1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

What Is "Proof Texting"...

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by preacher4truth, Jan 20, 2012.

  1. Martin Marprelate

    Martin Marprelate Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,817
    Likes Received:
    2,106
    Faith:
    Baptist
    I would far rather see a brother cite a proof-text in support of his argument than just give his opinion divorced from any Scriptural support.

    However, the proof of Scripture is not found in 'It is written,' but in 'It is written again.' And my proof-text for that is Matt 3:7. :smilewinkgrin:

    Steve
     
  2. Winman

    Winman Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    2
    A famous example of proof-texting is Psa 51:5

    Psa 51:5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.

    This verse is often pulled out of context to teach that all men are born sinful, when David was speaking only of himself. It is also debated that David's mother had been married to a non Jew before she married Jesse, and this is what David is referring to.

    1 Chr 2:12 And Boaz begat Obed, and Obed begat Jesse,
    13 And Jesse begat his firstborn Eliab, and Abinadab the second, and Shimma the third,
    14 Nethaneel the fourth, Raddai the fifth,
    15 Ozem the sixth, David the seventh:
    16 Whose sisters were Zeruiah, and Abigail. And the sons of Zeruiah; Abishai, and Joab, and Asahel, three.

    Note that David's sisters were Zeruiah and Abigail. These two women are mentioned one other place in scripture.

    2 Sam 17:25 And Absalom made Amasa captain of the host instead of Joab: which Amasa was a man's son, whose name was Ithra an Israelite, that went in to Abigail the daughter of Nahash, sister to Zeruiah Joab's mother.

    Here Abigaial and Zeruiah are mentioned again as the daughters of Nahash. Nahash was the king of the Ammonites.

    1 Sam 12:12 And when ye saw that Nahash the king of the children of Ammon came against you, ye said unto me, Nay; but a king shall reign over us: when the LORD your God was your king.

    This is further supported in that David showed Nahash"s family mercy.

    2 Sam 10:2 Then said David, I will shew kindness unto Hanun the son of Nahash, as his father shewed kindness unto me. And David sent to comfort him by the hand of his servants for his father. And David's servants came into the land of the children of Ammon.

    So, many scholars believe David's mother had been married to Nahash, king of Ammon who bore him Abigail and Zeruiah. David was a half-brother to his sisters and brothers, and many believe this is what David is referring to in Psa 51:5. His mother had been married to a non Jew. For this reason David was scorned by his brothers. It is also notable that Jesse did not present David to the prophet Samuel the first two times Samuel requested to see his sons.

    David was not saying all men are born in sin as many teach, but this verse is pulled out of context to teach that.
     
    #22 Winman, Jan 21, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 21, 2012
  3. David Lamb

    David Lamb Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    2,982
    Likes Received:
    0
    Wouldn't it be more accurate to say something such as: "Proof Texting: using isolated verses of scripture in an effort to disprove positions held to by others"? After all, some people of many different theological persuasions proof-text, and some people of many different theological persuasions don't.
     
  4. Old Union Brother

    Old Union Brother New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    Messages:
    740
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sell said David :applause::applause::applause::applause:
     
  5. preacher4truth

    preacher4truth Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,121
    Likes Received:
    17
    uh...thats false teaching! :laugh: :laugh:
     
  6. preacher4truth

    preacher4truth Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,121
    Likes Received:
    17
    I take it by the several replies that it is difficult to judge when it is incorrect.

    One point is that when a verse is used, and is used against dogmatic truth, i.e. the Deity of Christ, that then would be an obvious example of proof-texting.

    There are others that are not so obvious.

    When we get into other areas concerning the nature of God and man, and we look at dogmatic truths here in Scripture, any verses used to dispell dogma fall under the same verdict of proof-texting as well.

    Using Omniscinece/Omnisapience for an example, that is that God, or as some refer to the "Godhead" (which is really Divine nature if I recall) knows all things at all times and does not learn things as time goes by. Any passage used to attempt to prove this incorrect would fall under the proof-texting fallacy. In other words it is an example of a weak apologetic being used in attempt to dispell dogmatic truth.

    - Peace
     
  7. convicted1

    convicted1 Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2007
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    28
    Is not........:laugh:
     
  8. convicted1

    convicted1 Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2007
    Messages:
    9,012
    Likes Received:
    28
    :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
     
  9. HankD

    HankD Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    May 14, 2001
    Messages:
    26,977
    Likes Received:
    2,536
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Winman, you have inadvertantly added credibility to the O/P with your flawed (IMO) conclusion.


    HankD
     
  10. DaChaser1

    DaChaser1 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2011
    Messages:
    2,324
    Likes Received:
    0

    2 side issues on this good OP!

    One is that we MUST attempt to divorce our preconceived notions that we come to the Bible with , our 'religious gridlock", and let the scriptures themselves prove the doctrines, and change us if need be...

    Also, many time people take a truth and just run it exclusively, withregard for WHOLE word of God!
    example....

    they would citethe OT promises God amde to isreal and cliam it for the Church for making wealth, under covenant of health etc, but neglect taking also the curses under the law!
     
  11. preacher4truth

    preacher4truth Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,121
    Likes Received:
    17
    Yes, he certainly has.
     
