Discussion of the first article of the "affirmations" rest of the "supporting verses"

Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by agedman, Jun 8, 2012.

  1. agedman

    agedman
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    4,258
    Likes Received:
    187
    The first statement of the document:
    "We affirm that the Gospel is the good news that God has made a way of salvation through the life, death, and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ for any person. This is in keeping with God’s desire for every person to be saved.

    We deny that only a select few are capable of responding to the Gospel while the rest are predestined to an eternity in hell."​

    Below are the rest of the passages this part of the affirmation uses as support, and when necessary a sentence or two to show how support is not only weak, but nonexistent.

    Genesis 3:15; And I will put enmity between thee and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed; it shall bruise thy head, and thou shall bruise his heel.
    Luke 19.10; For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.​
    These are Scriptures that are accepted as supportive of the first sentence, but are not applicable to the rest of the statement of affirmation or of denial.

    Luke 24:45-49; 45 Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,
    46 And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:
    47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
    48 And ye are witnesses of these things.
    49 And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.​
    This selection of passages show that it must be by the direct intervention of God that “open(s) their understanding,” and that humankind has no self ability or volition in the matter. It supports what the affirmation would deny.

    John 1:1-18, 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
    2 The same was in the beginning with God.
    3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
    4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
    5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
    6 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John.
    7 The same came for a witness, to bear witness of the Light, that all men through him might believe.
    8 He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light.
    9 That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.
    10 He was in the world, and the world was made by him, and the world knew him not.
    11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.
    12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
    13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.
    14 And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.
    15 John bare witness of him, and cried, saying, This was he of whom I spake, He that cometh after me is preferred before me: for he was before me.
    16 And of his fulness have all we received, and grace for grace.
    17 For the law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.
    18 No man hath seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, he hath declared him.​
    This passage does not support of the affirmation for the Scriptures posted show that the denial is actually what is supported.
    Reader, note verse 13. It directly disproves what the affirmations seek to prove; what the affirmations would deny verse 13 shows the validity.


    John 3:16; For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believes in him should not perish but have everlasting life.

    Romans 1:1-6; 1 Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God,
    2 (Which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,)
    3 Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;
    4 And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:
    5 By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name:
    6 Among whom are ye also the called of Jesus Christ:

    Romans 5:8; But God commendeth his love toward us, in that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

    Romans 8:34; Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.
    35 Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?​
    As even the casual reader might discern, none of the above passages support the assertion of the affirmation, rather support what the affirmation denies.


    2 Corinthians 5:17-21; 17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
    18 And all things are of God, who hath reconciled us to himself by Jesus Christ, and hath given to us the ministry of reconciliation;
    19 To wit, that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation.
    20 Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us: we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God.
    21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.​

    Verse 17 states the “IF” of the “THEN” statements. Not a single verse is applicable to the support of the affirmation, but does support what the affirmation would deny.

    Galatians 4:4-7; 4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,
    5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.
    6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.
    7 Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.​
    Are ALL humankind redeemed?
    This portion of Scriptures do not support the affirmation, but does support what the affirmation would deny.


    Colossians 1:21-23; 21 And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled
    22 In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight:
    23 If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;

    Hebrews 1:1-3; 1 God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
    2 Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
    3 Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;

    Hebrews 4:14-16; 14 Seeing then that we have a great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession.
    15 For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin.
    16 Let us therefore come boldly unto the throne of grace, that we may obtain mercy, and find grace to help in time of need.
    WHO did the work of reconciliation?
    Are all reconciled?

    WHO purged the sins?
    Are all sins purged for all?

    None of these verses has supported the first statements of the affirmation.

    It has been shown in these threads that the statement of the affirmation relies upon Scriptures taken out of context, manipulated to apply to an unintended audience and misappropriated; moreover it has been shown that what the affirmation seeks for support actually supports what the affirmation denies.

    The affirmation stands in direct conflict with the Scriptural authority that it puffs itself up to deem supportive.
     
  2. mandym

    mandym
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,991
    Likes Received:
    0
    No it doesn't. It shows that this is what they needed in this instance. It says nothing about anything else beyond this occasion.

