The Bible is more a record of those who "know", than those who "believe."

[bbyrd009]

No, not at all, and I will clarify. You are correct, as is bbyrd, to say that belief and knowing are both part of our walk, which most certainly requires faith for the long game. But what I am referring to is, that when Paul was met by the Lord on the road to Damascus he did not experience faith or belief, but "knew" that what others may only "believe", he could "know" for certain - not by faith, but by the intervention of God. I "know" this, not only because it makes perfect sense, but that is my experience also.

meaning that that was Paul's experience also, of course.

My point is, that those who have not had such an experience or may be of little faith, would have the opportunity to hear the witness of those who have, in order to have greater confidence in the otherwise unseen reality of God. It should be common knowledge among believers that even if they must rely on faith alone, there are many who have seen and heard from the Lord [personally] and that our witness confirms their belief.

meaning their witness, the ones who actually heard Paul, though, i'm sure.

 

[bbyrd009]

(um wth is the point of that lol, i have no idea...oh, for you it's optional)

 

[bbyrd009]

I would say that it is true of anyone of us, that at any point in our lives, we only know what we know by what has been established up to that point...by the personal revelation of God - in his timing.

Indeed, Paul is addressing knowledge as apposed to would-be knowledge, in the above passage. In that context, he speaks to those who were hearing the greatest news of all time, who thought they already "knew" stuff...and they did. But, I believe what Paul was saying (in other words), was, "Look - you ain't heard nothing yet! Get over yourselves, and listen up." or: "There are those who have told you in times past that they "know" - but they don't know jack (Jesus), if they don't now share in telling you the same gospel of Christ which I now tell you."

which he got in a Revelation on the Road to Damascus, yes.

 

[bbyrd009]

something something 3rd Witness oh and i am the witness.

Yeah, that may be its own topic, but you are correct when it comes to those looking on. It doesn't look very convincing.

I also think you nailed it when you say everyone thinks they are right. I think that is the root of the problem, and yet it is mostly misunderstood. If understood and presented correctly, our diversity should not be considered any discredit to Christianity, but rather to our credit. Indeed we are different - just as the parts of one body are different and do differently having one Head and mind. It's okay to be different. It's not okay to have your own head or mind. And we should be proud to say it is even good that we are different, that we all have our own unique part in the greater plan of God. It should be taught that way.

"trust that God delights in your unique fruit" ya

but it is faith in the sanctity of your own opinion that reveals who you really think God is

 

[ScottA]

but it is faith in the sanctity of your own opinion that reveals who you really think God is

Perhaps for some, but my point has been to show that in addition to the many people who have faith but have not seen, there are also those who have seen and faith and even belief are not really the correct term...because they "know." And it should be reassuring to those of faith just to know that there are those who know of God first hand.

 

[Stranger]

ScottA

Every believer knows God first hand.

Stranger

 

[ScottA]

ScottA

Every believer knows God first hand.

Stranger

I could tell you that is not true, but since you seem to have your own way of defining things... Explain, then, the difference between the two different peoples of whom Christ is speaking in this passage:

John 20:29
Jesus said to him, “Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed.”

...I am saying there is indeed a difference...and you seem to be saying there is not. I agree with Christ. Explain why you disagree.

 

[Stranger]

ScotA

Every believer knows God first hand. Every believer, because he believes, has the Spirit of God in him. And every believer's spirit is born again. Thus, every believer knows God first hand. Not second hand. Not through you.

Actually, you are placing yourself in the place of Thomas. Thomas would not believe unless he knew. He required 'knowing' before believing. Just like you. Christ says, blessed are those who believe and have not seen. But, you're a knower, remember? You don't believe, you know.

There is a difference alright. I agree with Christ also.

Stranger

 

[ScottA]

ScotA

Every believer knows God first hand. Every believer, because he believes, has the Spirit of God in him. And every believer's spirit is born again. Thus, every believer knows God first hand. Not second hand. Not through you.

Actually, you are placing yourself in the place of Thomas. Thomas would not believe unless he knew. He required 'knowing' before believing. Just like you. Christ says, blessed are those who believe and have not seen. But, you're a knower, remember? You don't believe, you know.

There is a difference alright. I agree with Christ also.

Stranger

Wrong again. The fact that I understand this topic, does not mean this is about me. This has to do with the differences pointed out by Jesus in John 20:29, between those who have seen and those who have not seen.

This is really simple...it's the difference between "thinking" and "knowing." Look up the definitions if you need to. While you are at it, look up the definitions of "believe" and "know."

And then...if you would like to continue in the discussion, start by explaining the differences in John 20:29 ...so I know we understand one another.

 

[Stranger]

ScottA

I believe we understand each other quite well.

Every believer knows God first hand. That is why they believe. Every believer sees. God has opened the eyes of every believer. Yet you say, 'wrong'.

Oh? Before you said the difference was between 'knowing' and 'believing'. Now it is 'thinking' and 'knowing'. Why the change?

