Billingsly/Benton Debate on The Gospels

 
 
 Proposition: 
 The Scriptures teach that the four books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John -- before 
 the cross, belong to the Old and not the New Testament.
 
 Affirm:  Dan Billingsly
 Deny: Terry Benton
 
 Let me state again  the difference between our  positions.  I am setting forth what the Scriptures 
 teach on the difference between the Old and New Testaments, and Terry is  preaching and 
 promoting the Roman Catholic "heresy" of 1486 AD. This is abundantly clear from our first two 
 exchanges.
 
 Once again, Terry refuses to answer my questions. When Terry argued that "All Scripture" from 
 both the Old and New Testaments is profitable for New Testament doctrine, I asked him the 
 following questions.
 
 "Terry, when Christ commanded 'animal blood sacrifice' in keeping Moses commandment in  
 Matthew 8:1-4 -- is that New Testament doctrine? Are 'the ten commandments' in Exodus 20 New 
 Testament doctrine? 
 
 "How long, Terry, since you and the Trussville church ate the Passover as commanded by Christ  
 in Matthew 26? Terry, can one be "saved" today like the "thief" on the cross in Luke 23?"  
 
 Why does Terry avoid answering my questions? Friends, Terry doesn't believe or  practice what 
 he preaches!
 
 It is unbelievable that Terry believes and teaches that "All Scripture" in the Old Testament law of 
 Moses is New Testament doctrine. Terry is wrong, wrong, wrong!
 
 Terry, because he is under the influence and scepter of the Pope, is  simply wrong on every 
 argument he makes!  Terry is wrong on everything he teaches about the covenants. Come on 
 Terry, quit hiding behind the Pope's throne,  answer my questions and arguments -- debate the 
 proposition like a New Testament gospel preacher!
  
 Terry just can't get past the proposition! Although I have proven the proposition in every 
 affirmative, he just keeps coming back to his quibbling because he cannot answer my arguments 
 from the Scriptures.  The deeper I go into the Scriptures, the more difficulty Terry has with his 
 error. I will let the readers decide whether or not I have proven the proposition in every 
 affirmative. I am moving on!
 
 It is incredible that Terry doe's not understand that the Old Testament consists of not just one 
 covenant, but a series of different covenants. Please notice that Terry, in his second negative,  did 
 not even mention the fact that Moses said that the covenant of "the ten commandments" God made 
 with Israel at Mt. Sinai was not the same covenant that he had made with the earlier fathers (Deut. 
 5:1-3). 
 
 Terry asks about the commandment for the pre-Sinai Jews to observe the Passover in Exodus 12.  
 This was not the commandment in the Mosaical covenant given at Mt Sinai, for God gave a new 
 commandment for the Passover feast in Leviticus 23. Once again, Terry is mistaken in his 
 teaching of the Scriptures.  If Terry  had 10,000 words in his negative he couldn't answer the 
 arguments I make from the Scriptures.
 
 Terry,  when Paul mentions the "first" and "second" covenants in Hebrews 9:1, the Scriptures are 
 clearly  referring to the "first" covenant as the old Mosaical covenant and the "second" covenant as 
 the new covenant of Christ in Acts 2 through Revelation 22. There is no "third" covenant as Terry 
 suggests.
 
 Terry moans because I teach New Testament doctrine on what will happen to New Testament 
 Christians (like Terry) in this new covenant age,  who seek to be under , teach and be justified by 
 the works of the Old Testament law of Moses, as  taught by Christ the Messiah in MMLJBC. Here 
 is the scriptural reason.
 
 "Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even 
 we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ and not by the 
 works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified" (Gal. 2:16).
 
 "Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen 
 from grace" (Gal. 5:4). 
 
 Brethren, Terry doesn't believe either Christ or Paul, for Terry believes that "All Scripture" from 
 Genesis through Revelation is New Testament doctrine.  The New Testament teaches that this 
 damnable doctrine will condemn all who believe and follow this error.
 
 Terry's Questions For Dan
 
 1. Terry's Question:
 "God, who at sundry times and in diverse manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the 
 prophets, Hath in these last days spoken unto us by His Son..." (Heb. 1:1-2). When did Jesus speak 
 these things, if not during His earthly ministry? 
 
