Billingsly/Benton Debate on The Gospels

 
 
 Proposition: 
 The scriptures teach that one will be blessed today who obeys Jesus' righteous principles for His 
 kingdom described to some extent in Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John in the parts of their 
 documents that describe what Jesus said before He died on the cross. 
 
 Affirm:  Terry Benton
 Deny: Dan Billingsly
 
 1. Who is the one that will be blessed in this proposition?  Is Terry  teaching that an alien sinner, 
 one who is not a New Testament Christian, can be blessed by keeping Christ's teaching of the Old 
 Testament law of Moses in MMLJBC without becoming a New Testament child of God? 
 
 2. What does Terry mean by  a righteous principle?  Jesus never states that he is revealing 
 righteous principles of the New Testament kingdom in MMLJBC; Jesus never defines a righteous 
 principle in MMLJBC,  so how does Terry know what is and what isn't a righteous principle of 
 Christ's kingdom?  In fact, Jesus never uses the word principle in MMLJBC.  The only place 
 where the word principle is used, as I have consistently argued, is  in the true New Testament of 
 Jesus Christ in Acts 2 through Revelation 22 (Heb. 5:12; 6:1).
 
 What Terry means is that he is going to go through MMLJBC and "pick and choose" what he  
 wants to use as a righteous principle according to his faulty interpretation of the Scriptures.  
 Christ's teaching of the Old Testament law of Moses in MMLJBC certainly doesn't support Terry's 
 arbitrary choices of righteous principles. 
 
 3. Terry labored long and hard, with  my  previous affirmative debate proposition, to prove that 
 MMLJBC did not "describe" the teaching of  Christ -- before the cross. Now,  that is exactly what 
 Terry says  it means in his proposition. Who is Terry kidding?
 
 4. Because the word "principle" is not found in MMLJBC, Terry cannot prove his proposition. 
 The  debate is over! Terry loses! 
 
 What Jesus Taught In MMLJBC
 
 Terry moans because I teach New Testament doctrine on what will happen to New Testament 
 Christians 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). 
 
 Terry, Please Do No Misrepresent The Facts
 
 Terry affirms that I affirmed in the first debate that the four books of MMLJBC existed before the 
 cross, and he staked much of his rebuttal in that debate on this misrepresentation.  I made no such 
 argument. I agreed with Terry that the four books of MMLJBC, according to manuscript 
 authorities, were not written until some thirty-five to forty years after Acts 2, so the books could 
 not have existed until they were written.
 
 Now what does this mean? It means that MMLJBC were not part of "the apostles' doctrine" 
 preached during the first thirty-five to forty years of the book of Acts 2 and late into 1st century 
 New Testament history. There is no record in the New Testament of Jesus Christ in Acts 2 through 
 Revelation 22 of the apostles preaching MMLJBC in  Acts 2 through Revelation 22. This means, 
 in the new covenant revelation of Christ, the Holy Spirit and apostles,  that MMLJBC belonged to 
 the Old and not the New Testament.
 
 What I do teach is that MMLJBC, although written after Acts 2,  describe the last thirty-three 
 years of the old covenant age and the events of the life of Christ while he was under and teaching 
 the Old Testament law of Moses to the last generation of Jews in Israel. Terry, please do not 
 misrepresent these facts.
 
 Terry's "Proof" Of His Proposition
 
 Although the debate is already over  because the word principle  in Terry's proposition is not in 
 MMLJBC and therefore Terry cannot prove his proposition,  in brotherly kindness I will  continue 
 to expose Terry's fraudulent, contrived  and unscriptural claims. 
 
 1.  John 14:25-26: Although Terry interprets this verse to mean that the Holy Spirit would "bring" 
 to the twelve Jewish disciples a remembrance of all things that Jesus said to them in MMLJBC, 
 when Terry's argument  is put to the test -- it fails.  
 
 THE SCRIPTURES TEACH THAT THE  HOLY SPIRIT DID NOT QUOTE OR REPEAT ONE 
 WORD THAT CHRIST TAUGHT FROM THE OLD TESTAMENT AGE AND DOCTRINE OF 
 MMLJBC -- IN ACTS 2 THROUGH REVELATION 22 .  THEREFORE, THE HOLY SPIRIT  
 DID NOT BRING ONE WORD OR DOCTRINE FROM MMLJBC TO THEIR 
 REMEMBRANCE IN THE NEW TESTAMENT AGE!  
 
