How can we know God's "voice?"

[follower of Christ]

If I understand you correctly, you seem to be claiming that you believe sola sciptura to be correct doctrine,

Scripture is the final authority in matters of DOCTRINE, yes.
That has little to do with guidance from the Lord in matters that do not defy sound doctrine.

but also have an infallible authority outside scripture for our "UNIQUE situation."

What Im 'claiming' is that we have the Spirit of God INSIDE us and, like it or not, He DOES give us direction when we ask for it.
You seem to be lacking in knowledge that when we ASK for wisdom He will give it if we have faith.

But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and with no reproach, and it shall be given to him. But let him ask in faith, doubting nothing. For he who doubts is like a wave of the sea, driven by the wind and tossed. For do not let that man think that he shall receive anything from the Lord; he is a double-minded man, not dependable in all his ways.
(James 1:5-8 MKJV)

God giving us wisdom is quite in line WITH scripture.
Sola Scriptura, scripture alone, shows us conclusively that if we need wisdom in a matter to pray and have faith and that wisdom WILL be given.
We pray for wisdom in any given matter, God provides it by possibly giving us direction in our unique situations that wouldnt apply to anyone but us...ie we arent to take it and go preach it as doctrine to everyone else because it may not apply to their lives in any way at all anyway.

For instance, a man who is led by the Spirit to never touch wine. That would be for HIM alone because Gods word doesnt teach that wine is sinful in and of itself, but excess and drunkenness is.
If this man then turns around and tries to push this personal instruction onto others then he has crossed the line and is teaching contrary to scripture.
For HIM there may be a reason why God doesnt want him to drink wine...as I believe John the Baptist was to never touch it. But that doesnt apply to EVERYONE else.

I suspect you see the term..... "sola scritpura"....... as merely suggesting the the bible is an infallible and inerrant authority, but that there are others. Would you not be missing the "sola" part of the definition? The bible "alone" is the only infallible authority for faith and practice.

You seem to, as catholics do often, MISunderstand what most protestants see 'scripture alone' as actually being.
Scripture Alone simply means that we see GODS word as being THE authority in matters of doctrine.
I doubt youd find many, if any, protestants that would claim that the Holy Spirit does not help to guide us very personally thru our lives.
Scripture alone means that where matters of doctrine are concerned the bible ALONE is has the last word.

Scripture Alone actually helps keep folks who might get some personal direction from God from forcing it onto everyone else.
God may lead one man to never touch wine for whatever reason...maybe he has a disease like mine that alcohol triggers or something, but if this man were to try to push that onto someone else then we can go to 'scripture alone' as the authority and see for ourselves that this isnt what God has said to ALL men.

 

[mondar]

You seem to be lacking in knowledge that when we ASK for wisdom He will give it if we have faith.

But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and with no reproach, and it shall be given to him. But let him ask in faith, doubting nothing. For he who doubts is like a wave of the sea, driven by the wind and tossed. For do not let that man think that he shall receive anything from the Lord; he is a double-minded man, not dependable in all his ways.
(James 1:5-8 MKJV)

IS your application of James 1:5 saying that wisdom is an inner voice by which you can determine infallibly what God wants you to do in specific situations? If that is the case, I would suggest that you are using the text very much out of its context.

James 1:5 (and verse 2) is merely saying that trials build virtue into the Christian life through the process of wisdom.
Vs 2---- Trails
Vs 3---- Trails lead to patience.
Vs 4---- The mature Christian (lacking nothing) who has a complete range of virtues (Mature or perfect)
Vs 5---- The man of faith (lacking wisdom) gains wisdom as a gift from God as he progresses in his faith.

You seem to, as catholics do often, MISunderstand what most protestants see 'scripture alone' as actually being.

LOL, oh really? Please enlighten me. I have been challenged by some of my Catholic compadres on this board on my definition of "sola scriptura" in debates. I have posted sources like the one below. FoC, I am guessing you would have to first google "sola scriptura" to get a definition.

Tell me, do you recognize this? Where is it from?
1._____ The Holy Scripture is the only sufficient, certain, and infallible rule of all saving knowledge, faith, and obedience, although the light of nature, and the works of creation and providence do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, and power of God, as to leave men inexcusable; yet are they not sufficient to give that knowledge of God and his will which is necessary unto salvation. Therefore it pleased the Lord at sundry times and in divers manners to reveal himself, and to declare that his will unto his church; and afterward for the better preserving and propagating of the truth, and for the more sure establishment and comfort of the church against the corruption of the flesh, and the malice of Satan, and of the world, to commit the same wholly unto writing; which maketh the Holy Scriptures to be most necessary, those former ways of God's revealing his will unto his people being now ceased.

