No Amount of Historical Evidence Will Convince an Evangelical that the Voice in his Head is Not Jesus

Still Small Voice | Precious Fool

No amount of evidence against the historicity of the biblical stories of Creation, the World Wide Flood, the Exodus, the Forty Years in the Sinai, the Conquest of Canaan, or the Great Empire and Temple of Solomon will convince a “true” believer that his faith is false—because his loving Savior, Jesus, the resurrected Christ, communicates with him in a still, small voice each and every day.

How do you convince an evangelical Christian that the voice he hears in his head (not his heart) is none other than…himself?

Is it okay to talk to yourself in public? - Quora






End of post.

9 thoughts on “No Amount of Historical Evidence Will Convince an Evangelical that the Voice in his Head is Not Jesus

  1. Off topic here, but I just found out Hector Avalos passed away a few weeks ago. What a shame, much too young. I have owned his book “The End of Biblical Studies” since it came out, and have been planning to buy his book “The Bad Jesus.”


  2. In my own deconversion from Christianity, it was putting evidence and reason (even if I used them incorrectly, as Christians would assert), above emotion and sentimentality that brought me to the point of saying that what I thought was a relationship with Jesus and feeling God’s presence was in fact just a product of my own mind.

    Contrast this with WLC, who has said things to the effect that no matter how much or good the evidence against his core beliefs may be, or what new evidence may be discovered in the future, his internal knowledge of God through the “ self authenticating witness of the holy spirit” would override the external world’s evidence.


  3. I don’t think the vast majority of evangelical Christians can be convinced that voice in their head is them. That’s painting with a broad brush, but I think it’s accurate. When I was a full on EC, I don’t think anyone could have convinced me. I was drinking the kool aid by the barrel and wouldn’t listen to such faith poisoning nonsense. Ha! It wasn’t until I started seeing the BS and asking questions and digging for myself that I got to where I could hear stuff like that. With that being said, I guess it depends on where the EC is in their beliefs. If they’ve questioned enough, maybe they could be convinced?

    Liked by 2 people

      1. I laugh to myself when I see on the news the occasional story about how the govt. (I’m in Canada, don’t know if the US is the same) should deal with Islamic extremists returning from the middle east after fighting for ISIS or whoever. Since it’s apparently the case that there are not applicable laws to prosecute them for what they did on the other side of the world, It’s suggested that they be de radicalized or de programed upon return. But it’s never laid out exactly how that process would work, and more importantly just how successful any previous attempts have been. If it were that easy to de radicalize nut jobs then there would be no christian right, and no ISIS, and Gary wouldn’t have to ask the question.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s