#STRask - How Do These Passages Fit with Your View on How God Speaks?

Episode Date: September 15, 2025

Questions about why, if it’s impossible to miss God’s voice, the disciples incorrectly told Paul “through the Spirit” not to go to Jerusalem, people mistook God’s voice for thunder, the Bible says God speaks in riddles, Daniel had to ask for an interpretation, and more.   If it’s impossible to miss God’s voice, why did the disciples incorrectly tell Paul “through the Spirit” not to go to Jerusalem in Acts 21:4–14? Why did people mistake God’s audible voice for thunder in John 12:28–30? Numbers 12:6–8 says that God speaks to prophets in dreams, visions, and riddles, so clarity is the exception here. Even Daniel and Zechariah had to ask for interpretations (Dan. 7:15–16; Zech. 4:2–4), and James 4:2 says we do not have because we do not ask. Scripture shows examples like Samuel, Revelation 3:20, and Jesus’ “ears to hear” sayings where God speaks clearly yet not all recognize it, suggesting that our attentiveness is needed. How do passages like these fit in with your view on how God speaks to believers today?

Welcome. You are listening to Greg Kokel and Amy Hall on the hashtag STRSk podcast. And today we're actually continuing from a previous episode. So if you missed the last episode, I encourage you to go back and listen to that one first because we've laid a lot of groundwork for what we're talking about here. And by the way, we're spending time in this because I think it's a very, very important issue for practical Christian living. And the topic is whether or not we have to learn to hear the voice of God. So there was a quote from Greg that was posted that says, don't worry about learning to hear the voice of God. If God wants to say something to you, it will be impossible to miss it. Yeah, so you don't have to learn. Right. Right. And so we have, does God Whisper articles on our website? We have one called, I forgot it last time. When God speaks. When God speaks. That's a solid ground. That just came out earlier this year.

Yes. So both of those, you can get kind of a solid understanding of where Greg's coming from. But Sam actually offered a few challenges on X. And so we're going through those. And we've come to this one now, Greg. And he asks, why did the disciples? incorrectly tell Paul to not go to Jerusalem through the Spirit in Acts 21, 4 and 14. Right, and through the Spirit is in quotations, because that's in the text. So, in other words, Did they get it wrong? I guess. Yeah, did they get it wrong or whatever? So we're going to go and read that text. Actually, there's a lot there. There are two occasions starting in Chapter 21. I'm sorry to interrupt you, but I just want to say this was the second half of a sentence. So when he started, he said, if it's impossible to miss God's voice, and then he asked the question about Job. Now he's saying, if it's impossible to miss God's voice, why did the disciples incorrectly

tell Paul? Yes. So they must have missed it in some way. Okay. So I'm going to, you have Paul saying goodbye to the Ephesian elders, and then there's one instance there. That's the verse four. I'll read in a moment. And then you have him sailing to Cesarea, and he engages other believers, who also give a similar kind of message. So we've got, in a sense, a parallel message from two different groups of Christians to Paul about what awaits him in Jerusalem. So here we have the Ephesian elders in verse four. After looking up the disciples, we stayed there seven days.

Oh, I'm sorry, this is after the Ephesian. Now this is in tire. Okay. So now he's on his way home, said goodbye to the Ephesian elders in Tyre. He looks up the disciples, verse four. We stayed there seven days, and they kept telling Paul through the spirit. So there's our phrase, not to set foot in Jerusalem. Now, what's ambiguous about this verse is whether the spirit is saying Paul should not set foot in Jerusalem, or whether the spirit told them something. that prompted them to tell Paul not to set foot in Jerusalem, okay, as a personal concern. So that's certainly two possibilities, all right?

It does seem on the face of it, just in that verse, that Paul's told not to go, but he's on his way. So just an observation here. The concern here is whether or not God speaks clearly. if God wants to communicate something, he doesn't try, he accomplishes it. Well, in this case, he accomplishes it. The question is whether Paul obeyed it or not, or maybe he just ignored their, the Holy Spirit didn't tell him not to go, but it was just warning him about things to come. So the rest that I'm going to offer here really has, does not resolve the, is, how do I want to say this? The rest – verse four makes it clear that the Holy Spirit was clear, all right, but we're not sure

what the people did because we're not sure what was said. The subsequent passages tell us more. So either the disciples there said the wrong thing in light of what the Spirit revealed or said the right thing and Paul disobeyed it, okay, but nevertheless they got the Spirit correct. directly, whatever the detail was. Now, in a little bit, we're going to get more detail. All right. So I'm just saying, I've already demonstrated that this passage is not about God not speaking clearly. He does speak clearly, all right? We're not sure whether the disciples, or rather those who are telling Paul, are applying it properly, or whether Paul's disobeying it.