    You have made a claim here but have not proven your point.


    Ok well I am not going to continue to chase after claims made by you without support. Pejorative claims at that.
     
  3. Tom Butler

    Tom Butler
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2005
    Messages:
    9,031
    Likes Received:
    0
    Here is an example of what agedman was talking about
    II Corinthians 5:19
    Here are the choices when interpreting this verse:
    1. World means all without exception
    2. World doesn't mean all without exception

    1. If all without exception, then all without exception have their trespasses NOT imputed to them. They are reconciled. This, of course is universalism
    2. If world means people from all nations, tongues, etc., then those whom God has reconciled will not have their trespasses imputed to them. Paul says elsewhere, of course, that what is imputed to those of us who have been reconciled is the righteousness of Christ.
     
  4. mandym

    mandym
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,991
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well first there is nothing in his post even remotely close to this issue. Second I have no issue with what you have posted here and I am not sure of what your point is.
     
  5. agedman

    agedman
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    4,258
    Likes Received:
    187
    Can you show man ANY Scripture that God opened the eyes of all humankind?

    So by pointing out "Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God" in context was not proof of the point?

    Can you show me how being born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God, supports the first article of the affirmations rather than supporting the denial?


    You like that word, "pejorative" don't you.

    I suppose you read into what I posted with an assumed bias and therefore draw the conclusions you do, but "pejorative claims" assumed are not in fact pejorative.

    I stated what I considered the truth. "As even the casual reader might discern, none of the above passages support the assertion of the affirmation, rather support what the affirmation denies."


    Perhaps, you will supply just how these Scriptures are used to support the articles rather than claim I make unsupported statements of the level of pejorative. Or, perhaps they are pejorative to you, because you don't like the conclusion that was drawn.

    If the Scriptures do not support the article then by default they must then support the denial. I have shown they don't support the desires of the authors of the affirmation, but they do support the denial of the affirmation.
     
  6. mandym

    mandym
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,991
    Likes Received:
    0
    OK I pulled this out of you entire post because it is a clear example of what I have been pointing out thus far. You quote scripture, make a claim with no support. I challenge your lack of support and then you ask for support from me when you still have not given any anywhere.

    Quoting scripture followed by a claim and no explanation of support does not make a good argument. Nor does it develop a truth. Start backing up your own claims with explanation and not just quoting scripture. Then we have something to debate and discuss. This is why I usually avoid debating Calvinists. Most of you cannot support your own arguments so you require more support from those who question your arguments than you do your selves.
     
    #6 mandym, Jun 8, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 8, 2012
  7. agedman

    agedman
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    4,258
    Likes Received:
    187
    My point in the threads was to use the Scriptures the authors of the affirmation used, placing them in context and appropriate application seeing if they actually supported the view of the affirmation.

    I am not obligated to gather extraneous Scriptures.

    I lifted from the thread a specific verse to answer your post, and apparently you reject the answer by desiring me to pull in other verses that are not in question. I take this as a form of "entrapment" in an attempt to place the threads into some soteriological scheme that was never assumed by me.

    Perhaps you didn't recognize that that verse is part of the context of the passage the authors of the affirmation use to support their view. I merely have shown that the use is faulty and and actually supports the denial side of their affirmation.
     
  8. mandym

    mandym
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,991
    Likes Received:
    0

    You have shown no such thing. You cannot show anything by simply posting a scripture and making a claim with no support. It is just not possible.
     
  9. mandym

    mandym
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,991
    Likes Received:
    0
    This does not prove anything it is a claim with no support. and it barely even makes a claim.
     
  10. mandym

    mandym
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,991
    Likes Received:
    0
    So now I have shown:

    1. You have not proven anything

    2. Your arguments are circular

    3. Your arguments are strawmen

    4. You fail to provide any basis or support for your weak claims.
     
  11. agedman

    agedman
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    4,258
    Likes Received:
    187
    So you think I posted a untruthful statement?

    I don't understand your contention?