I already explained to you (John 20:29). You place yourself in Thomas shoes. Needing to know before he believes. But, those who have not seen and have believed are the blessed.

Stranger

 

[ScottA]

Every believer knows God first hand. That is why they believe. Every believer sees. God has opened the eyes of every believer. Yet you say, 'wrong'.

Oh? Before you said the difference was between 'knowing' and 'believing'. Now it is 'thinking' and 'knowing'. Why the change?

I already explained to you (John 20:29). You place yourself in Thomas shoes. Needing to know before he believes. But, those who have not seen and have believed are the blessed.

Stranger

You contradict yourself...and Christ. You're done.

 

[Stranger]

You contradict yourself...and Christ. You're done.

No contradiction. You're the one that was using Thomas as the illustration of seeing and not seeing as representing believers who only believe and those who know, not me.

With Thomas it was doubt because he had not physically seen compared to those who will believe who won't physically see Christ and His wounds but will believe. No one today will physically see Jesus as He is at the right hand of the Father. Thus those who have not physically seen but believe, meaning they see with their spirit, are the blessed. God has opened their eyes to it.

In other words, those who have not seen but see is no contradiction. And every believer sees because he has had his eyes opened by God to see.

Stranger

 

[bbyrd009]

imo the problem with that is that you have a concept of "believer" that perhaps someone else might not agree with, and vice versa. And while i am not in the position of judging, say, Jim Jones, i am skeptical that his eyes were opened, yet he would certainly claim to have been a "believer."

 

[bbyrd009]

this is pretty much the same rift that divided the Anabaptists, i think. The Book suggests Blessed Assurance, yet ultimately only the "hope" of salvation, which is to say that it is likely completely improper to consider oneself "saved" right now, at least completely and at every moment, since this would depend upon whether you are manifesting Grace or not, and you may not be.

Salvation is reduced to an on/off switch that gets thrown after one ticks off enough boxes on their religious worksheet iow, and at a certain point one i guess gets enough "faith" that they just start claiming to know stuff, to know God, or to know what God thinks, or at the very least know what constitutes a "saved" person, at least enough to commend them to someone else as being "saved."

So imo what you have here is a logic trap that will engender pride if one seeks pride. At the least the effect of Tares should be considered here, which would have an affect on this "knowing," it seems to me. Know, but be willing to question your premises iow. Know, but see that you cannot know, looking through a mirror, darkly. Keep a sense of not knowing also, lest you begin insisting upon things that may have been true then, but are not true now.

Because it seems that as soon as you demand "knowing" something, you have to in a sense put flesh on it, embody it in a concrete meme, the Thing You Know, that is defined like this and like that, and that does not have one of those, etc; and then you maybe even write down what you know, that others should maybe take to be inviolable, this definition of something you all know together, now. That will not always be true.

 

[ScottA]

No contradiction. You're the one that was using Thomas as the illustration of seeing and not seeing as representing believers who only believe and those who know, not me.

With Thomas it was doubt because he had not physically seen compared to those who will believe who won't physically see Christ and His wounds but will believe. No one today will physically see Jesus as He is at the right hand of the Father. Thus those who have not physically seen but believe, meaning they see with their spirit, are the blessed. God has opened their eyes to it.

In other words, those who have not seen but see is no contradiction. And every believer sees because he has had his eyes opened by God to see.

Stranger

If you want to start your own topic about he not seeing is actually seeing...or wrong is actually right, or down is actually up, or darkness is actually light - go for it. But that is not what this topic is about - it is about the fact that they are different, and that there are in fact those who have seen and know for certain.

 

[ScottA]

this is pretty much the same rift that divided the Anabaptists, i think. The Book suggests Blessed Assurance, yet ultimately only the "hope" of salvation, which is to say that it is likely completely improper to consider oneself "saved" right now, at least completely and at every moment, since this would depend upon whether you are manifesting Grace or not, and you may not be.

Salvation is reduced to an on/off switch that gets thrown after one ticks off enough boxes on their religious worksheet iow, and at a certain point one i guess gets enough "faith" that they just start claiming to know stuff, to know God, or to know what God thinks, or at the very least know what constitutes a "saved" person, at least enough to commend them to someone else as being "saved."

So imo what you have here is a logic trap that will engender pride if one seeks pride. At the least the effect of Tares should be considered here, which would have an affect on this "knowing," it seems to me. Know, but be willing to question your premises iow. Know, but see that you cannot know, looking through a mirror, darkly. Keep a sense of not knowing also, lest you begin insisting upon things that may have been true then, but are not true now.

Because it seems that as soon as you demand "knowing" something, you have to in a sense put flesh on it, embody it in a concrete meme, the Thing You Know, that is defined like this and like that, and that does not have one of those, etc; and then you maybe even write down what you know, that others should maybe take to be inviolable, this definition of something you all know together, now. That will not always be true.

