Many of our readers will remember the debate that took place this past summer in Denver, Colorado, with Open Theist Bob Enyart. We had to do a series of responses to Enyart after he went into major “damage control mode” after the debate, which did not go well for him and his very unique theology. We replied to most of his programs on the Dividing Line, and up to this past week, I had not heard anything more from he or his followers. As far as I know (and I have not bothered to monitor his program or website) he has not even attempted to respond to my rather full refutations of his radio programs. I assume someone would have informed me had he made the attempt. (I just took a moment to scan the archives of his radio show, and my name does not appear on any program after the series he did in July of 2014, which I refuted on the Dividing Line).
In any case, a few days ago, prior to joining Todd Friel on Wretched Radio, Todd was contacted by someone who referred him to an open theism website. He was promoting the silliness that Enyart had begun during his damage control phase, where, in the context of Enyart’s attempt to insist the Incarnation resulted in a fundamental change in God’s nature, R.C. Sproul Jr. had defended the hypostatic union by insisting that the Son, as the Son, did not change in the Incarnation, and that the hypostatic union specifically denies any intermixture of divine and human in Christ. Neither Sproul Jr. nor myself denied the incarnation, denied the hypostatic union, etc.—both of us are in print defending these things, preaching these things, etc. But we have always done so in an orthodox context (unlike Enyart, who revels in his rejection of orthodox Christian theology), and were doing so specifically against Enyart’s abuse of the hypostatic union and the Incarnation as a tool to deny the immutability of God.
Once Enyart started promoting this foolishness, I thoroughly obliterated his arguments on the Dividing Line. He has never even attempted to rehabilitate his slanderous accusation—he has chosen, instead, just to repeat it. So today he contacted Todd and specifically repeated the same false, libelous, slanderous, and already fully refuted accusations, asking Todd to “intervene.”
Now, it could just be that Enyart is bored. Maybe trying to stir up controversy in his normal areas of entertainment have grown cold. Maybe donations are down. I have no idea. But he’s back, and for those who followed the debate, and the aftermath, his current ploy is surely contemptible. So one last time (for anyone with a scintilla of honesty in their mind): The Word became flesh. God sent His Son. The eternal Second Person of the Trinity, the Son of God, took on a human nature in hypostatic union, so that Jesus the Messiah was fully God and fully Man, one Person with two natures. But what did NOT happen in the Incarnation is exactly what Enyart demands so that he can promote his fallible, non-omniscient, changing and changeable deity: the Son *as the Son* did not become a mixture of divine and human; the Son *as the Son* did not absorb a human nature so that the divine nature of the Son was changed, altered, transmuted, or in any case changed from what the Son had always been. The Son did not taken on a human nature IN THE SENSE DEMANDED BY THE UNORTHODOX AND HERETICAL VIEWS OF BOB ENYART (a sense that demands change in the Son for this “taking on” to occur). I believe in, confess, and defend *against the likes of Enyart* the historic understanding of the hypostatic union. It is just as simple as that, and repeating Enyart’s groundless accusations needs to be seen for the slanderous/libelous activity it is.
Here are the programs we did responding fully to Enyart last summer:
And the charge of heresy was specifically noted, and rebutted, in this program:
