A man recently wrote an article suggesting that the doctrine of the Bible is important enough to separate over.
Another man writes an article disagreeing with the first man on certain things (though it is not clear the the second man even understands the point of the first man) and complaining, in part, that the first man did not cite any Scripture in support of his position.
However, the second man cites no Scripture in support of his own position. All he offers us are his own opinions. Sure he sprinkles a few references in, but in reading them, it is easy to see that they do not support the second man’s opinions. In other words, not once does he show where God says what he says.
And that, friends, is ironic.
Of course we all know that there is a reason why the second man does not cite any scriptural support for his position. It is because there is none. Not one verse of Scripture can be marshalled to support this man’s doctrine.
And in so doing, he proves the point of the first man’s article. These types of people have added to the Scripture and then demand that all who disagree with them are in error.
And that, friends, is priceless.
In fact, the second man says at least one thing that is plainly and demonstrably not true. He says concerning the first man that “In part 22 of his series he dismissed the need to expound on 2 Thess. 3.”
Yet in the part 22 that I received, here’s what the first man actually said:
These fundamentalists correctly insist that certain Scriptures do require the limitation of fellowship with professing brothers who sin (1 Cor. 5:11; 2 Thess. 3:6, 14; et al.—my present purpose is not to expound these texts). These passages must not be dismissed …
When you compare the two statements, you can easily see that either the second man either can’t read, didn’t read, didn’t understand, forgot, or lied. I won’t hazard a guess as to which is true, though some options are worse than others.
But clearly the first man did not “dismiss the need.” He in fact emphasized the need. He said these passages must not be dismissed. Now, “not” is a short word, and easy enough to miss, I suppose. But it is an important one, I would say.
Now the question is, should any one listen to anyone who cares so little about the truth? It wasn’t all that long ago that I was lambasted for calling into question this second man’s honesty and integrity.
Turns out here’s part 2 of the proof that I was right.