Monday, April 03, 2006

How the Arguments Hashed Out

Here is a chart with the texts of his arguments and then mine. His passages are on the left and mine on the right after the dashes. These are just the arguments and whether they were answered. This does not deal with how poor his arguments were, so poor that they shouldn't really even be called arguments. You can see that I answered all of his arguments and he didn't answer 22 of mine. (a=answered)
Hafley Arg—Brand. Answ-------------Brandenburg Arg—Haf Answ
Galatians 5:19-21 a-----------------------John 6:37 a
1 Corinthians 6:9, 10 a --------------------John 10:27-29 a
Revelation 22:14,15 a ---------------------John 6:39 a
Revelation 22:19 a ------------------------John 6:35
2 Peter 2:20-23 a -------------------------John 4:12, 13 a
1 Peter 1:10, 11 a -------------------------John 3:6
Hebrews 10:28, 29 a ----------------------John 3:8
Galatians 5:1-4 a --------------------------1 John 1:5-2:2
John 15:5, 6 a -----------------------------John 6:37 a
Luke 12:42-46 a --------------------------1 John 5:1 a
1 John 2:29/4:7/5:1 a ---------------------1 John 5:4 a
Revelation 3:5 a ---------------------------1 John 4:4 a
Galatians 6:7,8 a --------------------------1 John 3:14
Hebrews 3:1-14 a -------------------------1 John 3:6 a
Romans 8:12, 13 a -------------------------1 John 2:19 a
Ezekiel 33 a -------------------------------1 John 2:29
John 17:12 a ------------------------------1 John 4:12, 13 a
John 2:23-25 a ----------------------------John 17:11 a
John 6:66 a -------------------------------John 17:2 a
1 John 5:1 a ---------------------------------John 17:24 a
Jude 1:5 a ---------------------------------John 17:12 a
Revelation 3:5 a ---------------------------2 Timothy 1:12 a
Isaiah 24:5 a -------------------------------Philippians 1:6 a
Psalm 105:10, 11 a -------------------------Galatians 2:20 a
Joshua 23:11-13 a --------------------------Ephesians 2:8, 9
1 John 3:15 a -------------------------------Ephesians 2:10
2 Timothy 2:12 a ---------------------------2 Corinthians 5:17
Galatians 6:1 a ------------------------------1 Peter 1:4 a
0 Unanswered ------------------------------Philippians 2:12, 13 a
-------------------------------------------------Romans 8:29, 30 a
-------------------------------------------------Matthew 9:22
-------------------------------------------------John 18:9
-------------------------------------------------Matthew 7:21-23
-------------------------------------------------Jude 1:1 a
-------------------------------------------------Colossians 2:10 a
-------------------------------------------------Colossians 3:3
-------------------------------------------------Romans 8:35-39 a
-------------------------------------------------Romans 5:2 a
-------------------------------------------------Revelation 22:19
-------------------------------------------------Revelation 3:5
-------------------------------------------------John 5:24
-------------------------------------------------Hebrews 10:10 a
-------------------------------------------------Hebrews 10:14 a
-------------------------------------------------Hebrews 7:25
-------------------------------------------------Romans 8:27
-------------------------------------------------1 Corinthians 1:2
-------------------------------------------------2 Peter 1:3, 4 a
-------------------------------------------------Hebrews 12:7-11 a
-------------------------------------------------1 Corinthians 3:10-15 a
-------------------------------------------------Romans 6:14
-------------------------------------------------1 Corinthians 6:11
-------------------------------------------------Romans 16:13 a
-------------------------------------------------Romans 5:5
-------------------------------------------------22 unanswered

12 comments:

debate observer said...

Sir, one of the arguments I recall from the debate is your stating that a person who is actually saved would not continue sinning. If they do continue sinning then this is evidence of their not being saved.

Brandenberg, in just these series of blog postings you have continuosly made prideful boasts about yourself, and, outright lied about the procession of the debate (which those who actually obtain the DVD/VHS will clearly see)- both of which are sins.

My question is, based on this do you really believe you're saved?

Kent Brandenburg said...

