What Is "Proof Texting"...

[jbh28]

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.

Let's stop derailing the thread. It's about proof texting and not about original sin. Start your own thread. If you do, I have a good answer that may help you out with the passage, but I won't do it here as that is not what the thread is about.

 

[preacher4truth]

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 .

Go make your own thread about original sin and put an end to your derailing ways, at least on this thread.

This is about proof-texting, not about the ax you need to grind about original sin.

Thanks.

 

[agedman]

I have heard preaching on bearing "much fruit" as the need to excuse the excessive sin of a "great soul winner."

That unless there is the fruit of soul winning, the person is not "right with God" or not "separated enough" or ...

Of course when ask what specifically were the fruits of the spirit, "soul winning" is most always part of the answer.

Let's see the fruits of the Spirit are love, soul winning, joy, soul winning, peace, soul winning ...

I think this would also be included as proof - texting.

 

[Amy.G]

I have heard preaching on bearing "much fruit" as the need to excuse the excessive sin of a "great soul winner."

That unless there is the fruit of soul winning, the person is not "right with God" or not "separated enough" or ...

Of course when ask what specifically were the fruits of the spirit, "soul winning" is most always part of the answer.

Let's see the fruits of the Spirit are love, soul winning, joy, soul winning, peace, soul winning ...

I think this would also be included as proof - texting.

I guess Isaiah would not have been saved.

 

[preacher4truth]

I guess Isaiah would not have been saved.

But I don't see where agedman is actually calling salvation into question with his post. I think he is simply talking of taking things out of context, or "proof texting."

 

[Winman]

Let's stop derailing the thread. It's about proof texting and not about original sin. Start your own thread. If you do, I have a good answer that may help you out with the passage, but I won't do it here as that is not what the thread is about.

How can you discuss proof-texting without discussing famous examples of proof-texting? Does everybody agree that folks proof-text? Yes. Discussion over.

 

[preacher4truth]

How can you discuss proof-texting without discussing famous examples of proof-texting? Does everybody agree that folks proof-text? Yes. Discussion over.

The OP isn't about whether or not it is factual. That's a given.

Read the OP. Thanks.

 

[Winman]

The OP isn't about whether or not it is factual. That's a given.

Read the OP. Thanks.

I did read the OP, and proof-texting is not necessarily a weak argument, Jesus quoted proof texts constantly.

John 10:33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

Here Jesus used Psa 82:6 as a proof text.

Psa 82:6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.

Here, Jesus rightly used scripture as a proof text. The Mormons will take this same verse and misuse it, claiming that everyone can become a god.

By the way, Psa 82:6 says we are all children of God, not the devil.

 

[Amy.G]

But I don't see where agedman is actually calling salvation into question with his post. I think he is simply talking of taking things out of context, or "proof texting."

Oh sorry. That's what I meant. I was agreeing with him about people who want to use the quantity of souls "you save" as a measure of spiritual fruit. My point was that Isaiah made no converts so according to this measurement he must have had no fruit. I was being sarcastic. There is no smiley for that. :laugh:

 

[preacher4truth]

I did read the OP, and proof-texting is not necessarily a weak argument, Jesus quoted proof texts constantly.

John 10:33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?

Here Jesus used Psa 82:6 as a proof text.

Psa 82:6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.

Here, Jesus rightly used scripture as a proof text. The Mormons will take this same verse and misuse it, claiming that everyone can become a god.

By the way, Psa 82:6 says we are all children of God, not the devil.

So, what are you saying, that we are gods, and that all are the children of God? I can see that you are asserting that all are the children of God.

This is another proof texting error on your part.

Clarify the gods portion. Thanks.

 

[preacher4truth]

Oh sorry. That's what I meant. I was agreeing with him about people who want to use the quantity of souls "you save" as a measure of spiritual fruit. My point was that Isaiah made no converts so according to this measurement he must have had no fruit. I was being sarcastic. There is no smiley for that. :laugh:

Oh!!!! Gotcha! :smilewinkgrin: :tongue3:

 

[psalms109:31]

Psalm 82
A psalm of Asaph.

1 God presides in the great assembly;
he renders judgment among the “gods”:

2 “How long will you[The Hebrew is plural.] defend the unjust
and show partiality to the wicked?[The Hebrew has Selah here.]
3 Defend the weak and the fatherless;
uphold the cause of the poor and the oppressed.
4 Rescue the weak and the needy;
deliver them from the hand of the wicked.

