Wednesday, April 22, 2015

Review of a COC vs MAD debate on Youtube

There was a debate out in Colorado between the Church of Christ evangelist and a so called "Mid-Acts Dispensationalist" named Bob Enyart. The so called "Mid-Acts Dispensationalist" clearly had no idea what he was doing.

Here is the link:

I may have missed it, but I didn't recall Bob Enyart ever even giving the gospel of the grace of God, 1 Corinthians 15:1-5. That Christ died for our sins, was buried, and rose again the third day. There was a lot of talk about believing on Jesus and believe that He was the Son of God, but that is not the gospel of the grace of God (1 Cor. 1, 2, 15, Rom 3-5, Col. 1:14, etc.). The Deity of Christ and His finished work is the gospel. The Deity of Christ is only half of it (Rom. 1:1-4).

Bob Enyart also appears to believe in drinking alcohol (see his website), which is utter nonsense (Prov. 23:29-24).

Also, Bob Enyart would not answer Erhardt's 2 points:

#1 Peter and Paul preached the same faith (Gal. 1:23)

#2 Peter and Paul preached the same way (Acts 9:2 with Acts 19:9)

Neither of those points accurately represent Mid-Acts Dispensationalism. We believe that the Christian faith and Jesus being the way are TRANSDISPENSATIONAL i.e. always true no matter if you are living under the Gospel of the Kingdom in the Tribulation of living under the Gospel of the Grace of God under grace.

"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." (John 14:6)

"Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." (Acts 4:12)

Those truths are true in any dispensation, Erhardt's points are not real points at all. They were simply "zingers".

Bob Enyart also didn't answer Erhardt on Galatians 2:8. Erhardt insisted that the interpretation of the verse was that the "gospel of the circumcision" and the "gospel of the uncircumcision" were the same gospel aimed at different audiences. In other words, Ehardt says that the audience is what is different, not the gospel that was preached. That is obviously wrong. If you just compare Peter's sending with Paul's sending you will know that they had different gospels.

Peter's sending:

Mark 16:15-16 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Matthew 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

Acts 2:37-38 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Paul's sending:

Acts 26:
[15] And I said, Who art thou, Lord? And he said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.
[16] But rise, and stand upon thy feet: for I have appeared unto thee for this purpose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee;
[17] Delivering thee from the people, and from the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee,
[18] To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me

Acts 20:24 But none of these things move me, neither count I my life dear unto myself, so that I might finish my course with joy, and the ministry, which I have received of the Lord Jesus, to testify the gospel of the grace of God.

1 Corinthians 1:
[17] For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.
[18] For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God.
[19] For it is written, I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.
[20] Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
[21] For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe

If those aren't two different sendings and gospels, then I don't know what is. Peter was sent to preach the Gospel of the Kingdom to all the world (Matt. 24:14): he that believed and was baptized would be saved. Paul was was sent not to baptize but to testify of the Gospel of the Grace of God (1 Cor. 1:17, Acts 20:24).

If that doesn't prove they had different gospels, how about Acts 2:37-39 compared with Acts 16:30-31?

Acts 2:37-38 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Acts 16:30-31 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

Now about Galatians 2:8, which Erhardt said was an issue of audience and not content. LOOK AT THE CONTEXT!

Galatians 1:11-12 But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was preached of me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.

Galatians 2:
[1] Then fourteen years after I went up again to Jerusalem with Barnabas, and took Titus with me also.
[2] And I went up by revelation, and communicated unto them that gospel which I preach among the Gentiles, but privately to them which were of reputation, lest by any means I should run, or had run, in vain.
[3] But neither Titus, who was with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised:
[4] And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage:
[5] To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.
[6] But of these who seemed to be somewhat, (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no man's person:) for they who seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing to me:
[7] But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter;
[8] (For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles:)
[9] And when James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we should go unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision

Erhardt was too spiritually blinded to look at the context and Enyart was to dumb to read the context. (too put it rudely 2 Cor. 11:6)

Other failures of the debate on Enyart's part were these:

1.) He did not give the gospel of the grace of God.

2.) He did not use the infallible word of God, the King James Bible. He messed around with an ESV, NKJV, and some Greek googly gook.

3.) Failure to mention ALL the requirements of the Gospel of the Kingdom such as good morals, enduring to the end, and selling all.

4.) Failure to mention Acts 1:6, and 3:19-26 where Peter offered the Kingdom to Israel and told them that their sins would not be blotted out UNTIL THE SECOND ADVENT.

5.) Failure to look at 2 Peter 3:15 where Peter admits that Paul had special revelation that was hard to be understood. "And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction."

6.) Failure to start off with a Premillennium-vs-Amillennium. Naturally the COC are not going to put a distinction between the Gospel of the Kingdom and the Gospel of the Grace of God--they don't even believe there will be a kingdom!

As for Erhardt, he did a good job as one of Satan's ministers trying to deceive people with a false gospel (2 Cor. 11:15).

Erhardt claimed that Cornelius in Acts 10 was saved when he got water baptized and that the baptism with the Holy Ghost did not save him. That is clearly wrong.

Acts 10:
[43] To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.
[44] While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
[45] And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
[46] For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
[47] Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
[48] And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days

Acts 15:
[7] And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them, Men and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago God made choice among us, that the Gentiles by my mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and believe.
[8] And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
[9] And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.
[10] Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?
[11] But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved, even as they

Okay. Was Cornelius saved by grace through faith alone without works at the moment he received the Holy Ghost? Yes!

1.) Cornelius received the Holy Ghost, which means he was out of the flesh and saved (Rom. 8:1-9).

2.) Cornelius was led by the Holy Spirit to speak in tongues, which means he was a son of God (Rom. 8:14).

3.) Cornelius was no longer in the world (spiritually), because the world cannot receive the Holy Ghost (John 14:17).

4.) Cornelius magnified God, therefore he was saved and our of the flesh (Rom. 8:8).

Erhardt missed every one of those points. (shame on Enyart for not bringing them up!)

I emailed Mr. Erhardt after someone sent me the debate and challenged him on these issues. He replied

" I recommend that you visit and view the video sermon I preached on baptism. It is on the homepage. Get back with me after you see it. I will respond to any questions, clarifications, challenges, etc. at that time."

He corresponded a little bit and gave me the classic COC hop-scotch through Mark 16, Acts 2, Rom. 6, Gal. 3, 1 Pet. 3:21, etc. but never answered ONE of my points. (even though he said he would answer "ANY" challenges. 

Pray for Mr. Erhardt that he will believe the gospel and trust Christ rather than attempt to establish his own righteousness (Rom. 10:1-4).

--Eli Caldwell

1 comment:

  1. How's it going Mr. Caldwell,
    I see that this is a old topic but I just hope and pray you are not still denying the truth of the gospel. God bless.


Your questions or comments welcome.