Brandon E’s Objections: #5 – I Don’t Have Enough Followers – Not True!

For an explanation of this series, see Brandon E’s Objections:  #1.

One of Brandon’s most repeated criticisms of me is that I don’t have enough followers.  Actually, I don’t want any followers – I only seek followers for Jesus Christ.  Therefore, zero followers is enough for me.

“He must increase, but I must decrease.”  – John 3:30  NASB




17 Replies to “Brandon E’s Objections: #5 – I Don’t Have Enough Followers – Not True!”

  1. Mike, this is an oversimplification of anything that I said. My point was this:
    Since you are the only person both you and I know of has arrived at your combination of views about the revelation, and since you contradict many believers in Christ–lifelong students of Scripture, men of God, and martyrs among them–what basis do you have to believe that you are are a more reliable interpreter of the Scriptures (more likely to arrive at the truth about what is revealed in Scripture) than any or all of them?

    After my prolonged attempt to give a scriptural account of why many believers would hold beliefs that you contradict and why you are the only person we know of that has arrived at your combination of views, when I asked you to simply be open to the possibility that you are mistaken, you he;d I what I said was absurd, that you only proclaim the word of God on your blogs and surely not your opinions, and then that I was simply taking the side of Satan in opposing the word of God.

    This isn’t Mike Gantt decreasing and Christ increasing, but Mike Gantt and his “knowing” ego inflating bigger and bigger than everybody else.

  2. You complain because my beliefs don’t square with the beliefs of all believers, yet the beliefs of all believers don’t even square with each other!

    You are living in delusion. According to that delusion, you are standing with all believers of all ages against little ole me. Please wake up.

    1. Mike, please.

      I’ve pointed out that there is a great deal of harmony across Christian groups concerning God being triune, the Spirit being God, the Lord’s second coming being bodily and evident (and hence yet to take place), etc., that is, views you contradict and antagonize, despite them being held by persons who would appear to be at least as spiritual as you.

      Your claim that I am “living in delusion” for pointing this out based on your unwillingness or inability to my point and the context in which it is made. As I’ve tried to made clear to you, but to no avail upon your persistant oversimplifications, the fact that not all Christians agree about everything has little bearing on my point, which is that you have explained that the reason why others such as myself could hear what you have to say and not think it is the Truth is that they are fleshly-minded, not spiritually-minded, not repentant, not kingdom-seeking, not faithful to God and Scriptures, etc., even though the views you are attacking have been held by many persons who would appear at least as spiritual as you.

      And are you really more spiritual than all of them? You’ve claimed that the spiritual followers of Christ aware that the Lord’s second coming took place in the first century, but that the fleshly-minded ones are unaware of this. So, which spiritual persons can you name who have believed this? I’ve already named persons who would appear to be at least as spiritual as you who did not believe what you claim.

      You assert your own absolute doctrinal correctness and “knowing” attitude in all these topics of Scripture, despite the fact that you are the only person we know of in the history of scriptural interpretation who has arrived at your combination of views through their own reading of it. Further, you even sooner conclude that the reason for this is that it is certain that all those who disagree with you are wrong or don’t have the truth than to remain open to the possibility that your own fallible or mistaken biases are at work.

      I said that if I were in the same position of only me having arriving at my views I would at the very least remain open to the possibility of being mistaken. In contrast, you denied the very possibility that you are mistaken, portraying such a suggestion as “absurd.”

      So Mike, who’s really in their own little world? Why is it that when anyone prays and come to conclusions that you contradict and antagonize it is impossible that they could be right, but when you pray and come to certain conclusions it is impossible for you to be mistaken, even though only you are known to arrive at these conclusions? Is this not special treatment that curiously favors you?

      How can you say that I’m “living in a delusion,” when in your little universe it’s impossible that you are mistaken?

    1. Mike, you are of at least average intelligence, and are better than this. I’ve already taken pains to explain why “you are certain that I should not be certain” is a gross oversimplication that prevents reasonable evaluation of two objectively different approaches to truth. This is precisely why I have to use so many words.

      I said that if I was the only one I knew of the history of scriptural interpretation who had arrived at my views, and I saw that there are many believers in Christ who have evidence of being at least as spiritual as I am who prayerfully arrived at conclusions that I contradict, I would at the very least be open to the possibility. It is not as if my prayers are self-authenticating and the prayers of other believers are not if I disagree with them. In contrast, you deny the very possibility of being mistaken, and said that I was taking the side of Satan in trying to steal God’s word away by asking you to be open this possibility.