Okay, so let's keep reading. All right. That was verse four. after looking up the disciples, he stayed their seven days, and they kept telling Paul through the spirit not to set foot in Jerusalem, all right? Then we come to verse 11. Now he's at the next port, Cessaria. And as we were staying there, verse 10, for some days a prophet named Agabus came down from Judea. And coming to us, he took Paul's belt and bound both his own feet and hands and said,

this is what the Holy Spirit says, in this way the Jews at Jerusalem will bind the man who owns this belt and deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles. Oh, okay. Now we've got a very specific statement of what the Holy Spirit is saying, and he's not saying, not go. He's saying this is what's going to happen if you go, all right? Crystal clear, once again. And it does happen, by the way.

And it's exactly what happens. and next verse, when he had heard this, when we had heard this, this is Luke speaking in the first person now, with the others, when we, we as well as the local residents began begging him not to go to Jerusalem. Okay, now we have a clear word from God about what's going to happen, and the people are saying, we don't want that to happen to you. And so now we have a fairly probable characterization of what's happening in verse four. The Holy Spirit says there's going to be trouble from Paul, and the people are saying, And don't go. All right. Verse 12.

I'm sorry. We began begging him not to go up to Jerusalem. Verse 13. Then Paul answered, What are you doing? Weeping and breaking my heart, for I am ready, not only to be bound, but even to die at Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus. And since he would not be persuaded by who? By the Holy Spirit?

No, by them. We feel silent, remarking, the will of the Lord Jesus be done. So when you read the entire series of things that are said in chapter 21, relative to this communication of the Holy Spirit about God's intention or what was going to take place in Jerusalem, which, by the way, the Christians there in Cessaria said, the will of was the will of God, then the apparent contradiction with my point just simply vanishes. And notice they don't say he's disobeying at any point in here. That's right. There's never that hint given here. So that's why I think that is a better interpretation of verse four. Sure, sure.

Okay, what's next here? Okay. Why mistake – do you want me to do one at a time or read the whole – I'll do one at a time. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Why mistake God's audible voice for thunder in John 12, 28 through 30? Okay. I haven't turned to that passage yet. what has happened in John 12?

Something similar happens to the Book of Acts. The people with Paul on the road to Damascus, they see the light, but they don't hear the voice. Or sometimes they hear something, but they don't understand what's being said. So let's just quickly go to John 12. So I'm just trying to go from memory. What's in there? 1228, Father, glorify your name. Then a voice came out of heaven. I have both glorified it, and I shall glorify it again. So the crowd of people who stood by and heard it were saying that it had thundered. Others were saying an angel has spoken to him. Okay. This is very simple to resolve. To whom was God speaking? Jesus. Did Jesus understand what the father had said?

perfectly. Well, the others didn't get all of that. Something was going on. They knew something miraculous was going on, but the message wasn't for them. So it wasn't God was trying to speak to them, and somehow they heard thunder. And I don't even know how they're going to hear thunder in their own head by themselves because they're unskilled at recognizing the voice of God or something like that. In any event, no, what they heard was a noise. But the one for whom the word was intended He got the word clearly, and there it is, all right. And some said, well, an angel spoke to him. So there must have been some sense by the people that something was supernaturally being communicated that was for Jesus, not for them.

Well, I would even say, I mean, we can say a voice thunders. It doesn't say it sounds like thunder. It says it actually thundered, meaning I take that to mean they heard it a booming voice. And it might, it could be the translation I'm using. So that might not be correct. But Jesus does say, this voice has not come for my sake, but for your sakes. So I think there's an expectation that he thought they did understand it. I think what you're saying would go for the passage about Paul where it talks about whether, you know, there's a question about whether or not they understood. Right. Right. That's very interesting. You know, see, I hadn't continued to read in the context, but think it was more. So, so, yeah, good. In the passage where they didn't hear the voice, we have to look at who was intended.