 Not one word!!! Check it out. Because of this fact, it is clear that Terry has misinterpreted and 
 misapplied John 14:25-26.  Terry cannot produce one verse from MMLJBC, therefore once again 
 Terry is wrong, wrong, wrong.  Let's look at the Old Testament  text and context of John 14:25-26.
 
 First, Terry did not quote for our readers verse 24 in  which Jesus identified the Old Testament law 
 of Moses to which Jesus' teaching in verses 25-26  belong.  In verse 24,  Jesus said, "...and the 
 word which you hear is not mine, but the Father's  which sent me." 
 
 Shame on you, Terry, for not giving our readers the text and context of John 12: Jesus was 
 teaching his Father's old covenant law of Moses in John 12!  Why didn't you give our readers all 
 the information? When you keep John 14:25-26 in its scriptural old Mosaical covenant text and 
 context, as did Jesus, this puts a completely different interpretation on the passage. 
 
 This is what happens when Terry or anyone else  tries to interpret the Scriptures by individual 
 verses rather than by whole covenants. John 12:25-26, as every other chapter and verse in 
 MMLJBC, must be interpreted in light of Christ's  teaching of the law of Moses in all four books.  
 MMLJBC must be interpreted by the text and context of the teaching of the law of Moses, the old 
 Mosaical covenant to which these books belong.
 
 Second, the  "all things" that Jesus had earlier taught these twelve Jewish disciples in MMLJBC 
 can be summed up in the following  passages.  
 
 "Think not that I have come to destroy the law, or the prophets, : I am not come to destroy but to 
 fulfill. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise 
 pass from the law, till all be fulfilled" (Matt. 5:17-18). Everything Jesus taught in MMLJBC 
 related to his teaching of the law of Moses and its fulfillment.
 
 "Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for 
 this is the law and the prophets" (Matt. 7:12). Again, Jesus specifically states more than 100 times 
 that he is teaching the Old Testament  law of Moses and the prophets in MMLJBC. Not once in 
 MMLJBC did Jesus ever state that he was teaching New Testament doctrine.
 
 "For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will,  but the will of him that sent me" (Jn. 
 6:38).  In MMLJBC, Jesus was not teaching or revealing his New Testament will to the Old 
 Testament Jews of Israel, he was teaching and doing the old covenant will of God in the law of 
 Moses in Israel.
 
 "My doctrine is  not mine,  but his that sent me" (Jn. 7:16).  How clearly Jesus expresses him 
 mission and work of teaching Jehovah's  old covenant doctrine of the law of Moses to Israel. 
 
 "For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment, 
 what I should say and what I should speak. And I know that his commandment is life everlasting: 
 whatsoever I speak  therefore, even as the Father said unto me, so I speak" (Jn. 12:49-50).  How 
 clearly Jesus sets forth his teaching  to the Jews of Israel as to "all things" in Jehovah's old 
 covenant will in the fulfillment and conclusion of the Old Testament age.
 
 In John 14:24-26, Jesus was not speaking, as Terry has misunderstood,  of "all things" regarding 
 New Testament doctrine he had revealed, for Jesus  revealed no new covenant doctrine in 
 MMLJBC. He was speaking of "all things" that the Messiah had to teach and inform Israel about 
 the true law of Moses and the final fulfillment of the law by his death on the cross (Lk. 24:44-45).  
 Remember, more than 100 times Jesus declared that he was teaching the law of Moses in 
 MMLJBC. Not once, not once did he ever declare in MMLJBC that he was teaching New 
 Testament doctrine. 
 
 Let us remember, even the twelve chosen disciples that Jesus was speaking to in John 14, (eleven 
 after Judas died), had to be persuaded of "all things" that Christ taught about the fact that he would 
 fulfill and abolish the Mosaical covenant at the cross --  and bring an end to Israel as described in 
 MMLJBC (2 Cor. 3:6-14; Rom. 10:1-4).
 
 I have successfully denied Terry's argument,  John 14:25-26 does not prove Terry's  proposition.
 
