In some previous posts I have asked certain questions that still haven't been answered. So without going back to those threads and possibly de-railing them I thought it best to make a new topic. Please bear with me.
I have asked certain ones to prove the existence of God or Christ without referencing any Biblical writings or characters. I was promptly directed to certain Biblical characters who didn't have a Bible but learned through the holy spirit about Christ.
Apparently they didn't understand the part about not referencing the Bible nor anything contained in it (which would include the Holy Spirit as defined in the Bible).
It would seem to me that if YHWH and Jesus (or a variation of name of the Son of God in the Bible) were proveable then there would be many references outside of the Bible.
This is important because it has been stated ad nauseum that the Bible isn't a reliable source of information about God (as many lies have been told) and therefore shouldn't be used.
So if a person took this train of thought and ran with it to it's logical conclusion it would seem impossible to know anything about God or his Son without the Bible.
What is reliable in the Bible and what is not? How are we to know the difference?
The Son coming to Earth and giving his life as a ransom has been shown as "proof" of his existence, yet this is a direct reference to the Bible as it contains the narrative of the events being discussed. What texts exist that speak of this that aren't part of the Bible? I would omit texts written by Christians as they are logically gonna be referencing the Bible in their arguements.
Also the arguement that people wouldn't have put their lives on the line for a lie can also be disproven as many JW's have done the same by refusing blood transfusions or various other religions have sacrificed their children to what turned out to be false gods.
One might look at the world around us and say "there's proof of God." I would counter with "which god?" Just because the Bible gives a creation account doesn't mean it's true, especially when science has debunked a lot of the Genesis account and not to mention the comments about the Bible being unreliable.
If it's unreliable, then stop referencing it in your talking points. Either it's a valid source or it's not. You can't have it both ways.
Also how do you know that the "voice in your head" is actually that of Christ? It could seemingly be something else.
Where is the definite proof that it is Christ?
Simple belief isn't enough. I could believe the "voice in my head" is the Tooth Fairy or more plausible my own subconscious. This seems to be the case when confronted with difficult questions about the origin of the universe, how a scripture should be interpreted or pretty much any other question. Ask the "voice in your head" if E=MC2 is really correct and if it's not, then give the mathematical formulae for what is really truth. Seems simple enough.
I would reason that not receiving an answer would be more proof that you're simply talking to yourself and not the Son. Why would the Son refuse to answer a question that would only exalt his name and prove his existence to people who weren't present in Bible times.
Also something was mentioned in another post about people always asking for a sign and this was an indication of their wickedness. Really? Yet how many of us have asked the GB for proof that they are guided by the Holy Spirit? How many of us have left that faith because we discerned that it wasn't being led by God at all? Yet to now question another person(s) who claim to reveal things to us (that they received from the Son through the voice in their head) is somehow wrong..
I know that some will think I am being mean or disrespectful. I'm not really. I'm simply asking questions that many of us often hide from (myself included). If it's real then it can stand up to questioning.