5 “The ‘gods’ know nothing, they understand nothing.
They walk about in darkness;
all the foundations of the earth are shaken.

6 “I said, ‘You are “gods”;
you are all sons of the Most High.’
7 But you will die like mere mortals;
you will fall like every other ruler.”

8 Rise up, O God, judge the earth,
for all the nations are your inheritance.

Exodus 19:5
Now if you obey me fully and keep my covenant, then out of all nations you will be my treasured possession. Although the whole earth is mine,6 you[Or possession, for the whole earth is mine. You] will be for me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words you are to speak to the Israelites.”

 

[Winman]

So, what are you saying, that we are gods, and that all are the children of God? I can see that you are asserting that all are the children of God.

This is another proof texting error on your part.

Clarify the gods portion. Thanks.

So, what are you saying, that we are gods,

I said no such thing and you know it, you intentionally misrepresent what I said. You do this all the time to many people. As you twist scripture, you also twist the words of others.

Psa 82 is speaking of the rulers and judges of the nation, who stand in the place of God, who execute judgment upon the people.

Psa 82:1 A Psalm of Asaph. God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; he judgeth among the gods.
2 How long will ye judge unjustly, and accept the persons of the wicked? Selah.
3 Defend the poor and fatherless: do justice to the afflicted and needy.
4 Deliver the poor and needy: rid them out of the hand of the wicked
5 They know not, neither will they understand; they walk on in darkness: all the foundations of the earth are out of course.
6 I have said, Ye are gods; and all of you are children of the most High.
7 But ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.
8 Arise, O God, judge the earth: for thou shalt inherit all nations.

John 10:30 I and my Father are one.
31 Then the Jews took up stones again to stone him.

Jesus openly declared himself to be God. These rulers who stood in the place of God to execute judgment wrongfully judged Jesus of blasphemy. Jesus said if they were called "gods" who ruled and judged the people, how much more he who had demonstrated he was the Son of God?

John 10:32 Jesus answered them, Many good works have I shewed you from my Father; for which of those works do ye stone me?
33 The Jews answered him, saying, For a good work we stone thee not; but for blasphemy; and because that thou, being a man, makest thyself God.
34 Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
35 If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
36 Say ye of him, whom the Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest; because I said, I am the Son of God?
37 If I do not the works of my Father, believe me not.
38 But if I do, though ye believe not me, believe the works: that ye may know, and believe, that the Father is in me, and I in him.
39 Therefore they sought again to take him: but he escaped out of their hand,

These rulers were called "gods" by the scriptures. It was their job to rule and justly judge the people, but they misjudged Jesus. They had seen many miracles and good works performed by Jesus which proved he was God, yet they accused him of blasphemy and attempted to stone him.

But as pertaining to proof-texts, the Mormons will pull Psa 82:6 out of context to argue that man can become a god. It is one of their favorite proof-texts.

 

[Amy.G]

So, what are you saying, that we are gods, and that all are the children of God? I can see that you are asserting that all are the children of God.

This is another proof texting error on your part.

Clarify the gods portion. Thanks.

"We" are not gods. This psalm is talking about the judges of Israel. They were called "gods" because they served in a godlike capacity of judging right from wrong.


They were "sons of God" because they were of Israel, God's chosen people.

 

[preacher4truth]

I said no such thing and you know it, you intentionally misrepresent what I said. You do this all the time to many people. As you twist scripture, you also twist the words of others.

Lighten up Francis. OK?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0OnpkDWbeJs

Here's what I actually said in the form of a question, not in representative form:

So, what are you saying, that we are gods, and that all are the children of God?

See the question mark? That's called a question, not a misrepresentation.

See the "clarify the gods portion" comment? Go look.

See how I never made the statement that you said that? Quit putting words in my mouth, and be honest instead of deceitful, OK?

You're the one misrepresenting. I never said you made the statement, I asked what you were saying. Quit your fabrications and delusions that someone is intentionally misrepresenting you, it's unfounded and lives only in your mind.

You remind me again of why I don't engage with you, you twist what others say, not paying attention, nor caring what they've said so you can go on an unfounded strawman rant of your own making.

Now as to the latter part of your post that states we all are the children of God not the devil. I noticed that you intentionally left this out of your response due to its glaring error.

This is factually representing what you said, and is proof texting error on your part.

What I said stands; you proof text a passage out of Psalms 82 to imply that all are Gods children,not children of the devil. You made this erroneous interpretational statement in your parting words.

Here is your quote:

By the way, Psa 82:6 says we are all children of God, not the devil.

Incorrect. We're not all the children of God. Some are children of the devil. Who does the "we" refer to in context winman?

You further my contention of why proof texting can be a weak apologetic, and it is one you practice consistently.

Your false interpretation isn't supported by Scriptures thus your verse is not a proof text for your conclusions. You're plainly in error.

Thanks for supporting my contention about proof texting being a weak apologetic. I knew you'd come through. :thumbsup:

One more thing for you to twist and deny: Jesus wasn't proof texting. The Jews understood the context, and so did He, and the scenario on the NT supported the context.

- Peace

 

[preacher4truth]

"We" are not gods. This psalm is talking about the judges of Israel. They were called "gods" because they served in a godlike capacity of judging right from wrong.


They were "sons of God" because they were of Israel, God's chosen people.

True, and we're not all the children of God either, as he erroneously states using his "proof text." :thumbsup:

 

[HankD]

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.

He is not blaming his mother but is confessing to God that his corruption was from the womb.

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.

You cannot prove this from scripture but can only make conjectures and site opinions.

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.

In context this is speaking of offenses against the law of Moses and not the sin and death nature.

Ezekiel 18

19 Yet say ye, Why? doth not the son bear the iniquity of the father? When the son hath done that which is lawful and right, and hath kept all my statutes, and hath done them, he shall surely live.
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.
21 But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.​

22 All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall li

As to our sin and death lineage :

Romans 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:​

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.

Not necessarily so winman, he didn't say he received it from his mother but it was a product of his mother's human conception. There are two chromosome components of conception which occurs in the womb of the mother but the seed (origin) is from the father.

OK, so this post is a good example of "proof texting" from the Bible (which IMO is good, or should we quote perhaps from The IIliad as an alternative?).

Reader decide.


HankD

 

[Winman]

You cannot prove this from scripture but can only make conjectures and site opinions.

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.

In context this is speaking of offenses against the law of Moses and not the sin and death nature.

It doesn't matter, you are teaching that we bear Adam's sin, when the scriptures clearly say the soul that sinneth, it shall die, and that the son shall not bear the iniquity of his father. If we are born dead because of Adam, then we did not die because of our own sin but Adam's, and we indeed bear the iniquity of Adam.

Augustine was apparently unfamiliar with this scripture.

And this chapter is speaking of eternal death, not temporal.

Eze 18:17 That hath taken off his hand from the poor, that hath not received usury nor increase, hath executed my judgments, hath walked in my statutes; he shall not die for the iniquity of his father, he shall surely live.
18 As for his father, because he cruelly oppressed, spoiled his brother by violence, and did that which is not good among his people, lo, even he shall die in his iniquity.

This passage is not speaking of being executed, it is speaking of dying "in" sin. This is the language Jesus used in John 8.

John 8:24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

Jesus is not speaking of physical death, everyone dies physically. He is speaking of dying "in" your sins, that is, spiritual death. This is what Ezekiel 18:18 is speaking of also, dying "in" his iniquity. Words matter.

Eze 18:21 But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.
22 All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.
23 Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord GOD: and not that he should return from his ways, and live?
24 But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die.

Again, this is not speaking of physical, temporal death unless you believe God is saying that a man will go unpunished for his sin in this life. Do you bellieve God is saying in verse 21 that if a man commits murder but then repents the law should forgive him and let him go unpunished? Absurd. Verse 21 is speaking of forgiveness of sins, which only God can forgive sins. So, this is not speaking of punishment under the law, but eternal punishment or forgiveness. Again, note that verse 24 speaks of dying "in" sin.

Matthew Henry recognized this chapter is speaking of eternal death, not temporal;

Perhaps, in reading some of the foregoing chapters, we may have been tempted to think ourselves not much concerned in them (though they also were written for our learning); but this chapter, at first view, appears highly and nearly to concern us all, very highly, very nearly; for, without particular reference to Judah and Jerusalem, it lays down the rule of judgment according to which God will deal with the children of men in determining them to their everlasting state, and it agrees with that very ancient rule laid down, Genesis 4:7, "If though doest well, shalt thou not be accepted?"