I have received four comments from COC people. Let me deal with his argument first. If you, sir, had listened more closely you would have heard that I said that it is continuous sinning (which I showed about 5 or 6 different ways). The verbs are in the present tense and the person with sin as a lifestyle is an unsaved person. They were never were saved in the first place.

As far as me being saved because I am lying and proud. Well, I haven't lied one time in this blog. What you are saying here shows that you didn't listen very well. It is proud to cast a deaf ear to someone else. I listened to Mr. Hafley carefully. It doesn't seem you listened carefully to the Word of God. Nowhere does the Bible say that someone can lose it. Look at all these references that say we cannot lose it. Having confidence in God's Word is not pride. Voluntary humility does. Mr. Hafley and his tactics are what are so proud. Did you read Truth Magazine's hatchet job on Thomas Ross after the baptismal regeneration debate. That will give you some perspective.

By the way, question: "How did I outright lie in the debate?" I'd like to hear that one. At least I could give you my answer.

One of Hafley's main tactics is to give the audience the intimation that his opponent is not intelligent or stupid because he doesn't agree with Mr. Hafley, but the audience, who "is intelligent" as he would often tell you, can figure them out. I would always be leary of someone who is always telling me how intelligent I am. The Bible and God are very intelligent. We have nothing without it.

And yes, I do believe I'm saved, because Jesus shed his blood for my sins, died a substitutionary death, and He has perfected forever them who are sanctified. I believe in eternal security, so I will always be saved. Thanks for asking though.

debate observer said...

Mr Brandenberg, please re-read my previous posting. I did not say you lied in the debate (except of course in areas pertaining to scripture...but I'll give you the benefit of doubt and say you were in error), but, I said you have lied about certain aspects of the proceedings. For example...


#1 Blog posting titled "debriefing on debating" you indicate that the debate was held in our building because of some "tradition". The fact is, and you know this quite well, that the debate was held in our building because you did not open your building to allow it. During the debate you stated this was becasue of the size difference, but your posting suggests something quite different. This appears to have been done to intentionally mislead -- the definition of a lie.

Blog posting #2 titled "Verbal Pong" you wrote that Hafley said he was debating Sam Morris' position. Actually, Hafley asked you if you agreed with that position. I was there and I "listened" quite well. Those who order the free recording of the debate will see and hear the same. Your attempt to imply that Hafley was not dealing with your position was simply, again, misleading.

In the interest of space I won't add more examples of untrue statements.

Arrogance
I do want to respond briefly about your arrogant postings. Mr. Brandenberg, I hope you understand there is a difference between being confident and being arrogant. As a Christian I am very confident, but I attribute that confidence to God who is in me. He gets the glory always.

blog posting titled "what kind of night" you said...
"My first speech was great maybe even spectacular" Don't you think that was a bit over the top??

Did Nehimiah ever make such a boast about himself?

Kent Brandenburg said...

Brandenburg has a "u," not an "e," nameless one. Maybe you'll get the courage to identify yourself at some point. Regarding "the tradition" of the COC regarding debate. First, do Baptists anywhere operate these kinds of parliamentary style debate? Almost none. This is a COC tradition. The history of this debate goes like this: About 3 years ago, I was invited to debate a COC man in Oakland for one night. I did. Thomas Ross listened to it on tape and he wanted to try this out, so he contacted all the COC in the area and I heard in hindsight that the debate was on. This year's debate was a challenge from Larry Hafley. I didn't initiate it. So that is the point of the tradition. My comments on home-court advantage were rhetorical at worse for people who read my blog. I said nothing about that we weren't given the opportunity. So absolutely no lie is there. Then I hear this thing from the pulpit on Thursday, I believe, him never checking with me, just announcing it to everyone. I sent Thomas Ross up to say that no one said what he said I said. The man from Kentucky blew it out of proportion. Thomas Ross on his own said it was the building size. I wouldn't have said that. That was solely his opinion. It was the first I had heard that it was the reason. I would have said exactly what I said on my blog. So "I" never said anything of the kind. Is that a lie on your part? I never said it. Thomas Ross did.