 2. Hebrews 2:3-4: Terry labors under the false impression that this passage teaches that Jesus 
 began to speak of "the great salvation" of the New Testament  in MMLJBC. He says that Hebrews 
 2:3-4 agrees with John 14:25-26. Let's check  out Terry's argument in the Scriptures and 
 Covenants.
 
 First, does MMLJBC teach that Jesus first spoke of "the great salvation" of the New Testament in 
 the Old Testament age of MMLJBC -- while old covenant salvation for Israel was still in force? 
 No! Jesus spoke only of Old Testament salvation for Israel in MMLJBC.  Moses and the prophets, 
 including Christ as the last Old Testament prophet in MMLJBC, spoke more than eighty times of 
 the Old Testament salvation of Israel -- not once did Christ speak  of New Testament salvation in 
 MMLJBC.
 
 "Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for he hath visited and redeemed his people. And hath raised 
 up an horn of salvation for us in the house of his servant David...To perform the mercy promised 
 to our fathers, and to remember his holy covenant...And thou child, shalt be called the prophet of 
 the Highest: for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways; To give knowledge 
 of salvation unto his people by the remission of their sins...And the child grew, and waxed strong 
 in spirit, and was in the deserts till the day of shewing unto Israel" (Lk. 1:67-80).  No speaking of 
 New Testament "salvation" here relating to Hebrews 2:2-3 -- for John the Baptist preached only 
 Old Testament salvation for Israel in MMLJBC. 
 
 "And she shall  bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name Jesus: for he shall save his people 
 from their sins" (Matt. 1:21).  Jesus was sent to bring salvation to only Israel, God's old covenant 
 people (Matt. 2:6)  by the teaching of the Old Testament law of Moses in MMLJBC.
 
 "Ye worship ye know not what: we know what we worship, for salvation is of the Jews" (Jn. 
 4:22).  Jesus closes the door on Terry's  argument by stating that the "salvation" spoken of in 
 MMLJBC was the Old Testament salvation of only Israel.
 
 Not once in MMLJBC, does Jesus ever mention "the great salvation" of the New Testament. 
 Terry's argument that Hebrews 2:2-3 teaches that Christ began speaking of New Testament 
 salvation in MMLJBC is simply not true.
 
 How did Jesus use the phrase "eternal life" in MMLJBC?
 
 "16And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may 
 have eternal life? 
 17And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God: but 
 if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments. 
 18He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit 
 adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, 
 19Honour thy father and thy mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. 20The young 
 man saith unto him, All these things have I kept from my youth up: what lack I yet?" (Matt. 19:16-20). 
  Here, Jesus tells this Jew that he must keep the commandments of the Old Testament law of 
 Moses to have "eternal life" or salvation under the law. No speaking of New Testament salvation 
 in Matthew 19:16-20.
 
 "25And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to 
 inherit eternal life? 
 26He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou? 
 27And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy 
 soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself. 
 28And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live" (Lk. 10:25-28).  
 
 Here, Jesus specifically points this Jew to obey the Old Testament law of Moses, no speaking of 
 New Testament salvation by Christ in this passage. See also, Mark 10:17; Luke 18:18.
 
 "2As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou 
 hast given him. 
 3And this is life eternal, that they might know thee the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom 
 thou hast sent.
  4I have glorified thee on the earth: I have finished the work which thou gavest me to do"  (Jn. 17:2-4).  
 
 Here, Jesus speaks of the salvation of faithful Old Testament Jews who believed in the Messiah in 
 the close of the Old Testament age and end of Israel. No  New Testament "salvation" spoken of by 
 Christ  in this passage or anywhere in MMLJBC.
 
 Brethren and friends, not once in MMLJBC does Christ speak of New Testament "salvation," 
 therefore Terry is wrong, wrong, wrong about Hebrews 2:2-3.
 
 3. John 12:47-50: Terry is wrong again about Jesus speaking of New Testament "salvation" in this 
 passage. Let's look at the text and context of John 12. 
 
 John 12:1 speaks of the Old Testament Jewish Passover,  verse 9 mentions the Jews who came to 
 hear the Messiah,  verses 10-11 it refers to the Jewish chief priests and more Jews. 
 