It is only in temporal calamities that children (and sometimes innocent ones) fare the worse for their parents' wickedness, and God can alter the property of those calamities, and make them work for good to those that are visited with them; but as to spiritual and eternal misery (and that is the death here spoken of) the children shall by no means smart for the parents' sins. This is here shown at large; and it is a wonderful piece of condescension that the great God is pleased to reason the case with such wicked and unreasonable men, that he did not immediately strike them dumb or dead, but vouchsafed to state the matter before them, that he may be clear when he is judged. Now, in his reply,

Original Sin is in direct contradiction to God's word that no man shall die for the sins of his father. If we are born dead because of Adam's sin, then God has broken his own law.

 

[HankD]

Original Sin is in direct contradiction to God's word that no man shall die for the sins of his father. If we are born dead because of Adam's sin, then God has broken his own law.

You are wrong winman (IMO).

You keep quoting passages such as Ezekiel 18, etc. which are related to actual sin as "proof-texts". Each of us is responsible for our own actual sin. By sinning we put our stamp of approval on Adam's sin by chosing sin rather than God.

The origin of sin and the reason we sin has to do with Adam not Moses or Ezekiel which are speaking of actual sins and transgressions against the law which was added to show the sinfulness of the sin which resides in us.

Romans 5:12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:​

We are born dead but not in the meaning of the death which is the result of a particular sin.

There is a death which comes from rejecting God's grace and Christ after reproval/conviction of sin. There is no remedy for this sin because He is the way, the only way. The soul which commits this sin will indeed die and that without remedy. This is the second death.

Proverbs 29:1 He, that being often reproved hardeneth his neck, shall suddenly be destroyed, and that without remedy.​

Those who are born dead (separated from God) because they are Adam's seed will come to life by believing in Jesus Christ.

Yes they are dead, separated from God, but they can still hear God because with God all things are possible.

Lazarus resurrection is a model. He was dead in his grave but he heard Jesus voice when He commanded him to come forth.

John 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice.​

John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.​

So, they had to have heard His voice while they were dead (separated from God) in order to pass from death unto life.​

As John 5:28 says: "marvel not at this", when He speaks the dead hear Him. Some of the dead apparently are content to remain in the grave.​

John 3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.​

Those in this condition of rejection of the grace of God will eventually suffer eternal separation from God per the scripture.​

John 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.​

abideth on him - Grk. meno - remains on him.​

HankD​

 

[Winman]

Hank, I do not disagree that men are dead in sin and must be born again, the issue is when they become dead in sin. Is it when they are conceived or born? Or is it when men commit actual sin?

Ezekiel 18:20 says the soul that sinneth, it shall die. How can a person born dead die? This verse also says the son shall not bear the iniquity of his father, neither the father the iniquity of the son. If we are born dead because of Adam, then we indeed bear his iniquity. If your view is true, it is not our personal sin that causes us to die, we are born dead before we can ever commit personal sin.

I know folks think this is some heretical view I hold, but it is exactly the view held by the Anabaptists who were persecuted by Catholics and Calvinists.

This was the opinion of practically all Anabaptists and it appears that teachings of this kind must have developed in many places at a rather early date. Sebastian Franck's famous Chronica, Zeitbuch und Geschichtsbibel of 1531 contains exactly these ideas as the gist of the Anabaptist position concerning original sin. In the section "Chronica der Römischen Ketzer" (Fol. 447) he says: "Concerning original sin nearly all Anabaptists teach as follows: just as the righteousness (Gerechtigkeit) of Christ is of no avail to anyone unless he makes it a part of his own being through faith, so also Adam's sin (i.e., original sin) does not impair anybody except the one who makes it a part of his own being through faith, and likewise brings forth fruit of this sin. For, as foreign righteousness does not save anybody, so will foreign sin not condemn anybody either, [See below, the reference to Ezekiel 18.]."


On Fol. 446, he says, "Nearly all Anabaptists consider children to be of pure and innocent blood, and they consider original sin not a sin which of itself condemns both the children and the adults. They also claim that it does not make anyone unclean except the one who accepts this sin, makes it his own, brings forth fruits of it and is unwilling to part from it. For they claim foreign sin does not condemn anybody, and in this they refer to the Ezekiel 18."

That was just to show you there have always been Christians who rejected Original Sin on the ground of Ezekiel 18.

I reject OS because of Ezekiel 18, I do not believe God has imputed Adam's death unconditionally to us as the Anabaptists also believed. I believe "the soul that sinneth, it shall die", that is, every person dies spiritually when they knowingly and willingly commit their own sin. If we die because of Adam, then God would be breaking his own law.