behind the claim that the Holy Spirit has been helping me through my investigation. I couldn't have done the work I've done without God.

Really? I see you as very arrogant.

 

[JustTheFacts]

Is there legitimate prophecy in the NT that is not about Jesus birth?

Of course there is Jesus provided prophecy and in Revelation John provided prophecy.

Is there, besides Jesus' own words, infallibility in the NT in the originals?

Jesus words are Golden. The rest of the words in there have to be validated to ensure they haven't been corrupted. For example, the easiest proof against the infallibility of the NT as a whole is the words that were added to Jesus' comments in Matthew 16:18-19 and for Peter walking on water.

A note —a repetitious note: You are the outlier here. You have to prove to us, your thesis. We are not players in your court. We are not going to follow your lead. I'm not calling you a JW, but that is their method. We don't put up with it here. Asking us questions doesn't do what you want here.

 

[JustTheFacts]

OH, ok, so you aren't saying that accepted Canon any of it false —you are only saying that so far you have not been able to prove much of it true? This is just off the cuff; I will try to get to the rest of your response when I have time.

I do not have proof that God gave authority to authors outside of Jesus' eyewitness testimonies and Revelation.

Do you take Peter's implication (quoted below) that Paul's letters are "scriptures" as simply referring to 'writings, letters', and not designating them as equally valid as those "other Scriptures"?

That is one verse in a letter that has authorship that is highly debated. My analysis of that letter found that Peter didn't write it and the likely author is Paul.

"He writes the same way in all his letters, speaking in them of these matters. His letters contain some things that are hard to understand, which ignorant and unstable people distort, as they do the other Scriptures, to their own destruction."

 

[Hazelelponi]

I'm not saying their words are worthless, I'm saying the Church treats them as the word of God but I cannot find where God authorized this.

So are you saying now that you are fully retracting the statements you made in the below quoted posts?

A prime example of damaging theology is that Protestants reject the Catholic claims but accept the Bible as the fully inspired word of God--even though John warned us that there was a church coup that was happening (1 John 2:18-19).

. If you dig into the details you will realize that Sola Scriptura contradicts the word of God.

. (1 John 2:18-19)

Jesus wasn’t warning his Church leaders about losing their faith and belief in him, Jesus was telling them they would fail as managers. The only way the disciples could be led astray was through failing as leaders of the early CJC. And fail they did, just as Jesus warned, they were led astray.

The four chosen disciples were fishermen who didn’t have the experience nor foresight to start the biggest enterprise ever to exist—the Church. John stated that they selected replacements and successors, but “none of them belonged to us.” The men the disciples chose to replace them as leaders in the beginning Church were ALL false teachers. John doesn’t tell us there was one, or even a few false teachers, he told us they were ALL false teachers. John did not describe the infiltration of false teachers into the CJC, he described a coup—a total takeover. The disciples were led astray by smooth talking false teachers who weren’t interested in spreading the Good News of Jesus, they were interested in spreading their religion for their own benefit.

If you are changing your position then I praise God for it.

Is this what you have decided? That you're just confused about why we accept all the Scriptures and would like to understand?

J

Post in thread 'Welcome - Just The Facts'

Sunday at 10:39 AM

Like what? I think that is what we are trying to get at here. I think addressing specific opinions and explaining why you don't support them, (since you say that there are some you do not support) is necessary for the conversation to go forward.

Thanks.

A prime example of damaging theology is that Protestants reject the Catholic claims but accept the Bible as the fully inspired word of God--even though John warned us that there was a church coup that was happening (1 John 2:18-19). Protestants love end time ART theology (antichrist, rapture, tribulation) and validate it through...

• JustTheFacts

 

[Arial]

Jesus words are Golden. The rest of the words in there have to be validated to ensure they haven't been corrupted. For example, the easiest proof against the infallibility of the NT as a whole is the words that were added to Jesus' comments in Matthew 16:18-19 and for Peter walking on water.

What are you using to validate your claim that they were added? And did you mean fallibility instead of infallibility? BTW infallibility refers to how Scripture is authoritative.

 

[JustTheFacts]

Really? I see you as very arrogant.

That's real funny-- referring to me as the arrogant one. I've presented keys for unlocking prophecy, fraud and corruption and what have you done with that information? I was going to open up and share my math solution to Daniel and Revelation that will blow people away, but when I brought it up, one person commented that God doesn't care about math. Have there been any followup questions or comments to the key I provided that unlocks Daniel 9:24-27? Nope, not one recognized the difference between the key I presented and what the 'smart' people in your world claim. What did y'all do with the fraud I mentioned in Matthew 16:18-19 and Peter walking on water? Nothing!

Why is that? Because y'all are arrogant and don't think anyone can improve your knowledge. Y'all are so arrogant that you can't open your minds to search for the truth. You dig in your heels and recite the same nonsense verses that prove nothing. I don't care what you or anyone here thinks about me, because I was just here trying to find the needle in the haystack--a Christian with good knowledge of the scriptures and an interest to find the truth. Thus far I don't think one exists.

I call myself an expert because I was hired at the Los Alamos National Laboratory as an subject matter expert (SME) at the premier research and development facility in the world. I was so good at my job they had me manage the broken investigations group to fix the process--which I did. My talents were provided by God and he brought me in to take an outside look at what is going on in the Christian faith because I think he is getting tired of the nonsense. Through visions he warned me just how arrogant and stubborn you experts are---kind of like the pharisees. It's sad, that what this expert has found thus far--a lot of arrogant know-it-alls that know nothing and don't care to learn. I keep looking for someone smart with an open mind and the next person in line, @makesends, might have some possibilities but the track record there isn't good.

You should be tickled and honored to have me offer to share my results with you. I almost provided the math solution to Daniel and Revelation and I'm glad I stopped with the key. If y'all can't get find the fraud I pointed out, trace God's law that disproves Paul as being able to speak for God, or spot the very important key for prophecy that I provided, there isn't hope of getting any valuable input there. You have my email and I'm getting tired of the abuse and attacks here, so if you come across somebody who has some interest in learning about what happened to the Church, let me know.