 Dan's Answer: 
 The Scriptures teach that the "last days" of Hebrews 1:1-2 refer to the New Testament age of Acts 
 2 through Revelation 22, not the Old Testament age of MMLJBC. Acts 1:2-3 teaches that during 
 the forty days that Jesus was with his disciples after his resurrection that he was "...speaking of the 
 things pertaining to the New Testament  kingdom of God." Then, every word of the New 
 Testament of Christ in Acts 2 through Revelation 22 is Christ's new covenant teaching revealed 
 through the Holy Spirit and apostles in these "last" new covenant "days" in God's eternal scheme 
 of redemption.
 
 At the close of the forty days, when Christ gave the New Testament commission for the eleven to 
 "...go into all the world" in Matthew 28:19-20, he commanded "...teaching them to observe all 
 things I have commanded you..." Terry believes and teaches that the "all things" of Matthew 28:20 
 referred to all of the teaching of Christ in MMLJBC, but in reality the "all things" referred only to 
 the "all things" of New Testament doctrine  that he taught them during the forty days he was with 
 them after his resurrection and before his ascension (Acts 1:2-3).
 
 2. Terry's Question: 
 "How shall we escape if we neglect so great salvation, which at the first was spoken by the Lord, 
 and was confirmed unto us by them that heard Him?" (Heb. 2:3). What things were "first 
 SPOKEN by the Lord?" 
 
 Dan's Answer: 
 The Scriptures teach that in MMLJBC, Jesus spoke only of Old Testament salvation for the Jews 
 of Israel (Matt. 19:16-20). Jesus FIRST SPOKE of New Testament salvation after the cross, after 
 the Old Testament age ended, after the old Mosaical covenant was abolished, after his resurrection 
 as described in Matthew 28, Mark 16, Luke 24, John 20-21 and Acts 1. 
 
 Those eleven disciples who "heard Jesus" in Matthew 28, Mark 16, Luke 24, John 20-21 and Acts 
 1, those who were to become his new covenant apostles in Acts 2,   are the ones who "confirmed" 
 the New Testament teaching of Christ in Acts 2 through Revelation 22.  Hebrews 2:3 refers to the 
 "all" New Testament "truth" in the revelation of Christ through the Spirit to the apostles (Mk. 
 16:20). This is in perfect harmony with Hebrews 2:3
 
 3. Terry's Question: 
 Was the gospel Jesus preached before the cross (Matt. 24:14 -"this gospel of the kingdom") going 
 to be preached in all the world in the New Testament age?
 
 Dan's Answer: 
 In Matthew 24, Jesus is describing the destruction of the temple in Jerusalem and the "end" of the 
 Old Testament Jewish "world." Brother R.L. Whiteside, in his book Doctrinal Discourses, p. 294-
 296, states that "the end of the world" in verse 3, as in verse 14,  means the consummation of the 
 Jewish age -- not the end of the New Testament age and/or  physical world.  The end of the Old 
 Testament age at the cross and the destruction of the temple certainly was  a "witness" to all 
 nations by the apostles as the preached the New Testament gospel of the death, burial and 
 resurrection of Christ to "all the world" in the book of Acts.  The gospel preached in MMLJBC 
 was the Old Testament Mosaical gospel for only old covenant Israel.
 
 4. Terry's Question:  
 Was this same gospel going to include the story of the woman who washed Jesus' feet (Matt. 
 26:13), and was this same gospel going to be preached "in the whole world" after the cross and in 
 the New Testament age?
 
 Dan's Answer: 
 The answer to the "world" in Matthew 24:14 and 26:13 is the same.  The word "gospel" in both of 
 these passages referred to the Old Testament Mosaical gospel (Lk. 4:14-21) that John the baptizer 
 of Israel and Jesus the Messiah preached to only the "last generation" of Jews in Israel -- before 
 the cross.
 
 Question for Terry: If you think the word "gospel" here means the New Testament gospel and if 
 you think the word "world" here means the whole New Testament world, where in the record of 
 the apostles preaching and teaching in Acts 2 through Revelation 22 is the mention of this 
 woman?  Answer: It is not mentioned in the apostles new covenant preaching!  Once again, Terry 
 is wrong, wrong,  wrong!
 
 Dan's "Over 100 Times" Argument
 
 Not only can Terry not get the covenants right, he can't even count! 
 
 Terry said that he could only find about 65 times when MMLJ and Jesus said that he was teaching 
 the law of Moses. Then Terry starts adding, multiplying and subtracting and comes up with the 
 idea that Jesus declared that he was teaching the law of Moses in MMLJBC about 40 times.
 