Scripture Alone simply means that we see GODS word as being THE authority in matters of doctrine.

The quote above also says that it relates to "obedience" also. It says that the scriptures are "sufficient" for obedience. With the sufficiency of scriptures, no infallible inner crystal ball is needed.

I doubt youd find many, if any, protestants that would claim that the Holy Spirit does not help to guide us very personally thru our lives.

This statement seems a red herring. Of course protestants claim that the HS guides. That is not the issue. The issue is can we infallibly determine that guidance.

Also, I find the average modern person calling himself a protestant would not even begin to understand what "sola scriptura" means. To define "sola scriptura," one would have to consult the original Lutheran and Reformed scholars that coined the term. Of course the English Regular Baptist statements from 1689 would do (hint hint). Even Spurgeon's reading of he 1689 would do.

FoC, this might be my last post in this discussion. I am not sure I see the profit in it.

 

[Vic C.]

Mondar, that reminded me of a conversation Joe and I had a while back. He claimed that Sola Scriptura would be better understood if we thought of it as Prima Scriptura instead. How does the idea of Scripture as the first and foremost primary source of Biblical truth sound?

 

[sheshisown]

:waving Hello~

Most recently I have been studying the tenets from the Westminster Confessional, Reformed Theology, and I have this to add to your Sola Scriptura question.

From the Cambridge Declaration, website is included after the quote:

We reaffirm the inerrant Scripture to be the sole source of written divine revelation, which alone can bind the conscience. The Bible alone teaches all that is necessary for our salvation from sin and is the standard by which all Christian behavior must be measured.

We deny that any creed, council or individual may bind a Christian's conscience, that the Holy Spirit speaks independently or contrary to what is set forth in the Bible, or that personal spiritual experience can ever be a vehicle of revelation.

http://www.inchristalone.org/ScriptureAlone.htm

This is a single declaration but is not unconnected to the whole theology of the Reformation.

bonnie :shades

 

[Sparkey]

... Sola Scriptura would be better understood if we thought of it as Prima Scriptura instead. How does the idea of Scripture as the first and foremost primary source of Biblical truth sound?

Greetings,

How does Zec 13:5 fit in?

When it was spoken of Jesus in Isa 53:3, "He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows", it is clear that he stood in a long line of prophets who were also acquainted with suffering. The prophets were not earthly philosophers who spoke their opinions for scholars to discuss, their pronouncements were heralded with the words: "Thus saith the LORD..."

When Isaiah was confronted with the holiness of God he cried out,

• Then said I, Woe is me! for I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips: for mine eyes have seen the King, the LORD of hosts. (Isa 6:5)

The only language that has kept popular usage of the term, "woe" is Yiddish. We can still hear Jews declare their frustration saying, "Oy vay!!" Which is shortened from the expression, "Oy vay ist mer". "Oy vay" is Yiddish for Oh, woe! -- the abbreviated form of, "Oh, woe is me."

When the Prophet of the Old Testament was to pronounce positive messages from God he would preface it with the term, "Blessed" to signify a blessing from God. Jesus used this highly recognizable format during his sermon on the mount. "Blessed are teh poor in spirit, blessed are those who mourn, blessed are those who hunger and thirst after righteousness." If the Word of the LORD was negative (a curse) the preface would become "Woe". Jesus also used the negative format indicating that he (as a Prophet) was speaking from God, "Woe to you, scribes, pharisees, hypocrites!" The word "Woe" on the lips of a Prophet signified imminent doom from God.

Prophets are anointed by God to speak forth His word. Priestly duties differed from those of a Prophet as we see in Malachi: "For the priest's lips should preserve knowledge, and they should seek the law at his mouth: for he is the messenger of the LORD of hosts. But ye are departed out of the way; ye have caused many to stumble at the law; ye have corrupted the covenant of Levi, saith the LORD of hosts.
Therefore have I also made you contemptible and base before all the people, according as ye have not kept my ways, but have been partial in the law." (Mal 2:7-9)

Knowledge is being poured out upon the whole earth. Things have not always continued as we see them today. The LORD has spoken and our hearts are changed. Joel stated that the Holy Spirit would be poured out upon all flesh.