And I think that's a good point. The voice is intended for you. They heard saying that it thundered. Others were saying an angel has spoken to him. There must have been content. Yeah, there's no reason to think they didn't hear the words. Yeah, yeah. In fact, I'm trying to think, no, that wasn't this passage.

But Peter says they heard the voice of God saying, you know, this is my beloved son and whom I am well pleased and that sort of thing. That was a different situation. Well, that might have been the transfiguration. Yeah, I think it might have been. But he refers to that in First Peter. Yeah. That's right. Okay.

So in neither case, though, however you take it, if this is just for Jesus, Jesus heard it. If it was actually words for others and Jesus intimates that, then they heard it too, but it was a thunderous voice. And that's why they say an angel has spoken to him because there was something being spoken that they caught. And I think it's important to reiterate here your point that there's no sense here that they had to learn how to hear it or they should have learned how to hear it. There's no place in the New Testament where they teach you how to hear. If it's not teaching us how to hear the voice of God, that's a big thing to leave out if it's something we need to know. Yeah, certainly according to the emphasis of many of these authors. Okay.

To me, it's almost stunning how frequently this comes up. And the teachings of other people with no biblical justification at all, they are teaching it as a received tradition, which so many people take completely as gospel, so to speak, because everybody says it. So it must be biblical. And then maybe they find a verse, my sheep or my voice, and they think. think that's applying to this circumstance, and that's all they need. But it turns out it's much different than that. Okay, here's the next one. God speaks to prophets and dreams, visions, and riddles, numbers 12, 6 through 8. Here, clarity is the exception. All right. So I'm not sure I'd have to go back to those examples, but when I think about the riddles, the, okay, and here the

the word, all right, here the word clarity is being used equivocally. In other words, there are different senses of clarity, all right. All I'm saying is God doesn't try. When he, when he intends to communicate something, he communicates it. And what is clear is the communication. So that would apply in this case to it is a clear dream. Very particular things happen in the dream. it is a clear vision, and the formation of the riddle is also clear. Now you have to figure out what do these things mean? So Nebuchadnezzar had dreams. They were very clear.

He knew exactly what he saw. He didn't have to learn how to perceive the details of it. He didn't know what the details meant. And so he got Daniel to tell him what the details meant, all right? So the concern about clarity is this is different. a different application of the concept. It's an equivocation. We mean the word clarity in a different sense here than what I meant.

A riddle has to be, you know, the riddles in the book of proverbs. The proverb is clear, what it says, figuring out the riddle, that's a different matter. Okay. All I'm saying is when God communicates something, he doesn't try, he communicates that. He's communicated his word clearly. Do we have to work at understanding it? Sure, that's on our side. But the words are there on the page.

And we have the documents that accurately reflect the originals. There it is. It's clear. It's not muddled. Now, it may not be clear what it means, but that's a separate issue entirely. What we're talking about here is God's specific communication to people, and there he doesn't try. He does what he intends to do. And notice you mentioned Nebuchadnezzar.

having the dream, the dream is clear, even in the case of the interpretation, Daniel doesn't have to learn how to interpret it. He actually prays for a revelation of the interpretation. Right, right. Even the interpretation is communicated in a clear way to him, even though it was communicated separately from the dream. Excellent. And now speaking to Daniel, there were other things that Daniel saw and wrote down that he did not understand. Here is what you're saying. I don't know what this means. Okay. And that's because

God did not intend to have him have full understanding of it, but it was for a later time. And in fact, that's, I think, in one of the places, maybe Daniel 12, where that's actually explicitly stated. And that's true of a lot of prophecies. God revealed things that turned out to be prophecies about Jesus. You know, they had an immediate fulfillment, but then a longer fulfillment. And they didn't realize that, even though they knew what God had said, they didn't realize the full implications of it. That's great. And as characterized by Jesus' conversation with the disciples on the road to Emaeus after the resurrection, you know, he goes back and he shows, and all these things that are clearly stated, the significance in their application to him. Okay, so I think this is the last one from him.