 John 12:12-13  refers to Jerusalem and Jesus as the King of Israel,  verses 15-17 is a quotation 
 from Zechariah 9:9 speaking of Jesus bringing Old Testament salvation of the law of Moses to the 
 Jews of Israel, in verse 19 the Pharisees complain of the fact that the whole Jewish world has gone 
 after Christ the Messiah, in verse 34 the Jews quote the law of Moses concerning Christ the 
 Messiah sent to only Israel
 
 John 12: 37-41 refers to an Old Testament quotation from the prophet Isaiah about Christ the 
 Messiah,  verses 42-43 speaks of the hypocritical old covenant faith of the Pharisees in the 
 Messiah and their fear of being cast out of the synagogue.
 
 In John 12: 44, Jesus teaches that every Jew who believed on him as the Messiah -- believed also 
 on Jehovah who sent the Messiah to Israel, in verse 46 Jesus declares that he was the light of God 
 sent into the world of Israel not the world of the Gentiles, for Jesus declared, "...I am not sent but 
 unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel" (Matt. 15:24).
 
 In John 12:47-48, when Jesus speaks of "my words" he is referring to his teaching of the true law 
 of Moses as the Messiah.  He then declares that he had not come to Israel to condemn the 
 unbelieving Jews in the world of Israel, he came to "seek and save" the unfaithful world of Israel 
 (Matt. 15:24). Jesus then goes on to say that the words of the law of Moses that he spoke to Israel 
 in MMLJBC -- would judge unbelieving Israel  -- not the alien world -- in the last day.
 
 In John 12:49-50, Jesus affirms that the Old Testament salvation of Israel to which he was 
 speaking in John 12 was the old covenant commandment of Jehovah for Israel.  Then Jesus 
 affirms that there was "eternal life" and "salvation" in Jehovah's old covenant commandment 
 given to only the Jews of Israel in MMLJBC.
 
 John 12:47-50 is not speaking of "the great salvation" of the New Testament, but the Old 
 Testament "salvation" of Israel referred to more than eighty times in the law of Moses. Because 
 Terry is wrong about John 12 -- he is also wrong about Hebrews 2:2-3.
 
 4. John 16:1-4: All of my previous arguments in 1 through 3 apply to John 16:1-4. In addition, 
 Jesus warns his Jewish disciples of the Jewish hatred and persecution to come as he faces the 
 cross. Jesus warns them of the Jewish threat to put them out of the synagogue and even murder 
 them for following the Messiah.  How is warning of Jewish prejudice and threats considered to be 
 New Testament doctrine?  No New Testament doctrine or speaking of "the great salvation" 
 mentioned in this passage.
 
 5. John 16:12-13: Here is  just another of Jesus' Old Testament prophecies from MMLJBC about 
 the coming of the New Testament age and the divine inspiration to be given to those who become 
 new covenant apostles.  This passage confirms each and every one of my arguments and denies 
 Terry's proposition.  Remember, Jesus said that the Holy Spirit, beginning in Acts 2, would guide 
 these disciples into "all" New Testament "truth." According to Jesus' prophecy here, the Holy 
 Spirit would reveal "all truth" -- not some "truth" as Terry argues, for the New Testament age in 
 "the apostles' doctrine." This completely destroys Terry's argument that Christ revealed only some 
 or partial  New Testament teaching in MMLJBC.
 
 Because the Holy Spirit did not quote or repeat any of the teachings of Christ from MMLJBC in 
 his revelation of "all" New Testament "truth" in Acts 2 through Revelation 22, none of Christ's 
 teaching in MMLJBC was a part of New Testament "truth."  No New Testament doctrine or 
 speaking of "the great salvation" mentioned in this passage.
 
 6. 1 Corinthians 11:23-26: This passage speaks of the fulfillment of  another  Old Testament 
 prophecy of Christ from Matthew 26 and Luke 22.  Jesus identifies this prophecy in Luke 22:16 
 where he stated "...until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God...until the kingdom of God shall 
 come" (Lk. 22:16, 18). In 1 Corinthians 11:23-26, Jesus repeats the Old Testament prophecy  and 
 explains the fulfillment  to Paul in Christ's  special revelation of New Testament doctrine to an 
 apostle who was not with the original twelve in MMLJBC. All Old Testament prophecy belongs 
 to the Old Testament. Never has Old Testament prophecy ever been considered New Testament 
 doctrine. Only the fulfillment of Old Testament prophecy recorded and defined in Acts 2 through 
 Revelation 22 is New Testament doctrine.
 