• And ye shall know that I am in the midst of Israel, and that I am the LORD your God, and none else: and my people shall never be ashamed. And it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh; and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, your old men shall dream dreams, your young men shall see visions: And also upon the servants and upon the handmaids in those days will I pour out my spirit.
  
  And I will shew wonders in the heavens and in the earth, blood, and fire, and pillars of smoke.
  The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and the terrible day of the LORD come. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever shall call on the name of the LORD shall be delivered: for in mount Zion and in Jerusalem shall be deliverance, as the LORD hath said, and in the remnant whom the LORD shall call. (Joel 2:27-32)

But I digress.

Prophets were to appear before God to seek his council and were like the Chief Prosecuting Attorneys of their day. We can see this attitude in the widow that Elijah visited (and blessed). "1Ki 17:18 And she said unto Elijah, "What have I to do with thee, O thou man of God? art thou come unto me to call my sin to remembrance, and to slay my son?" They could also speak forth blessings as was appropriate but it was the Word of the LORD in their mouth that was unique to their office. In the bible, cities are doomed, nations are doomed, individuals are doomed --> all from the uttering of the word "Woe" from the lips of a Prophet of God. Moses knew the efficacy of prophecy and his desire can be seen when he said, "Would God that all the LORD's people were prophets, and that the LORD would put his spirit upon them!" (Num 11:29)

The position of Prophet was never removed although it has been changed. The children of Israel had Judges first, then Kings and Priests and Prophets over them. Those men appeared before God in the stead of (in the place of) the children. The anointing was to them only and not to 'all flesh'. Today we are joined into Jesus and no longer need another to go for us. Jesus gave us (the church) prophets and prophetesses just like he gave us apostles (apostolos - he that is sent) and evangelists & etc. for a reason ---> the perfecting of the saints and building up of His body, us.

• He that descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things.) And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ (Eph 4:10-12)

Paul agreed with Moses' desire that men of God should seek to prophecy. Prophecy here is seen as one of the nine Gifts of the Holy Spirit enumerated in his teaching of the Corinthians. We are told specifically to zēloŠprophēteuŠ"strongly desire to speak under inspiration" of the Holy Spirit.

When we turn to Zechariah 13:5 and read the surrounding passages we need to pay attention to the verb tense to get a sense of time as it flows through this prophecy. There are things we see that are done, things that are being done in modern day and things that are yet to be done.

• And it shall come to pass, that when any shall yet prophesy, then his father and his mother that begat him shall say unto him, Thou shalt not live; for thou speakest lies in the name of the LORD: and his father and his mother that begat him shall thrust him through when he prophesieth.
  And it shall come to pass in that day, that the prophets shall be ashamed every one of his vision, when he hath prophesied; neither shall they wear a rough garment to deceive:
  But he shall say, "I am no prophet, I am an husbandman; for man taught me to keep cattle from my youth."
  
  And one shall say unto him, "What are these wounds in thine hands?" Then he shall answer, "Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends."
  
  Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that is my fellow, saith the LORD of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones.
  And it shall come to pass, that in all the land, saith the LORD, two parts therein shall be cut off and die; but the third shall be left therein. And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried: they shall call on my name, and I will hear them: I will say, It is my people: and they shall say, The LORD is my God. (Zec 13:3-9)

Yes, we have a more sure word of Prophecy (Sola Scriptura -or better yet- Prima Scriptura) and it is imperative that one who speaks the Word of God speaks what the Lord has given him to say, does not speak his own words. Jesus spoke what his Father told him to, and not of himself. He said there will come one who speaks of his own. Israel didn't receive Jesus, but HIM, they will receive. God's word is written in the tables of our hearts (Jer 31:31). Our work is to believe on him who was sent by the Father. If we profess to speak out the Word, we are making ourselves to be Prophets. We need to be certain that we appear before Him and inquire of Him before we do this.

If we are speaking the Word of God and we are cutting some from here, some from there, some law from here, some law from there, one line from here, another from there --->>> are we desiring earnestly to prophecy? Or are we Farmers, taught from man? What are 'false prophets' that we are so often warned about?

