My Sheep Hear My Voice

[tamborine lady]

graemlins/type.gif

John 10-27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

In light of the scripture above, how do YOU "hear" his voice??

Working for Jesus,

Tam

[atestring]

we need to be strenghtened by might in the "inner man" .

[mman]

Heb 1:1-2 God, who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds;

Heb 2:3-4 how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him, God also bearing witness both with signs and wonders, with various miracles, and gifts of the Holy Spirit, according to His own will?

II Pet 3:2 that you should remember the words spoken beforehand by the holy prophets and the commandment of the Lord and Savior spoken by your apostles.

I Cor 14:37If anyone thinks himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things which I write to you are the commandments of the Lord.

II Pet 1:21for prophecy never came by the will of man, but holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit.

Heb 11: 4 By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh .

How does Abel still speak? Through God’s written word.

How does Christ speak? Through his written word which was confirmed.

Do we have all we need with the written word? II Tim 3:16-17 and II Pet 1:3 tell us we have all we need. If God's word thoroughly equippes us for every good work and we have all we need that pertains to life and godliness(through the knowledge we have in the scriptures), WE DON'T NEED ANYTHING OTHER THAN GOD'S WORD.

Today, we don't need apostles, direct revelation, signs, wonders, miracles or any of those things the early church needed while in its infancy. The word has been confirmed (past tense) and is all sufficient.

[tamborine lady]

graemlins/type.gif

That's very good MMan. I was just wondering if people heard God by just reading the word,if they sometimes heard a "still small silent" voice.

Or if they got revelations in dreams or/and visions?

I'm sure some use the word(bible) only. But I'm also sure that God has spoken to some people in unusual ways from time to time.

What are some of your unusual encounters.

(Virgin Mary toast doesn't count) graemlins/laugh.gif

Peace,

Tam

[Joseph_Botwinick]

Originally posted by tamborine lady:
(Virgin Mary toast doesn't count) graemlins/laugh.gif

Peace,

Tam Speaking of which:

http://holyobserver.com/detail.php?isu=v01i03&art=tortilla graemlins/laugh.gif

[tamborine lady]

graemlins/type.gif

I don't blame her a bit, if I was hungry, I would eat it too!!

graemlins/laugh.gif

Tam

[hillclimber]

I talk to Him all the time. When I don't, I hurt.

[TaterTot]

he speaks to me through his word, through others, and through my mind with that still small (silent) voice.

[PastorGreg]

But the last are only valid if borne out by the first.

[wopik]

In light of the scripture above, how do YOU "hear" his voice??
By keeping the biblical Pentecost, as Jesus commanded (Acts 1:4-5; 2:1-2, kjv): this year ('05) on June 12th-------fifty days after Nisan 14 Passover (Jesus' death).

[rc]

Watch yourself Wopik, there is NO imperative there...

[wopik]

Hello, rc --


Watch yourself Wopik, there is NO imperative there... Jesus' followers took Jesus' command (acts 1:4-5) as an imperative --


Acts
2:1
And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.

[rc]

Proper exegesis restricts this to that time AND PLACE. He did not say do this every year... and you would have to go to THAT place also... Have you been to Jerusalem every Shavuot?

[wopik]

Hello, rc --


He did not say do this every year... point 1 - even if someone sneezes on "the first day of the week" in the NT, Christians jump all over it like bees to honey: acts 20:7 - Paul did not say do this every week... (if you want to go that route).


point 2 - the LORD's "appointed times" WERE/ARE to be kept yearly - always were, and still are by some Christians.

Most Christian sects still keep their own version of Pentecost - yearly, at their own locations.

[rc]

Point 1 - Nope, He didn't. You can have sabboth anytime you want, you can break bread and have church any day you want... this doesn't prove your point at all.

Point 2 NO scripture to back that one... how bout this...
Colossians 2:16 16 Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath.

[Monergist]

The "sheep," those given to the Son by the Father, elect from the foundation of the world, "hear" the voice of Christ in the preaching of the Word and respond in faith. "False sheep" and goats do not hear, their ears are dull and they do not respond to the Word of Christ.

[wopik]

Colossians 2:16 16 Therefore let no one pass judgment on you in questions of food and drink, or with regard to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath.
Paul is telling these Christians not to accept criticism for keeping the holydays, new moons and sabbath days for they ARE [not were] a shadow of things to come; but the reality of all this is Christ.

Where is the statement that says we shouldn't keep these days? Colossians 2:16 assumes they are keeping the holydays,etc., and says don't let anyone judge you for it. This is 'rock solid' proof that the mostly gentile Colossian church was keeping these days.


If the holidays of the Bible are done away with, so is eating and drinking, for they are listed there, too.

[wopik]

you can break bread and have church any day you want... "Break Bread" does not automatically mean or indicate a Eucharist/Communion. It can also mean just eating some food or a meal:

Paul took bread and broke it and blessed it and told everyone on the ship to eat because they hadn't eaten in fourteen days, since they were fighting a storm at sea (Acts 27:33-38).