  12. preacher4truth

    preacher4truth Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,121
    Likes Received:
    17
    Yes, WOF/Prosperity Gospel would fall under some serious proof-texting fallacies. But this is their MO. Many in these camps use a topical analysis of Scripture, then quote those passages on said topic (typically prosperity in material things) completely out of their context.

    But this is how they make gain of the Gospel, speaking their great swelling words of vanity; 2 Peter 2:18. This is one extreme example of how using a proof-text theology is dangerous, but it is indeed valid.

    Other proof-texting errors are not so extreme, but can remain quite subtle, and are just as deceptive and deadly.

    - Peace
     
  13. Earth Wind and Fire

    Earth Wind and Fire Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    33,376
    Likes Received:
    1,568
    Faith:
    Baptist
  14. DaChaser1

    DaChaser1 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2011
    Messages:
    2,324
    Likes Received:
    0
    came
    out of those types, and indeed is dangerous doctrines, as people 'gamble' with their health and monies, for if they "had enough faith", would always be working and never get sick and need medicine!
     
    #34 DaChaser1, Jan 21, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 21, 2012
  15. preacher4truth

    preacher4truth Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,121
    Likes Received:
    17
  16. Bronconagurski

    Bronconagurski New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2011
    Messages:
    790
    Likes Received:
    0
    I worked security in a large trauma center hospital. We had to ask some of the health, wealth and prosperity crowd to leave as they were in someone's (supposedly a friend) room telling them if they had enough faith they wouldn't be in the shape they are in. Now that takes a lot of gall.
     
  17. DaChaser1

    DaChaser1 New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2011
    Messages:
    2,324
    Likes Received:
    0
    Guess those who practice 'divine health" must have greater faith then the Apsotle paul, as he was 'forced" to accept that through his weaknesses, in Christ was made strong!
     
  18. preacher4truth

    preacher4truth Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,121
    Likes Received:
    17
    That's sad. It's probably not a stretch to say they took with them some verses out of context to share with those they were talking to.

    I heard this one ripped from its context; "But he answered and said, Every plant, which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up." Matthew 15:13.

    This passage was quoted in reference to one who had a tumor, that God did not plant that tumor and that it would be rooted up.

    It sounds to the unlearned as a powerful passage for just such a case. Sadly, many believed this interpretational and applicational error. Of course, if one is not healed, it is their fault, not Gods, and that is the copout.

    This all goes back to a deficient doctrine of faith. Saving faith is not an inherent power of freewill we possess, but comes from God and by Gods Word to us, Romans 10:17 &c. So, it is not something we muster up. Copelandism teaches that God is helpless until man exercises faith and let's Him in, rendering God to bellhop status. May it never be!

    This would be comparing common faith with supernatural God given faith, and are two differing types of faith, and only one "saves." One is mental assent, the other is God given and life giving.
     
  19. preacher4truth

    preacher4truth Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,121
    Likes Received:
    17
    I'm glad you got away from that mess.

    Do you see where they mix up mans faith with supernatural God given faith?
     
  20. Winman

    Winman Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    2
    It is true that people often pull scripture out of context to say what it is not saying. Psa 51:5 is one such example. David is not discussing Original Sin in this Psalm, but confessing his personal sin with Bathsheba.

    Psa 51:1 To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David, when Nathan the prophet came unto him, after he had gone in to Bathsheba. Have mercy upon me, O God, according to thy lovingkindness: according unto the multitude of thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions.
    2 Wash me throughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin.
    3 For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me.
    4 Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight: that thou mightest be justified when thou speakest, and be clear when thou judgest.
    5 Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive me.

    It is clear David is confessing his own personal sin in this Psalm. But some would have us believe that in verse 5 David suddenly changes the subject to Original Sin and blames his mother for being born with a sin nature.

    What David IS saying is that he was born of a Jewish mother who had been either married to a non Jew and was divorced (because Nahash was alive and showed mercy to David for his sisters' sake), or else had borne children to a non Jew out of wedlock. This was considered a pollution. David was scorned by his own brothers and his own father who did not present him when Samuel asked to see all of Jesse's sons.

    Actually, in this David is a type of Christ. Jesus was also scorned by his half-brothers.

    John 7:3 His brethren therefore said unto him, Depart hence, and go into Judaea, that thy disciples also may see the works that thou doest.
    4 For there is no man that doeth any thing in secret, and he himself seeketh to be known openly. If thou do these things, shew thyself to the world.
    5 For neither did his brethren believe in him.

    Just as David was mistreated by his half-brothers because of his (in their view) less than legitimate birth, Jesus was mistreated and misjudged in the same way, his own family did not believe in him. David was also assigned to care for the sheep, a figure of Christ our Shepherd.

    1 Sam 16:11 And Samuel said unto Jesse, Are here all thy children? And he said, There remaineth yet the youngest, and, behold, he keepeth the sheep. And Samuel said unto Jesse, Send and fetch him: for we will not sit down till he come hither.

    If anything, this verse is teaching that David was unjustly considered sinful because of his birth. We do not bear the sins or iniquities of our parents.

    Eze 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

    But back to the OP, Psa 51:5 is a perfect example of pulling scripture out of context as a proof text to prove a presupposition that it did not address.

    If Psa 51:5 were to prove we are born with a sin nature (which it does not), it is still a problem for OS, as it would say he received his sin nature from his mother, not his father.
     
    #40 Winman, Jan 21, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 21, 2012
Loading...