Tuesday, April 04, 2006

What Was I Supposed to Do?


It gets to be a little much. You know what a humble Baptist is to a COC member? On his back with a COC shoe on his neck. Humility isn't timidly admitting that the false prophet is right. I've been getting these letters from COC people telling me that it was a different debate than I've described and I'm an arrogant outright liar. Two words: Sanballat and Tobiah. Read Nehemiah and find the criticism Nehemiah got when he rebuilt the wall. Larry Hafley is one of the most arrogant guys you'll ever see. His rhetoric tactics require some like kind speech. A fool must be answered lest he be wise in his own conceit. Let me give you just a few more bloopers. I should say at the outset that I'm not making any of this up. The COC hears things through the Larry Hafley grid. Larry Hafley makes things up out of thin air at least once for every 20 minutes of debating. When you point them out, he makes some excuse or spins it into something else. I have so many of these bloopers going through my mind, it is just a matter of choosing.

Hebrews 10:10, 14 are great eternal security verses. They read, "By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified." If they had one verse like these two on their side of this issue, they might be worth considering. "Sanctified" does not always refer to salvation in Scripture. It means "set apart." In these two verses it is salvation. In v. 10, the word "sanctified" is perfect tense, so that a person who is sanctified by the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all, is sanctified at one point in time in the past, that action of sanctification completed with the results ongoing. In v. 14, "hath perfected" is perfect tense. He completed our perfection at one point in the past with the results ongoing, and how long is that perfection ongoing? For ever. The point of Hebrews 10:1-18 is that Jesus completed what needed to be done for us to be saved for ever, so that we don't need to keep coming and coming, working and working, or believing and believing.

How do they answer that? They say that all of Hebrews was written to the saved alone, so that every text that is a warning to unbelievers is actually a warning to believers so that they won't lose their salvation. Larry Hafley went to Hebrews 10:28, 29, which say, "He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses: Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?" Their key is the word "sanctified." They say that the word "sanctified" in v. 29 refers back to the one who despised Moses' law at the beginning of v. 28. "Sanctified actually refers back to "the Son of God." Jesus own blood sanctified his priestly ministry, just like the OT sacrificial animal blood sanctified Aaron and the priests. The "he" in "he was sanctified" is Jesus. The unbelieving Jew counts the blood of the covenant by which Jesus was sanctified to be an unholy thing. Son of God is the nearest antecedent and proximity is the number one criteria to identify the correct antecedent to a pronoun.

Mr. Hafley ignores all this grammar, does a kind "awww shucks" routine, tells the people how smart they are, and that the person here was "sanctified," so he must have been saved and then lost it when he did an unholy thing and did despite unto the Spirit of grace. If sanctified here can lose it, Hafley posits that the people in Hebrews 10:10, 14 can also lose it, even though they are said explicity not to be able do so. This is called interpreting the clear in the light of the completely muddled. I don't have to go to some other passage to show his passage doesn't work. "Sanctified" refers to Jesus because the nearest antecedent. It also fits the picture of priesthood that we would expect. After I made this argument in the debate, he presented no contrary evidence, but he did keep throwing up the chart with Hebrews 10:28, 29 and acting like I said nothing, never debunking anything that I said in Hebrews 10:28, 29 or Hebrews 10:14, 15. Who do you think I'm going to say is going the wrong way?

11 comments:

Caleb said...

I have to say Mr. Brandenburg that really you only won the debate because of your stunning good looks.

(Love you, Bridget)

Jeff Voegtlin said...

Huh


Ha


:-)

Jason Hodge said...

Pastor Brandenburg,

I just ordered the debates on DVD. I look forward to watching them.

It seems so important that we listen to the substance of the arguements rather than the tone or rhetoric of the speaker, or the response of the audience.

One thing is for sure, reading this discussion, I didn't take enough Greek in college! :(

Keep at 'em!!

Kent Brandenburg said...

I think my looks are stunning too, but in a different sense, more like shock and awe.

Anonymous said...

To be the student of the bible that you claim to be,and I dont question that, you think maybe your time and talent could be better applied to something besides "debating" an "undebatable" subject? Or is that to stunning?

ILA

Kent Brandenburg said...

Debating someone is really nothing more than evangelizing him and the audience, using the sword to pull down strongholds in their minds (2 Cor. 10:3-5). That isn't a waste of time, anonymous. ILA (doesn't ring a bell). I am a student of the Bible, but I don't remember saying that I was. On top of having hundreds and thousands hear the truth in the debate, on DVD, and then reading this blog, I will have a book out on eternal security out of preparation for the debate.

Anonymous said...

So, you are also a writer? Now that is interesting... good book material suffice it to say. Perhaps Mr.Hafley is doing the same thing. Evangalism is a loving, kind teaching of God's Word;Mr.Webster says it is" convert to Christianity by preaching". Nuturing the new converts. To see that you are a student of the Bible and writer one has but to follow one of your links. An interesting side note in reading all of this is that I notice you have your own following which can be good but not always. Remeber, Jesus also had a large following.. So, you do pastor? I see you are addressed by some as "Pastor Brandenburg". I would not expect "ILA" to ring any bells for you.

Kent Brandenburg said...

I am a pastor, ILA. The goal would be to gain followers of the Lord Jesus Christ, and to follow me only as I follow Christ. Evangelism should be done in love, but often it is not considered loving because one must recognize that he or she is a sinner who deserves hell. That is not a popular message and many consider it unloving. Preaching the truth is a loving thing to do because Jesus said that the when you know the truth, the truth shall set you free. Literally, preaching the gospel is proclaiming the good news that Jesus died, was buried, and rose the third day according to the Scriptures. People who will believe in Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior, He will save from sin and Hell.

Anonymous said...

Well, Pastor Brandenburg interesting observations to say the least. I will agree with you that preaching redemption of sin has neve been a popular topic; even the rich ruler never seemed to get that part. Some that did still couln't live with it; so I must assume they died without it (eternal salvation). If you are the "leader" in your church and as you say preach and teach from the bible tell me where all this Greek comes from? Do you have another job? I ask only in that it seems you have a lot of computer time. Perhaps I am jealous of that part. And, if I may ask one other question..(I have taken the time on my day off to read all your blogs) why do I see on some.."comments removed"? Is that by you? Just curious.
ILA

Kent Brandenburg said...

ILA,

I learned Greek in high school/college/graduate school, have taught it, and use it. I removed those comments, because I am the administrator of the blog. Some can be my own comments, incidentally. I spend time writing, preparing messages, and I have broadband, so I can write answers to emails, the blog, etc. while I do other things since it is always on. Writing the blog doesn't take long, ILA, because the work for the contents was already done. They take me about 15 minutes. I can write these notes rather quickly too. It is always worthwhile to consider whether I am spending too much time. Do I know you ILA? Just out of curiosity.

Anonymous said...

You know Pastor B. I amaze myself by coming back here to read these things.I am quite sure you spent a lot of prep time on you debate literature and I can see that it would be a valuable tool for here as well. So you are the "boss" here..again..interesting. Why ever would one take/teach/use Greek? Now that would be a real achievement. While I may not agree with all your opinions I will say I admire your tenacity and ability to "blog" if that is proper..if not, well I still do.
Do you know me? I would doubt that in that we have never met, but if I am ever in your part of the world( I forget where that is) I will make it a point to sit in on one of your sermons.Or is that permissable? I actually found your debate listed under Hafley's listing..strange world we live in.
ILA