      Let’s say that I met a man who convinced that government documents show that he was the real king of England, but nobody else who had the same government documents was known to think so. I tried to see what reasonable basis he has for such a claim, but eventually he told me, “God told me so, and who am I to trust men rather than God?” Seeing that it was apparently impossible for him to believe otherwise, at last I asked him to be open to the possibility that he is mistaken. But he said, “You are certain that I should not be certain, and that’s absurd. Have you no sense of irony!”

      Can you see how reducing the two positions to “one person being confident that the other shouldn’t be confident and that’s absurd” prevents a reasonable evaluation of the two to see which one is more absurd?
      To a delusional person everyone else is delusional for not believing the delusion.

      Now, of course, you are not claiming you are the king of England. But look at what you are claiming:

      Something that evidently no one else but you believes.

  3. Brandon, I am not claiming something absurd or self-promoting so I don’t see how your “I’m the king of England” analogy holds. Moreover, I’m not suggesting, as your loon does, that ultimately the documents don’t matter and that people should believe me because I’ve prayed about it. On the contrary, the documents are the authoritative voice. And if no one sees what I’m saying in the documents (i.e. the Old and New Testaments), they should not listen to me.

    1. It should be evident that my illustration was used to show why your “you’re being confident that I shouldn’t be confident, and that’s absurd” is an gross oversimplication, especially since you alone deny the possibility that your particular set of interpretations of Scripture could be mistaken, even though you are the only one we can find that holds them in combination, which many people who aren’t Mike Gantt would find absurd. Yes, you aren’t claiming something “self-promoting” in the sense of outwardly royalty; but you are asserting the privilege to say that it’s not possible that your interpretations are your opinions and not the very word of God in Scripture, such that if others–even if they are believers in Christ and interpreting the same body of completed Scriptures as–don’t agree with your claims, they are not spiritual, not kingdom-seeking, etc., and even taking the side of Satan in opposing God’s word/your interpretations. As for your last sentence, I agree, and would say the same thing for any interpretation of Scripture.

    1. I’m asking what good reason is there to think it is not possible that you are mistaken about your doctrinal particulars, when many people trust God and interpret the Scriptures, but only you to our knowledge has arrived at your own views.

    1. I’ve read them, and we’ve discussed some of their main contents..

      Concerning everyone allegedly going to heaven, your scheme has it that after the Lord’s second coming and the resurrection of the dead (which, according to you, happened invisibly in the first century, but only the spiritually-minded are aware of it), everyone “goes” to heaven after death, that people are only judged after death to determine to their placement in heaven, and that “hell” or the “lake of fire” is only during this life on earth. However, I’ve pointed out that according Revelation 20:11-15 at the judgment of the great white throne, the previously dead who were in Hades and the sea and who were not found in the book of life are cast into the lake of fire after death and Hades themselves are cast into the lake of fire. It surely does not portray everyone “going to heaven” after death and being judged only concerning their placement or reward in heaven, like you claim. And concerning the lake of fire, are the dead here being reincarnated or sent as ghosts to go for another round of suffering on earth?

  4. Revelation 20:11-15 does not describe anyone going to heaven. What it does describe is the transformation from the old heavens, earth, and sea to the new heavens and earth (no sea) – which description continues into the next chapter.

    See Whatever Became of Jesus Christ? Part Three – The Nature of the Second Coming.

    See also The Biblical Case for Everyone Going to Heaven: Chapter Eleven – But What About Bad People? and The Biblical Case for Everyone Going to Heaven: Chapter Nine – The New Heavens and the New Earth

    1. New heaven and new earth regardless, it describes the previously dead who were in Hades and the sea being cast into the lake of fire after death and Hades are, if they were not found in the book of life, not everyone or anyone going to heaven. The passage does not need to mention anyone going to heaven in order to speak of previously dead individuals being cast into the lake of fire after death and Hades are.

  5. When Hades gave up the dead they were given up to heaven (1 Thessalonians 4:16). Therefore, the only ones left on earth available to to be thrown into the lake of fire were the living dead (Revelation 3:1) – that is, the tares that had been sown among the wheat (Matthew 13:24-30).

    1. 1 Thessalonians 4:16 is speaking of “the dead in Christ,” those “who fall asleep through Jesus” (cf. Rev. 14:12-13), the believers who together with the living believers will meet Him in the air when He descends from heaven, not of everyone going to “heaven.” We know from Daniel 12:2 and John 5:28-29 that among all who come forth from the tomb that to some it will be a “resurrection of life” and to others “a resurrection of judgment” and “eternal contempt.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.