Good points. The problem here, is those who "believe" themselves into a state of "thinking" they "know", and not considering that it may be different for different people, that some are shown and some must rely on faith alone. Both are blessed, but it is God who decides who has what experience. Does that make us unequal? No, but it does mean that God's timing can be, and is, different for different people. And if that were not true, there would be no Israel, no prophets of old, no twelve apostles, no apostle Paul...but all would come to full revelation together. But that is not biblical, but rather, we all come "in our own order."

The point of this topic is to point that out, to send a message of assurance to those who are of little faith, that God is working on many fronts and their time will come - that their faith is not in vain, as there is proof of that very thing among the body as a witness to all.

 

[Stranger]

If you want to start your own topic about he not seeing is actually seeing...or wrong is actually right, or down is actually up, or darkness is actually light - go for it. But that is not what this topic is about - it is about the fact that they are different, and that there are in fact those who have seen and know for certain.

Well, you're the one who kept pushing (John 20:29). Remember. "...because thou hast seen me....blessed are they that have not seen..."

Yes I know there are those who have seen and know. They are called believers. They have been born-again. They have had a special relationship experience with God.

There are those who are immature yet in the faith. There are those that are mature in the faith. There are those that are weak in the faith. There are those that are strong in the faith. But there are none who know as opposed to those who exercise faith.

(1John2:20) "But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things." (1John 2:27) "But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him."

See, once one believes he has the Spirit of God and knows. He doesn't need a special group of 'knowers' to tell him he doesn't know and they do. He will progress in his faith and grow in his faith, but he already knows because he exercised faith.

I don't really think you know what faith is.

Stranger

 

[ScottA]

Yes I know there are those who have seen and know. They are called believers. They have been born-again. They have had a special relationship experience with God.

That is an erroneous statement. Knowing and believing are two different things. Look it up.

There are those who are immature yet in the faith. There are those that are mature in the faith. There are those that are weak in the faith. There are those that are strong in the faith. But there are none who know as opposed to those who exercise faith.

(1John2:20) "But ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things." (1John 2:27) "But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him."

This too is an erroneous statement and not biblical. If that were true there would be no Israel, no prophets of old, no twelve apostles, no apostle Paul...but all would come to full revelation together. But that is not the way it occurs, but rather, we all come "in our own order."

See, once one believes he has the Spirit of God and knows. He doesn't need a special group of 'knowers' to tell him he doesn't know and they do. He will progress in his faith and grow in his faith, but he already knows because he exercised faith.

There you go again making up your own definition of different words...that are different for a reason. Until you come to terms with your misconception of these differences, your comments are of no value to this discussion. The reality that you cannot seem to grasp, is that seeing is seeing, and not seeing is not seeing. If one says he has seen and has not seen, he is a liar. And these two different realities are appointed differently - by God.

I don't really think you know what faith is.

I do, but you obviously are not qualified to tell me.

 

[Stranger]

That is an erroneous statement. Knowing and believing are two different things. Look it up.

This too is an erroneous statement and not biblical. If that were true there would be no Israel, no prophets of old, no twelve apostles, no apostle Paul...but all would come to full revelation together. But that is not the way it occurs, but rather, we all come "in our own order."

There you go again making up your own definition of different words...that are different for a reason. Until you come to terms with your misconception of these differences, your comments are of no value to this discussion. The reality that you cannot seem to grasp, is that seeing is seeing, and not seeing is not seeing. If one says he has seen and has not seen, he is a liar. And these two different realities are appointed differently - by God.
I do, but you obviously are not qualified to tell me.

As I said, believing and knowing work together with every believer. Those to whom God uses as prophets, or apostles, were not used because they were knowers. These do not contrast 'believers and knowers'. This is God revealing what He wants to He wants to the believers He wants. They are believers.

How can I make it up when I just showed you in (1John 2:20, 27) that all believers know. Do you agree with (1 John 2:20,27). So how can I make it up.

What you refuse to grasp is that the believer sees. Else he would never believe. The believer knows, because he sees.

Stranger

 

[ScottA]

As I said, believing and knowing work together with every believer. Those to whom God uses as prophets, or apostles, were not used because they were knowers. These do not contrast 'believers and knowers'. This is God revealing what He wants to He wants to the believers He wants. They are believers.

No... You are combining those whom God has separated for a time, clearly identifying them as different. You cannot redefine what God has defined...nor can you redefine the definition of each even by use of common language. You are not being honest.

How can I make it up when I just showed you in (1John 2:20, 27) that all believers know. Do you agree with (1 John 2:20,27). So how can I make it up.

It does not say that "believers" "know", but rather that those who have "received" "anointing" "know." Perhaps you would do better to define the difference between one who "believes" that has not received the Holy Spirit, and one who has received the Holy Spirit - neither of whom have "seen."

What you refuse to grasp is that the believer sees. Else he would never believe. The believer knows, because he sees.

So you say...which is not true in the way that I have presented it to you. When Paul "saw" a light for heaven shine around him and "heard" the voice of Christ, he did indeed see and hear. But others, filled with the Holy Spirit or not, whom did believe him...did NOT see or hear as Paul had. This is just one example - but you cannot deny it...and yet seem to insist upon doing so, against the word of God. You too kick against the goads.