Second, I'm going to stick with my explanation of Mr. Hafley's saying he would debate against the Sam Morris position. I talked to him afterwards one night, and he essentially said the same thing to me, that he was surprised by the position that we took, different than he thought it would be. He slapped that slide up at the beginning because that is the position he thought he was debating. Everyone will see that. He often says he has us "programmed," but in the debate, notice how many times he turns the slides off, not having an argument for our position.

When anyone looks at the context of that blog post, they can see that the "maybe even spectacular" was offset by "Tonight was a tough night," indicating that my spectacular start didn't represent the entire night. The whole "started off spectacular" rhetoric purposefully employed hyperbole to show a contrast. And I later said to you that my confidence came from the Word of God, so the reason it could have been a spectacular start was because of the Word of God. You are fishing, Mr. Observer. I sense bitterness in you, which I can understand from your perspective. You'll only get peace and contentment from simply trusting in Christ and stop adding ritual and works to grace like the Galatians did (Gal. 5:1-4). Cease from your own labor and rest in Him (Hebrews 4).

debate observer said...

Thanks for clarifying. Perhaps it was simply hyperbole...I'll take your word for it.

Although I am not "bitter", I will admit I was a bit annoyed with your postings. I apologize for my tone.

You are 100% correct that peace and contentment comes with trusting Christ (Jhn 14:27; Heb 13:5). I truly strive everyday to do just that. I will admit that sometime I let circumstances cloud my focus. I see now, and will admit, that I’ve allowed your blog to do just that. Shame on me.

Finally, Mr. Brandenburg (sorry for the earlier misspellings) I realize now that your stance may not be based on deception, but rather on a simple lack of knowledge and/or understanding. You consistently accuse members of the church of Christ of being purveyors of a teaching that promotes “works to earn salvation” even though you have been repeatedly told this is not what we believe (In fact during Hafley’s first speech he detailed this exact point). I don’t know why you (and others in your circle) simply refuse to acknowledge this.

Once again, as a Christian I understand that I am “saved by grace through faith” (Eph 2:8). I understand that there is NOTHING I can do to “earn” salvation by works. To repeat, there is nothing I can do to “earn” salvation! (Eph 2:9). Nevertheless,…and please don’t miss this…, works is something that I am supposed to do even though I am an “unprofitable servant” (Lk 17:10) – not to “earn” salvation, but as evidence of the faith I have (Jam 2:20), and because I love my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ (1 John 5:3; John 15:10; John 14:15).

Is this really that hard to accept? – especially when it is 100% consistent with the whole of scripture.

Guillermo Alvarez said...

Mr. Brandenburg;
I would like to clarify some things that you mentioned in your response.
1. “Maybe you'll get the courage to identify yourself at some point.” Many that post comments in your favor do not write their name, do they also lack courage?
2. “Thomas Ross listened to it on tape and he wanted to try this out, so he contacted all the COC in the area and I heard in hindsight that the debate was on.” It seems to me that Mr. Ross thought that debating against the truth was going to be like “chips and cream soda” (don’t say that “I said Mr. Ross said” it just seems from last year that you all thought it was going to be easy). When Mr. Ross challenged me (he is the one who challenged me) to debate, I sent him the following day the propositions for a written discussion. It took him over two weeks to get back to me on that, and he changed the original propositions so much that he wanted to debate baptism, eternal security, which one is the true church and salvation by faith only all in the same debate. I told him that we could study one topic at a time if he really wanted to discuss all of these. He insisted in a oral debate, so I contacted brother Hafley to see if he could come to California.
3. “This year's debate was a challenge from Larry Hafley. I didn't initiate it.” During the Hafley-Ross debate, Mr. Ross kept bringing up the idea of eternal security, brother Hafley handed him the propositions to debate that issue, which Mr. Ross wanted to debate in the first place. So in reality, we never went out looking for a debate with you all, a member of Bethel Baptist Church came to us looking for a debate, and he found it. Yes, you did not initiate this years debate, but the challenge was to Mr. Ross, and if he did not want to do it, brother Hafley said that you Mr. Brandenburg or Mr. Sutton or anyone else whom you could find willing would be fine. 4. “do Baptists anywhere operate these kinds of parliamentary style debate? Almost none. This is a COC tradition.” No sir, this “tradition” was started by Mr. Ross. Hope you sign the propositions on the “origin, name, organization, ect.” so we can continue this tradition.
5. “Thomas Ross on his own said it was the building size.” Last year Mr. Ross also said that building size was the issue as to why the discussion was only at our building. I told him to contact the Baptist Churches in Alameda to see if any would be willing to open their building for at least two nights, he didn’t. You could have done the same or find a suitable place (like a gym) to do it, but you didn’t.
5. “I sent Thomas Ross up to say that no one said what he said I said... I wouldn't have said that. That was solely his opinion. It was the first I had heard that it was the reason. I would have said exactly what I said on my blog.” You sent a man to speak on your behalf, but now you don’t want to accept what he said, yet you had 3 twenty minute speeches to take back what Mr. Ross said, and you didn’t, seems to me that it was because you didn’t mind what he said that night.