 OK, Terry, let's use your 40 times. Now,  you show us  one (1) time in MMLJBC where Jesus 
 declared, stated or said that he was teaching New Testament doctrine.  We are waiting! Later, in 
 Benton's Reply, Terry then states that Jesus NEVER declared "I am teaching the OT law of 
 Moses." Now, which is  it Terry, 40 times or NEVER?  Terry goes on and on trying to count and 
 recount,  define and redefine words in an effort to prove his point. But he cannot prove his 
 argument,  because the Scriptures do not teach Terry's doctrinal error.  Terry is  confused and 
 befuddled as he continues to count and recount. 
 
 Terry  looks exactly like Al Gore, the Democratic party and the Florida Supreme Court in last 
 year's presidential election.
 
 Terry, Jesus quoted the old covenant law of Moses during the Old Testament age in MMLJBC 
 because he was actually teaching the law to the old covenant children of God  in the "last 
 generation" of Jews in Israel. He was teaching the law of Moses in MMLJBC because he and all 
 other Israelites were still under the law while it  was still in force. 
 
 In the New Testament, the apostle Paul and others quoted the Old Testament law of Moses to 
 show that it had been fulfilled and ended at the cross, and that the Jews were no longer under the 
 law of Moses.  No New Testament writer in Acts 2 through Revelation 22 ever quoted the Old 
 Testament law of Moses to show that Jewish New Testament Christians  were still under the old 
 covenant law.
 
 What about John 3:16?  This passage was spoken to Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews under the law 
 of Moses whom Jesus called "...a master of Israel"  (Jn. 3:1, 10).  Nicodemus called Jesus a Rabbi 
 or Jewish teacher of the law of Moses (Jn. 3:2).  In John 3:14, Jesus speaks of the time in the Old 
 Testament when Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, and that every Israelite who looked 
 or believed on the serpent was saved from the serpents and lived (Num. 21:9). In John 3:16, Jesus 
 is saying to Israel that as the Messiah was lifted up, all Jews who looked and believed on the 
 Messiah and followed his teaching of the law would be saved from their sin and have eternal life.
 
 Notice that John uses the past-tense describing the fact that God "gave" Christ the Messiah to save  
 old covenant Israel (Matt. 1:21, 2:6; 15:24).  In John 3:16, Jesus is teaching that at the time he 
 spoke to Nicodemus, God had already given his Son in his virgin birth to save Israel. This 
 harmonizes perfectly with every other passage of Scripture in MMLJBC (i.e., Matt. 1:21; 2:6)that 
 describes Jesus old covenant mission and work in Old Testament Israel.  Terry's interpretation 
 harmonizes perfectly with Calvinistic doctrine.
 
 Has Terry now left the Roman Catholics and  joined with the  Baptists and promoting their false 
 "faith-only" salvation?  John 3:16 discusses Old Testament faith of the Jews in Israel in their 
 Messiah sent from God. John 3:16 does not refer to nor relate to the New Testament! 
 
  The past-tense in John 3:16, "...he gave..."  shows clearly that the Old Testament action had 
 already taken place, and that John 3:16 was not speaking to alien sinners or Christians in this New 
 Testament age. 
 
 What about John 8:24?  Here Jesus is speaking again to unbelieving Jews only. John 8:1-23 
 describes the Old Testament Jerusalem temple, scribes and Pharisees, the law of Moses, the two 
 witnesses required in the law of Moses as seen in Deuteronomy 17:6 and Jesus teaching the law of 
 Moses to the Jews in the treasury of the temple. John 8:24 is spoken to Old Testament Jews under 
 the old covenant law of Moses who had not believed on the Messiah. Not one word in John 8 
 about New Testament faith, doctrine, etc. Terry has preached his false denominational  
 interpretation of these passages until he now believes it to be true. No help for Terry in John 3:16 
 or 8:24!
 
 Every old covenant command of  Jesus  in MMLJBC for Old Testament Jews to believe in their 
 Messiah  passed away with the rest of the Old Covenant law of Moses at the cross,  and every new 
 commandment (Jn. 13:34-35) that he gave in the law as the last prophet  sent to Israel  also passed 
 away at the cross (Heb. 10:9-10). Every part of the Old Testament law of Moses, including the 
 teaching of Jesus the Messiah in MMLJBC was abolished at the cross (Col. 2:14; 2 Cor. 3:6-14). 
 Terry is simply  wrong on every point he attempts to make in this debate.
 