Even Daniel and Zecharii had to ask for interpretations. Well, that's just, that's already subsumed under the point we just made. Right. Because there is a clarity of communication versus a clarity of meaning. I'm talking about the first, not the second, because that's what's in question here. About learning to hear the voice of God, the point is the communication is not clear, unless we gain the skill to decipher it in a certain way. So then he says we should try to avoid the third part of James 4, too, which is you, it looks like you do not have because you do not ask.

All right. So maybe he's saying you don't have the understanding of the message because you don't ask. I think that might be what he's saying here. since they had to ask for interpretations. If that's what James has in mind, that's not my take on that verse, you ask, you have not because you ask not. This is a general principle of prayer. Oh, and sometimes you ask, you don't receive because you ask with no wrong motives, all right?

So he's talking about prayer there in general. He's not talking about ask God for clarity of the revelation. However, even if you want to apply it that way, you're welcome to. But notice that that kind of application is to the second sense of clarity, not the first one. Okay, now we know what God says, but we don't know what it means. So we ask God what it means. Okay, that would be a request for clarity of the second sense, which is not in question with my point. I acknowledge that when God speaks, a lot of times, even though the statement is clear, the meaning is not.

which is why I had a question mark in the margin of that particular passage and lots more passages in my Bible. And I always put them in pencil because maybe sometimes I can figure it out to my satisfaction. Then I erase the question mark. But yeah. So we have a couple minutes left. So those were all the questions from Sam. But we'll close off with a question from Andrew. And he says, I've loved this show for over a decade. But I've always wrestled with your view on how God speaks. Scripture shows examples like Samuel, Revelation 320, and Jesus's ears-to-hear sayings where God speaks clearly, yet not all recognizing, recognize it, suggesting that, well, God can make himself heard. It often depends on our attentiveness. Okay, so let me take

those in reverse. I know we're short in time here. When Jesus says, let those who have ears to hear, let them hear. Now, here's my question. Did the people to whom Jesus, Jesus was speaking, did they hear clearly that statement? Yes. Yeah. And he was referring to statements he made prior to that, which he applied this second statement to, did they hear those statements clearly? Yes.

Yes. This is all about the significance of the clearly revealed statements. And not everyone is going to see the significance or accept the significance, which is why Jesus says, and here is where the word here is used in an equivocal way. It doesn't mean the same thing. Of course they heard. They heard what he said. They didn't get it.

They didn't understand it for a variety of reasons. Their hearts are closed or whatever, and he talks about that in different passages. But of course they heard that. So, again, this passage has no bearing on undermining the point that I'm making that when God communicates, he communicates clearly. He's not trying and failing. He communicates clearly. Now, what we make of the communication is an entirely different matter, and those people who are of a mindset to follow Jesus are going to make sense out of it, and the ones that aren't, they're not going to make sense out of it. Sometimes Jesus had to privately explain the parables, because the parable was clear in its statement.

It wasn't clear in its meaning, and then Jesus had to. follow up. Now, the revelation passage is, behold, I stand at the door and knock. If anyone hears my voice and opens the door, I will come in and step with him or whatever, something to that effect. I'm pausing because it's a little bit surprising to me that someone would invade using that first against the view that I've offered, because this is clearly figurative language. There is no door. He's not talking. And so when he says, here's my voice, not talking about hearing his voice literally. He's inviting them to respond to the chastisement that's just been offered. I don't know which church that is in the book Revelation.

There's seven churches that John addresses in the Revelation, and this is one of the churches where this appeal to return to God is expressed in this figurative way. He's not, in any sense, even largely referring, and again, it seems so obvious to me, referring to people have to learn to discern the voice of God because there he is knocking away. I didn't hear any knocks. Well, if you listen carefully, you'll hear the knock. Well, that's a metaphor. Anyway, so I hope that's enough to dispatch that point. He's talking about an appeal to the church to respond to the chastisement, and the result will be a communion with him.

Fair enough. We used to use that verse all the time in evangelism, and we'd say, Jesus is knocking on the door your heart. Are you going to open the door and let him in and become a Christian? Well, that's also a misapplication of the passage, it seems to me. In that passage, he's talking to Christians or those who think they're Christians, all right, one of the churches. So, okay, now, the first thing, so I'm going backwards, was the Samuel passage. This is wildly misunderstood. So what you have in Samuel is you have the little boy Samuel, to whom God speaks, and he doesn't know it's God.

He wakes up, he goes and he talks to the high priest, Eli, who he's in service of, and Eli says, go back to bed. And this happens like three times. And on the third time, Eli, you know, comes to his senses, the text indicates, he says, go and say, yes, Lord, your servant is listening and there's a conversation, which Eli forces Samuel to repeat, you know, tell me everything it was he told you. Okay. Now, the way this is characterized, and it's so, it's painful for me to say this because there are people that I know and I love and are smart that characterize it this way. here you've got little Samuel who doesn't know how to recognize the voice of God. That's the language he used. And so he has a mentor in Eli who knows how to recognize the voice of God and teaches little Samuel how to recognize how to recognize. And then Samuel enters in to the same conversational relationship with God by recognizing his voice that Eli possesses.

and has taught him how to do. And in light of that, you have authors, I won't even mention their names because I honor these men, but I think this is a ridiculous application of the passage. As you'll see, they say, well, they have developed the idea of the ability to recognize the voice of God, and so they are mentoring other Christians who don't have that ability, just like Eli mentored Samuel. Okay. Now, the only similarity between that characterization of the passage and the passage itself

is Eli, Samuel, and God speaking. That is the only parallel, okay? First, Eli is not used to hearing the voice of God. We know that because the only time we have on record, and by the way, all you have to do is start in chapter 1, verse 1, Samuel, and finish the third chapter. Just read the whole thing. That's what I did. and all of a sudden they realize this is not what's happening, what these people are seeing.

The only time we know that Eli heard from God is when a prophet knocks in his door and pronounces a curse on Eli because his son's Hophony and Phineas are sleeping with the girls in the temple, and Dad is not chastising him. So he's in trouble. He is not a godly man. You know, he was the one that fell over and broke his neck when the ark was taken away and he died ignominiously. So Eli's not a godly man who hears the voice of God, first of all. So what about little Samuel? Samuel's not a godly little boy.

In fact, the text says he did not know the Lord. So it is like a parallel with a Christian who has the spirit but has learned the ability. And the text also says, words from the Lord were rare in those times. So far, nothing's matching up, but everything's going the other direction. Okay, when God speaks to Eli, I'm sorry, to Samuel, does Samuel have any trouble hearing? No, he hears exactly what God's saying, because God's not trying. He just doesn't know it's gone. Why?

Because he's a boy in the temple with another guy who calls him in the middle of night and asks him to come and do stuff for him, and he just hears the voices, so he goes to Eli, three times. And the third time, Eli says, oh, wait a minute, wait a minute, I didn't call you. Wow, what's going on? Okay, say this. speak Lord your servant to see it listening and then after God says all this stuff then Eli gives him the second degree or third degree whatever tell me everything to happen because Eli's not a guy who's hearing from God either notice that Eli did not teach Samuel any skill whatsoever he just said it's not me it's God listen to him and and it took him

a little while to come to that conclusion three shots and then that the at the end of chapter C.3 says, and none of the words of Samuel fell to the ground, in other words, they were all fulfilled, thus he was confirmed as the prophet of Israel. This isn't the kind of standard behavior of Jews in general and therefore to be transferred to Christians in general. This was the launch of the first great prophet of Israel. And, by the way, one of the requirements of a prophet is they never get it wrong. So that point is being verified in the life of Samuel, who never got it wrong. He's a real prophet.

Please, friends, don't you see that there is not the slightest parallel of any kind with what's happening in 1st Samuel 1 through 3 and what these dear brothers and sisters in Christ are describing by application what should be happening in our lives? it's it's it's it's just not there it's just not there and the fact that he he heard an audible voice this goes back to your piece called when god speaks and you talk about this and relate it to this whole situation but i think it's worth saying one more time even though we're way over listen to what second timothy three says starting at verse 16 all scripture is inspired by god and for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training and righteousness, so that the man of God may be