------------------------------------

Acts (The Good News Translation)
2:46
Day after day they met as a group in the Temple, and they had their meals together in their homes, eating with glad and humble hearts,

------------------------------------

Acts (The Good News Translation)
20:7
On Saturday evening we gathered together for the fellowship meal. Paul spoke to the people and kept on speaking until midnight, since he was going to leave the next day.

-------------------------------


Lk
24:30
When He [Jesus] had reclined at the table with them, He took the bread and blessed it, and breaking it, He began giving it to them.

This is just a common meal after a long, dusty day's journey.

It could not be the Eucharist, for Jesus said He would not drink of the vine again till He was in His Father's Kingdom (Matt 26:29) -- "But I tell you, from this moment I will not drink of this fruit of the vine until that day when I drink it new in My Father's kingdom with you."


The same with John 21:13; Jesus took bread and gave it to the disciples. This was just a regular fish dinner (Jn 21:15).

[rc]

Here is a caution to take heed of judaizing teachers, or those who would impose upon Christians the yoke of the ceremonial law: Let no man therefore judge you in meat nor drink, &c., v. 16. Much of the ceremonies of the law of Moses consisted in the distinction of meats and days. It appears by Rom. xiv. that there were those who were for keeping up those distinctions: but here the apostle shows that since Christ has come, and has cancelled the ceremonial law, we ought not to keep it up. "Let no man impose those things upon you, for God has not imposed them: if God has made you free, be not you again entangled in that yoke of bondage." And this the rather because these things were shadows of things to come (v. 17), intimating that they had no intrinsic worth in them and that they are now done away. But the body is of Christ: the body, of which they were shadows, has come; and to continue the ceremonial observances, which were only types and shadows of Christ and the gospel, carries an intimation that Christ has not yet come and the gospel state has not yet commenced. Observe the advantages we have under the gospel, above what they had under the law: they had the shadows, we have the substance.

[wopik]

were shadows of things to come (v. 17), intimating that they had no intrinsic worth in them and that they are now done away..Let's quote the Bible precisely!


The LORD's Sabbath and the LORD's holidays ARE [not were] a shadow..........

indicating that they HAVE intrinsic worth in them and that they are NOT done away.


Col.
2:17
Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.


http://garnertedarmstrong.ws/pubs/UnderLaw.htm

[wopik]

rc

were shadows of things to come (v. 17), intimating that they had no intrinsic worth in them and that they are now done away..Jesus and Paul thought the LORD's holidays were priceless TRUTH.


Did Jesus abolish Yom Kippur (Day of Atonement - the Fast, acts 27:9) ? (Heb. 10:25).


Did Jesus abolish Pentecost ? (acts 2)


Did Jesus - the Passover Lamb - abolish Passover ? (1 Cor. 5: 7-8).


Did the LORD of the Sabbath Day abolish the Sabbath ? (Heb. 4:9).

[Eric B]

Paul is telling these Christians not to accept criticism for keeping the holydays, new moons and sabbath days for they ARE [not were] a shadow of things to come; but the reality of all this is Christ.

Where is the statement that says we shouldn't keep these days? Colossians 2:16 assumes they are keeping the holydays,etc., and says don't let anyone judge you for it. This is 'rock solid' proof that the mostly gentile Colossian church was keeping these days. Who would judge them FOR keeping them? The only ones trying to impose their religion on anyone else was the judaizers. Even the pagans didn't care if you kept God's days in addition to their own, so it certainly wasn't them.
Some of the the days were shadows of yet futyre parts of God's plan (Tabernacles=Millennium, etc.) But still; Christ is the "reality" we should be looking to. (inasmuch as Christ was already reigning in the Church, it was in a way the Kingdom, and those days can be seen as foreshadowing the Church age after the final derstruction of the OT system --yet in their future, as well).
If the holidays of the Bible are done away with, so is eating and drinking, for they are listed there, too. That could mean dietary restrictions. Geberhard, who was here arguing in favor of the feasts, point out that it could be apart of the "feasts". Even if this was true, still, nobody was trying to stop anyone from keeping days. But people were judging others for NOt keeping them, as we see still going on today.

[tamborine lady]

graemlins/type.gif

Col 2-16 Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days:
17 Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.


Eric said:But people were judging others for NOT keeping them, as we see still going on today.
-------------------------------------------

Thats exactly what I believe that scripture means Eric!!

When brings us back to the question of the thread. How come we all say we hear HIS voice, but we come up with different answers?


Selah,

Tam

[wopik]

Col 2-16

Eric said:But people were judging others for NOT keeping them, as we see still going on today.
There is only one "negative" in colossians 2:16: "let NO [negative] man judge you....."

People like to ADD another "negative" to make the verse say what they want it to say.

CASE IN POINT:


Have you ever read Colossians 2:16 in the Living Bible paraphrased?

It goes like this: "So don't let anyone criticize you for what you eat and drink, or for NOT celebrating Jewish holidays and feasts or new moon ceremonies of Sabbaths."

They add the word "NOT" into the verse, which isn't in any other translation - especially KJV.

Take the bogus "NOT" out and you have the precise meaning of the verse.

[Eric B]

But it is not "FOR celebrating"; it is "IN RESPECT OF celebrating". Changing that to "for" is just as bad as adding "not".
So it's that first "no" that sets the whole statement to a negative.