    Perhaps you are attempting to mold my statements into a view of your own making and then you can discredit them.

    By showing that the verses DID support the first sentence (as all views would also state) I was actually acknowledging the verses, but also showing the reader the limited application.

    Is there a problem with doing this?

    Perhaps because I didn't express it exactly that way, but assumed that the readers would compose correctly using the brief note(s) I offered, I actually missed the reading comprehension level of the typical BB member.
     
  12. mandym

    mandym
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,991
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have no idea how you pulled that out of that quote.

    Disappointing

    I have done nothing except point out that making a claim without support proves nothing.

    You have shown nothing. I fail to understand why this is hard for you to understand. It is quite simple.

    Again, you posted scripture, then you posted a sentence making a claim. Then you offered not break down or explanation nor and supportive information. Therefore your claim is weak at best.


    Anyway I get the feeling you are just talking past me. I don't enjoy circular arguments like you engage in so I will bow out from here. God Bless
     
    #12 mandym, Jun 8, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 8, 2012
  13. agedman

    agedman
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    4,258
    Likes Received:
    187
    If that list is what you view as accurate, then you haven't tracked the OP nor the discussions.

    Is not your own bias of preconceptions about genesis of the OP actually so skewed your thinking that you are finding fault were there is none?

    In your desire to bring a conclusion of support to the affirmation article, you have actually been the one who has neglected All Scriptures.

    I don't recall you posting even one verse to refute the statements of the thread. But then, that may not be possible considering the lack of supportive Scriptures the authors used.
     
  14. mandym

    mandym
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,991
    Likes Received:
    0
    The only thing I have tried to address, intentionally, is the fact that your claim proves nothing because your provided no support for it. If we could ever get tpast that I would love to move on. But what you are doing is the equivalent of writing a research paper, and ending it with the thesis statement.

    What you are doing is actually weird.
     
  15. agedman

    agedman
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    4,258
    Likes Received:
    187
    No more weird than the authors of the affirmation who make statements of what they believe and deny and then list a series of Scriptures in the hope that no one will actually investigate what they propose as Scriptural support.

    All I have done is show that the list of Scriptures may or may not (usually not) support their desired belief, but actually can be used to support the denial side and most of the time with more Biblical authority.

    Mandym, I know all about producing writing products of all levels of educational quality.

    The threads were not doctoral dissertations, nor were they meant to be the finished product. Each OP was established in the light of allowing the BB members to investigate and post what they view as supportive or not.
     
  16. mandym

    mandym
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2011
    Messages:
    4,991
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am sorry to disagree but you made a statement in the beginning that does not line up with this:

    "I thought I would begin by showing how one of their proofs was taken completely out of rational application."

    This does not indicate allowing anyone to come to their own conclusion. This was a statement made as beyond doubt.
     
  17. agedman

    agedman
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2011
    Messages:
    4,258
    Likes Received:
    187
    And how is that a problem?

    I am unsure your motive for questioning how I wrote the OP.

    If you are trying to justify the frailty of the affirmations, such questioning does nothing to aid the view of the authors.

    If you are attempting to demean and derail by shifting the emphasis, that isn't working very well, either.

    If you want to rework the OP, then the BB is open for you to start your own thread and show us all how to do it.

    If you think that I will become angry, and start hurtful remarks and labeling in this thread, that isn't going to happen.

    If you think that I was unfair and did not use the Scriptures appropriately, then use Scriptures to bring correction.

    If you think the verses that were placed at the end of the first article of the affirmations were accurate, then show were I have made error.

    As I have stated before, I am not ashamed that I cannot be corrected. Astric and Icon both have posted with verses that help to clarify the matter.
    Where is your work?

    There are four threads on the verses of the affirmation's first article.

    There is plenty of work that needs done in ferreting out the truths of the Scriptures the author's used for support.

    I don't care that the OP of the threads don't meet your approval.

    I really don't need and will not make any attempts to justify my work to you.

    If you have a statement or question using specific Scriptures that is another matter.
     

Share This Page

Loading...