~Sparrowhawke

 

[follower of Christ]

This statement seems a red herring.

Oh good grief.
Are you sure it isnt 'circular' or something too ?

I made an assertion, I supported that assertion with evidence from scripture.
Sorry if thats not adequate for your tastes, but you'll just have to learn to deal with it

Of course protestants claim that the HS guides.

ANY christian regardless of denomination or 'church' SHOULD believe what Gods word SAYS.
If they do not, then they certainly need to step back and ask themselves if the are truly in the faith.
I didnt give you the words of protestants, friend, but of scripture itself

But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and with no reproach, and it shall be given to him.
But let him ask in faith, doubting nothing.
For he who doubts is like a wave of the sea, driven by the wind and tossed.
For do not let that man think that he shall receive anything from the Lord; he is a double-minded man, not dependable in all his ways.
(James 1:5-8 MKJV)

That is not the issue. The issue is can we infallibly determine that guidance.

Thats a nice attempt there, friend.
Read it again;

But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and with no reproach, and it shall be given to him.
But let him ask in faith, doubting nothing.
For he who doubts is like a wave of the sea, driven by the wind and tossed.
For do not let that man think that he shall receive anything from the Lord; he is a double-minded man, not dependable in all his ways.
(James 1:5-8 MKJV)

Your statement would disqualify you immediately from being able to even expect receiving wisdom as it is based entirely in doubt to begin with.
I'll pass, if you dont mind

Also, I find the average modern person calling himself a protestant would not even begin to understand what "sola scriptura" means.

Im not going to get into a battle of wits here with ya, friend.
I know what most of the protestants that Ive crossed believe about the bible, which is pretty much what Ive presented.
we believe that scripture is the final authority in matters of doctrine. I know of NO protestant view that would even remotely claim that God is not able to give wisdom to those who ask for it.
That would be in defiance OF S.S. simply because of the passage Ive given you twice now that says He will if we have faith.

To define "sola scriptura," one would have to consult the original Lutheran and Reformed scholars that coined the term. Of course the English Regular Baptist statements from 1689 would do (hint hint). Even Spurgeon's reading of he 1689 would do.

Wonderful. You have fun with that
Ive explained what I believe and what scripture says and what a broad range of protestants believe in general about scripture being the final authority. I honestly dont care how someone in 1689 defined it....words and phrases evolve in their intent over time given their use by the general population....the word 'gay', for instance.
I hope you arent still using a 17th century dictionary, for pete sake.

Even tho Catholics say we are Sola Scriptura, Id bet even most catholics can understand the fact that we believe that God CAN give us wisdom when we pray for it and have faith in Him to provide it.

FoC, this might be my last post in this discussion. I am not sure I see the profit in it.

Agreed.

 

[follower of Christ]

http://www.inchristalone.org/ScriptureAlone.htm
This is a single declaration but is not unconnected to the whole theology of the Reformation.
bonnie :shades

Thanks for the link
I noticed this under General Revelation:

We believe this general revelation is relative to human nature. God, having created us, knows how to communicate with us. God, by an act of His grace, has made this revelation known to man through the created order by reason and experience. Man's reason and experience are both mediators of revelation (Rom 1:19f).

http://www.inchristalone.org/ScriptureAlone.htm

While they do seem to be trying to limit God a bit in much of that material, at least they seem to know that since we were created by God that He certainly knows how to communicate with us. Tho, again, it seems they are trying to limit it somewhat.

This was also interesting...

We believe that the Holy Spirit continues to illumine actively and graciously all believers to understand and rightfully interpret the inspired Scriptures. The Holy Spirit teaches, clarifies, and directs believers in the application of Scripture both in their individual lives and in the work and life of the Church (Jn. 14:26; 15:26; 16:13; I Jn. 2:20,27; I Cor. 2:12-16).

 

[follower of Christ]

Yes, we have a more sure word of Prophecy (Sola Scriptura -or better yet- Prima Scriptura) and it is imperative that one who speaks the Word of God speaks what the Lord has given him to say, does not speak his own words.

This is an interesting one...

Prima scriptura is a doctrine that says canonized scripture is "first" or "above all" sources of divine revelation.
Implicitly, this view acknowledges that, besides canonical scripture, there are other guides for what a believer should believe, and how he should live, such as the created order, traditions, charismatic gifts, mystical insight, angelic visitations, conscience, common sense, the views of experts, the spirit of the times or something else.
Prima scriptura suggests that ways of knowing or understanding God and his will, that do not originate from canonized scripture, are in a second place, perhaps helpful in interpreting that scripture, but testable by the canon and correctable by it, if they seem to contradict the scriptures.