 3RD AFFIRMATIVE by Dan Billingsly
 
 Proposition: The Scriptures teach that the four books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John -- before 
 the cross --belong to the Old and not the New Testament.
 
 In our 2ND AFFIRMATIVE  and in Argument 9,  as we successfully proved our proposition by 
 thirteen powerful arguments on the text and context of MMLJBC,  brother Benson in his 2nd 
 Negative  did not even as much as mention these thirteen scriptural and undeniable statements. He 
 did not because he could not!
 
 This is another clear sign to all thinking brethren that Terry has simply given up the debate.  Since 
 his 1st Negative, he has not been able to get past the proposition. He has done nothing but ramble 
 all over the place with senseless talk  disconnected from the proposition.  I am moving on in the 
 discussion.
 
 The Old Testament Age And Doctrine Of  "The Sermon On The Mount" In Matthew 5 - 7
 
 ARGUMENT 10: The Old Testament age and doctrine contained in "the sermon on the mount" as 
 taught by Christ to the Old Testament people of Israel proves that MMLJBC belong to the Old and 
 not the New Testament.  All of Christ's  teaching in "the sermon on the mount" (a sectarian title 
 not found in the Scriptures) was  addressed only to the Jews of Israel,  all teaching was taken 
 directly from the law of Moses,  and summarized by Christ as "the law and the prophets" (Matt. 
 7:12). Just look at the powerful arguments Terry cannot SCRIPTURALLY answer.
 
 1. Matthew 5:1-12: "Beatitudes" were a form of Old Testament teaching often found in the 
 prophets, Psalms and Proverbs. No New Testament gospel here! Beatitudes are not common 
 to or a form of Jesus' teaching in  the New Testament of Acts 2 through Revelation 22.
 
 2. Matthew 5:13-16: Jesus identifies that he is addressing these teachings only to those old 
 covenant children of God in Israel who were "the salt of the earth" and "the light of the world" 
 whose old covenant "works" and obedience to the law of Moses  glorified their Father in heaven 
 (vs. 13-16). Note that the people Jesus addressed called God their "Father"!  No New Testament 
 gospel here! Only Old Testament Jews of Israel called God "Father,"  non-covenant Gentiles did 
 not call God their "Father."
 
 3. Matthew 5:17-18: Jesus declares that as the promised Messiah he did not come to destroy the 
 law,  or the prophets, he came to fulfill all of the promises and prophecies of God in his covenant 
 with  Israel. No New Testament gospel here! Christ came to only Old Testament Israel in 
 MMLJBC  to "fulfill" the law of Moses, not to reveal New Testament doctrine.
 
 4.  Matthew 5:19-26: Jesus speaks of Old Testament commandments in the law of Moses and how 
 the common Jew's righteousness in the law must exceed the hypocritical righteousness of the 
 scribes and Pharisees. Then, more than 120 times in MMLJBC Jesus contrasts the false rabbinical 
 traditions of that day with his teaching of the true law of Moses. When Jesus said, "Ye have heard 
 it said of them of old time..." he was referring to the false teaching of the rabbis that had arisen in 
 Israel over the past 400 years, then when he said "...but I say unto you..." -- as the Messiah he was 
 referring to the true law of Moses he was teaching in MMLJBC. Not once in MMLJBC did Jesus 
 contrast New Testament doctrine with the Old Testament law of Moses as many misled gospel 
 preachers, such as Terry, have assumed.
 
 The word brother in verse 22 refers to Old Testament brethren  in Israel -- not New Testament 
 brethren in Christ or the New Testament church. The gift, the altar and the reconciliation of verses 
 23-24 all refer to Old Testament teaching of the law of Moses for the public worship of Jews at the 
 temple in Jerusalem.  No New Testament doctrine here! Terry, since you believe this is New 
 Testament doctrine, where do you make your sacrifices and where is  your altar?
 
 5. Matthew 5:27-32 (see also 19:3-12): In response to the false rabbinical tradition or 
 interpretation of Exodus 20:14 and Deuteronomy 5:18 that condemned only the overt act of 
 adultery, Jesus shows that the law of Moses in Exodus 20:14 also condemned lust in the heart 
 which always preceded the overt act. Then Jesus goes on to show that if the Jews' right hand and 
 eye offended the law of Moses  -- then cut them off and pluck them out!
 