adequate, equipped for every good work. If that's the case, we should find instructions for learning how to hear the voice of God. If that's necessary for us to be adequate for every good work, we should find the instructions here explicitly. And if we don't, then we have to ask ourselves, maybe that's not what we're supposed to be doing. And you're not denying. And I'm not. And I think this is where people get confused. You're not denying that God can never give a vision or never even speak an audible voice. That's not your argument. Your argument is when God speaks, you don't have to try and interpret nudges or hints or... Decipher. It's clear. Decipher any clues. And incidentally, this is actually the point of that piece I put out. Because even though I lay out as a foundational thing, here are the problems with this overall view. The fact is God does intervene with direct revelation, actually 13 times in the book of Acts since Pentecost. And so, well, let's look and see what that looks like.

It turns out that they follow a very, very particular pattern. They are clear, they are not sought for, and they are supernatural. Those are the three characteristics of virtually every single time when we have detail of what took place. Sometimes it says the Holy Spirit was not permitting us to go into Asia, okay? Well, we don't know what's going on there because it's not told. But all the times we have detail, we see the clarity and generally supernatural. It's a vision. It's a dream.

An angel shows up. There are a couple of jail breaks, you know. There's a prophetic word that's offered. And therefore, and it's not, it isn't like people are waiting around for people to, for God to speak so they know what to do. So even the times that God does speak, my point in the article is, biblically, we see them. and I have no reason to think he doesn't do similar things today. But I suspect he's going to follow the same pattern that he did in the Book of Acts because there are good reasons why he worked that way in the Book of Acts, and that's what I expect now.

At least if you think God is speaking to you in a way that is not consistent with that, all I have to say to you is, well, God could do whatever he wants, but what you just described does not have biblical support. And you said it's 13 times in the New Testament or just in Acts? From the Book of Acts from Pentecost, because that's a historical record of God in 30 years. No, it's not often at all. And one of the things I contrasted to, I'm not sure in the article, I think I might, but as all of the numbers of times that people made critical decisions and there's not the slightest intimation that God is giving them special direction. And in some cases, it's clear that God hadn't. The second, first missionary journey, yes. set aside Saul and Barnabas for the tasks that I have for them. Second one, Barnabas and Saul say, hey, let's go back. Okay, let's go back.

Let's take John Mark. No, we're not taking job mark. I'm mad at him. Oh, or that I'm not going with you, blah, blah, blah. So they have their big fight and they split up. But then they go off at two different enterprises. There was no intimation that God had anything to do with that. And he didn't need to have anything to do with that because they had a great commission.

Nothing to do with that in terms of giving them specific instructions. He certainly had something to do with it. No, of course, in the deeper sense, of course, in everything that happened. But my point is, yeah, that they were free to make their decision because they had a broad command, going to all the world to make disciples, baptizing, teaching, et cetera. And so they don't need a special word when they got that one. They already got marching orders. And God intervenes when they're carrying out their basic marching orders when it's the timeout.

Okay, I want you to do this right now. and then God intervenes with something powerful, specific, clear, and it's an interruption. Well, if you're hearing this for the first time, I just encourage you to think about it, to look up these passages yourself. We can still be friends if you disagree. It's okay. But we do. I've had experiences where I've explained this to someone, and she's actually given me a huge hug because it took such a huge amount of pressure off of her because she was trying to make a decision. and waiting to hear some special revelation from God in some way.

And I was trying to explain to her, you don't have to do that. You can look at what God's instructions are. You can use your wisdom. You can get counsel from people. You can do what's right without having these special nudges from God and waiting for those. And trying to translate them, interpret them, you know, decipher them. That's misery-making for so many people. Yes, it was a huge relief for her.

So if this is biblical, then it's something you want to know about and understand. So I encourage you to do that. And Greg, just discussed this a while back on the weekly show. So the episode on August 13th, you responded to some more objections. So if you're interested in hearing more, go to our website. Look up, does God whisper? Look up when God speaks and go to the August 13th show and you'll hear Greg answer some more questions about this. So we've gone way over, but this is the one thing where a lot of our listeners disagree on, so we do get a fair amount of questions about it, so we're happy to discuss this with you. So thank you so much. Send us your question on X with the hashtag STR Ask or go to our website at STR.org. This is Amy Hall and Greg Kogel for Stand to Reason. Thank you.