...Contrast with sola scriptura
Prima scriptura is sometimes contrasted to sola scriptura, which literally translates "by the scripture alone"...teaches that the Scriptures are the sole infallible rule of faith and practice, but that the Scriptures' meaning can be mediated through many kinds of secondary authority, such as the ordinary teaching offices of the Church, antiquity, the councils of the Christian Church, reason, and experience.

However, sola scriptura rejects any original infallible authority, other than the Bible. In this view, all secondary authority is derived from the authority of the Scriptures and is therefore subject to reform when compared to the teaching of the Bible.
Church councils, preachers, Bible commentators, private revelation, or even a message allegedly from an angel or an apostle are not an original authority alongside the Bible in the sola scriptura approach.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prima_scriptura

Based on THAT definition of Sola Scriptura, Id say thats pretty close to what I believe.

 

[Fembot]

OK I know I posted in here. Where is it?

 

[Fembot]

I pay attention to repeating words that occur throughout my day. Then I turn to the Bible to research those words and end up stumbling onto scriptures that I believe God directed me to. Numbers have also been directed towards me repeatedly throughout my day/week, whirlwind. Sola scripture is the representation of God's voice IMO. But I do believe that he sends messages to individuals. Determining that a message is from Him should be done using the Bible only.

 

[Sparkey]

Yes, we have a more sure word of Prophecy (Sola Scriptura -or better yet- Prima Scriptura) and it is imperative that one who speaks the Word of God speaks what the Lord has given him to say, does not speak his own words.

This is an interesting one...

Prima scriptura is a doctrine that says canonized scripture is "first" or "above all" sources of divine revelation.
Implicitly, this view acknowledges that, besides canonical scripture, there are other guides for what a believer should believe, and how he should live, such as the created order, traditions, charismatic gifts, mystical insight, angelic visitations, conscience, common sense, the views of experts, the spirit of the times or something else.
Prima scriptura suggests that ways of knowing or understanding God and his will, that do not originate from canonized scripture, are in a second place, perhaps helpful in interpreting that scripture, but testable by the canon and correctable by it, if they seem to contradict the scriptures.

Based on THAT definition of Sola Scriptura, Id say thats pretty close to what I believe.

Thanks, definitions help me a lot.

Oh! and Greetings, FoC!

We've not been introduced but, and of course, on the web such formalities are often unnecessary, yes? I noticed that you didn't reply to my main question - "How does Zec 13:5 fit in?" I would also like to comment on "communication" itself. When you (or I) have an idea, we have searched within ourselves (hopefully prayed about it) and then through a process that I don't understand, we allow that idea to "bubble up" within us before we speak it out, yes? We take aim while we express ourselves.

The other person thinks about what has been said and digests the idea (so to speak); we've heard the Lord speak of things that are "sweet in the mouth, bitter in the stomach" so our reactions at first reading or hearing might not be the same upon "second thought", yes?

Using metaphor is insufficient - but I'm trying to express the "communication" process itself. What is it about you - that makes me speak differently (when addressing you) than I would to another person (to my mom - or even to someone else on this forum) ? What is it about "me" that would cause you to speak differently? Communication involves both the speaking and the hearing. It is the same with God except the responsibility is shifted usward, specifically our hearing well. Still, my point is that God can even speak to you through the mouth of an ass if He wants to. Of course we can both prove this based on scripture, yes?

I've never heard the term "Prima Scriptura" before so when my "little Christian lawyer mind" read your comment it stood up and shouted, "I OBKECK" which, translated with my keys on the keyboard correctly, means: I object! I don't agree that the use of the or term "Prima Scriptura" itself could "Implicitly" acknowledge something. Do you mean to say that every person that has ever held or spoken of an affinity to "Prima Scriptura" implicitly acknowledges their view to be 100% in agreement with your definition? If not, what does your use of the word, "Implicitly" mean? <No need to answer, it is rhetorical.>

Communication between God and man is not defined by man. We need to focus more on hearing Him than on arguing between ourselves, right? Can the Lord speak to me through you? I think He does. I also think that I can search the scriptures for better understanding (as can you). I pray you therefore (using the term in a colloquial sense) consider prayerfully that the Holy Writ speaks on this subject this in Zec 13:5 and the surrounding Scriptures. Please also cf. Jer 31:31.