Hope that you consider posting this comment on your blog Mr. Brandenburg.

Guillermo Alvarez

Kent Brandenburg said...

Shakespeare, "He that doth protest too much."

Kent Brandenburg said...

Debate Observer,

Can you lose your salvation in the COC? Answer: Yes.
How does one lose it? Answer: A sinful work
So you have to keep doing works to stay saved? Answer: Yes
If you stop doing works, will you lose it? Answer: Yes

Wrong works lose it. Not doing good works loses it. You are dependent on works. Don't you see this, debate observer? I say this with sincere compassion.

The Galatian judaizers didn't think they were adding works to grace either, but one work, circumcision alone, made them a debtor to do the whole law and nullifed Christ's work.
If it's grace it's no more works (Rom. 11:6).

Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus said...

This comment is to Debate Observer

"I understand that there is NOTHING I can do to “earn” salvation by works. To repeat, there is nothing I can do to “earn” salvation! (Eph 2:9). Nevertheless,…and please don’t miss this…, works is something that I am supposed to do even though I am an “unprofitable servant” (Lk 17:10) – not to “earn” salvation, but as evidence of the faith I have (Jam 2:20), and because I love my Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ (1 John 5:3; John 15:10; John 14:15)."

This is NOT the position of the Church of Christ, however.

If a person believes, as the CoC does, that one may lose their salvation and must maintain their state of grace by good works, as the CoC clearly believes, then they are NOT saved by grace, but by works, or so they think. Mr. Hafley and the rest of the CoC spin machine may deny this all they want, but their words are false.

debate observer said...

Mr. Brandenburg, with all do respect, you continuously do the same thing....ignore what you've been told. In addition, you ask a question and then presume to answer on my behalf. I welcome questions, but sir, at least give me the chance to respond.

I will do so now.....

1. Can you lose your salvation in the church of Christ?

NO! A faithful Christian (one who abides in the doctrine of Christ) cannot lose his/her salvation (2 John 9; John 15:6; John 14:23-24 and others).

2. How does one lose it?

See response to question #1

3. So you have to keep doing good works to stay saved?

See response to question #1

4. If you stop doing good works will you lose it?

See response to question #1


Brandenburg, in my responses to questions 2 through 4 I am not being facetious. The fact is that the answer to all of the questions are contained in the first response. It appears that you want some grand explanation, but being a Christian is actually quite “Simple” (2 Cor 11:3). Actually it was summed up by Solomon in Ecclesiastes 12:13 – “Fear God and keep his commandments for this is the whole duty of man.” And, this was reinforced by Christ in His words and His actions. As a Christian I am simply going to stand on what Christ said, and I am going to strive to do what Christ said do. By doing this, one day I will be where Christ is. Guaranteed!!

What is my name? I am called a "Christian" (Acts 11:26). And with the help of God I will courageously take a stand as such.

debate observer said...

To Titus quin...

With all due respect, do you think it is appropriate to tell me what is taught in the household of which I am a member? I would not presume to tell you what is taught in the Baptist church (even though I was once a “Baptist”) because I am not currently a member of that church. At best I would ask questions, then comment based on what I was told, not based on preconceived notions. I would appreciate the same level of respect. Thanks much.

Sherri Sue said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.