 If Terry and all other traditional gospel preachers among us really believed that Matthew 5 -7 and 
 all of MMLJBC was New Testament doctrine -- and practiced what they preach, what a bloody-
 mess they would make of the church! But the fact is they don't believe what Jesus teaches in 
 MMLJBC is really New Testament doctrine and they certainly don't practice what they say they 
 believe. Is this hypocrisy?
 
 Unfortunately, when Terry and other traditional brethren insist that MMLJBC belong to the New 
 Testament, all they ever to teach the church from these four books is a some old covenant ethics 
 and morality -- and, of course, Christ's teaching of the Old Testament law of Moses on marriage, 
 divorce and remarriage in Matthew 19.
 
 To these Old Testament teachings of the law of Moses on marriage, divorce and remarriage in 
 Matthew 19,  Terry and others have added fifteen different traditional doctrines that are false 
 because they are of purely human and uninspired origin.  For example, Terry teaches that most 
 people in a second marriage are living in adultery in an adulterous marriage. Brethren, these two 
 phrases are not mentioned in the entire Bible, much less the New Testament, therefore these two 
 unscriptural and non-mentioned phrases do not represent New Testament doctrine. It is 
 scripturally impossible for a man to commit adultery with his wife.
 
 In Matthew 5:31-32, Jesus discusses what the Old Testament law of Moses taught Jews in 
 Deuteronomy 24:1-4 about  divorce and remarriage. In Matthew5:33-37, Jesus teaches Jews what 
 the Old Testament law of Moses taught in  Leviticus 19:12 about  perjury and making unlawful 
 oaths. In Matthew 5:38-48, Jesus described  what the Old Testament law of Moses taught  Jews in 
 Leviticus 19:18 about  revenge, retaliation and loving their Jewish neighbors in Israel. Jesus closes 
 Matthew 5 with this statement about these Jews being the children of their Father in heaven.  No 
 New Testament doctrine in Matthew 5! 
 
 The same holds true with Matthew 6 and Jesus teaching the Jews  their alms deeds, praying in the 
 synagogues, the Lord's prayer for Jewish disciples of the Messiah, how to fast, the danger of 
 earthly treasures, the danger of trying to serve two masters, and of confidence and faith that old 
 covenant Jewish children of God should have in the heavenly Father.
 
 In Matthew 6:33, Terry and other traditional  brethren  have misunderstood the phrase "...the 
 kingdom of God" to mean the New Testament kingdom of Christ. In Matthew 6 Jesus is teaching 
 Jews about living the faithful life of and old covenant Israelite in the old covenant kingdom of 
 Israel, not a New Testament Christian in the church. If the unfaithful Jews of his day would seek 
 the true meaning in the Old Testament kingdom of Israel and its righteousness, all that they 
 needed would be "added" unto them. 
 
 The same is true of Matthew 7 and Jesus' teaching the Jews about the dangers of judging one 
 another under the law of Moses,  that the old covenant holy things of the law of Moses  could not 
 be shared with the Gentile dogs who were outside  covenant of Israel, directions for scriptural 
 praying (ask, seek, knock) in Israel, the need for the Jews to walk in the "straight and narrow" way 
 of the law of Moses, the Jews would be known by the fruits as they kept the works of the law and 
 finally the Jew who listened to the Messiah and believed in and followed his teaching of the law 
 would be a wise builder who built on the solid rock foundation of the old covenant law of Moses. 
 Finally, the people compared Jesus teaching of the law of Moses to the scribes. 
 
 I wish time and space permitted a complete and detailed analysis  of  each chapter of Matthew, 
 Mark, Luke and John -- before the cross, but this study according to the rules  must now come to a 
 close.  Just remember, I contend that the text and context of MMLJBC declare that these four 
 books belong to the Old and not the New Testament. Terry argues that when a book was written 
 declares to which covenant that book belongs.  
 
 Remember, Terry teaches that "all Scripture" in the Bible is profitable for New Testament 
 doctrine.  The New Testament Scriptures deny Terry's doctrine.  
 
 We have repeatedly proven our proposition that the Scriptures declare that all of the teaching of 
 Christ in MMLJBC belongs to the Old and not the New Testament. Our prayers are for Terry and 
 all traditional brethren, that they may come to understand the New Testament truth of Christ, the 
 Holy Spirit and apostles  revealed in Acts 2 through Revelation 22.
 
 Our best wishes to Terry and all readers!