 7. Mark 1:1: What Terry doesn't tell you is that there are four different gospels mentioned in the 
 Scriptures. One gospel that came thousands of years before Christ and Mark's writing. Notice the 
 following.
 
 a. The Old Testament Patriarchal  gospel that God preached to Abraham in Genesis 12,  as 
 confirmed by Paul in Galatians 3:8. If there was only one revealed gospel, as Terry argues, then it 
 began in Genesis 12 not Mark 1. 
 
 "And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before 
 the gospel to Abraham, saying in thee shall all nations be blessed" (Gal. 3:8).
 
 If there was only one "gospel" or announcement of good news made by God in the Bible, then all 
 teaching from Genesis 12 through MMLJBC would be New Testament doctrine. Does Terry 
 believe and teach this? He does teach that "all Scripture" is profitable for New Testament doctrine. 
 Do you see the dilemma Terry faces in his unscriptural arguments?  Mark 1:1 marks the 
 "beginning" of the Old Testament Mosaical gospel  for only the nation of Israel -- not the 
 beginning of the New Testament gospel for all nations.
 
 b.  The Old Testament Mosaical gospel that John the baptizer of Israel (Matthew 3:1-13), Jesus the 
 Messiah (Lk. 4:14-21) and their disciples preached to only old covenant Israel in MMLJBC.  
 Again, Mark 1:1 marks the "beginning" of the Old Testament Mosaical gospel  for only the nation 
 of Israel -- not the beginning of the New Testament gospel for all nations.
 
 c.  The New Testament gospel of the death, burial and resurrection of Christ defined and described 
 by Christ to the apostles (Matt. 28:18-20; Mk. 16:15-16; 1 Cor. 15:1-4).
 
 d. The false gospel preached by former Old Testament Pharisees who had become New Testament 
 Christians (Acts 15:5-6). They sought to teach, in the New Testament name of Christ, that all 
 Gentile converts to Christ  must be circumcised and keep the law of Moses to be faithful 
 Christians. (Sounds like Terry, doesn't it?) The apostles, led by the Holy Spirit, said that no such 
 commandment had been given by Christ (Acts 15:24). Paul identifies this false gospel in Galatians 
 1:6-8.
 
 8. Mark 14:9: Terry states that the account of the Jewish woman who washed Jesus feet was 
 preached everywhere.  If that is so, where is a record of Mark 14:9 stated in "the apostles' 
 doctrine" of Acts 2 through Revelation 22? The fact is that this account, this Jewish woman's old 
 covenant faith in the Messiah, was to be preached in all of Israel as a part of the old covenant 
 Mosaical gospel for only Israel.  The account of Mark 14:9 was not preached by the apostles as a 
 part of the New Testament gospel. All Terry has to do to prove his argument, is to show us where 
 the apostles preached this account in the true New Testament of Jesus Christ in Acts 2 through 
 Revelation 22. Terry, please give us book, chapter and verse.
 
 Is "Foot Washing" A New Testament Doctrine?
 
 John 13:4-15 records the fact that Jesus washed the feet of his disciples and commanded them to 
 wash one another's feet -- otherwise they could not be his disciples. Terry, if MMLJBC is New 
 Testament doctrine, and if John 13:4-15 is Christ's New Testament commandment, do you wash 
 the brethren's feet and teach "foot washing" for the New Testament church?
 
 Readers, because Terry's major arguments are false, all of his sub-arguments are also false.  Every 
 argument Terry makes is based on a misinterpretation of Old Testament teaching of the law of 
 Moses in MMLJBC.
 
 The scriptures do not teach that one, anyone, alien sinner or New Testament  Christian will be 
 blessed today because they obey Jesus' teaching of  the Old Testament law of Moses in MMLJBC.  
 Terry arguments are both invalid and unscriptural. Terry has not proven his proposition!