I do appreciate your thoughtful answers and await same. Oh, I liked your other avatar better ;)

~Sparrow

 

[Paidion]

For me, like JoJo, it is in thought form. But not just a thought, like ones I think, it is a complete and finished thought all at once...before I even have a chance to even think of thinking, as though someone else used my mind to think and I simply observed. It's really hard to explain . He doesn't speak like this to me every day, and I could probably count the times it has happened on one hand.

Caroline, because of what you wrote above, I am convinced that you have truly heard from God those few times! I can identify with this "complete thought" being thrust into the mind. Once I had a vivid dream over and over, night after night. Then one night, it had a different ending. Immediately afterward, the very complex meaning of the dream was revealed to me instantaneously! But I cannot explain how that was done --- only that it happened in a split second! It was only afterward that I began to think about this meaning.

 

[Guest]

Nothing but sheer speculation here in post after post . . .

How do you know the voice or message isn't Satan's? or just your own brain playing tricks on you?

There is no way.

 

[Paidion]

How do you know that other people exist? It may be a mere illusion. Maybe you should consider solipsism.

 

[Guest]

How do you know that other people exist? It may be a mere illusion. Maybe you should consider solipsism.

If I become a solipsist, will you become an atheist?

 

[JoJo]

Nothing but sheer speculation here in post after post . . .

How do you know the voice or message isn't Satan's? or just your own brain playing tricks on you?

There is no way.

If you ever heard either the voice of God or Satan, you would know. But until you've heard either, your denial of the possibility is sheer speculation.

 

[Fembot]

Nothing but sheer speculation here in post after post . . .

How do you know the voice or message isn't Satan's? or just your own brain playing tricks on you?

There is no way.

If you ever heard either the voice of God or Satan, you would know. But until you've heard either, your denial of the possibility is sheer speculation.

:amen

Psalms 145:18
The LORD is near to all who call on him, to all who call on him in truth.

Isaiah 55:6
Seek the LORD while he may be found; call on him while he is near.

Matt 5:43-44
You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy. But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven.

Matthew 6:5-12
And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. But when you pray, go into your room, close the door and pray to your Father, who is unseen. Then your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you. And when you pray, do not keep on babbling like pagans, for they think they will be heard because of their many words. Do not be like them, for your Father knows what you need before you ask him. "This, then, is how you should pray: "'Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come, your will be done on earth as it is in heaven. Give us today our daily bread. Forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors.

Matthew 7:7-8
Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives; he who seeks finds; and to him who knocks, the door will be opened.

 

[follower of Christ]

Nothing but sheer speculation here in post after post . . .

How do you know the voice or message isn't Satan's? or just your own brain playing tricks on you?

There is no way.

How long have you been a born again christian ?
If its been 10 years and you still believe this then I submit that you have not spent a lot of time cultivating that relationship.

 

[follower of Christ]

I've never heard the term "Prima Scriptura" before so when my "little Christian lawyer mind" read your comment it stood up and shouted, "I OBKECK" which, translated with my keys on the keyboard correctly, means: I object! I don't agree that the use of the or term "Prima Scriptura" itself could "Implicitly" acknowledge something. Do you mean to say that every person that has ever held or spoken of an affinity to "Prima Scriptura" implicitly acknowledges their view to be 100% in agreement with your definition? If not, what does your use of the word, "Implicitly" mean? <No need to answer, it is rhetorical.>

Hi again
That wasnt my definition but just a quote from wikipedia

Based on the definitions provided the Prima Scriptura seems a bit out there, but the snippet about the difference between that and Sola Scriptura causes me to believe I am very close to SS in my views.
I dont know who wrote the definitions on the website I quoted.

Heres the link again if you want to check it out..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prima_scriptura

.

 

[Guest]

If you ever heard either the voice of God or Satan, you would know.

I am to believe that one who hears these voices "just knows" of their divine or Satanic origins?

There is a word for when people believe that they hear personal messages or voices that others don't. When it occurs in large numbers, it is called "religion". When it occurs in an individual, it is called a "delusion".

It seems that there is sanity in numbers.