A Response to Paul Gates’ “Dishonest Don”
See our previous two articles in which we expose Paul Gate’s scurrilous article as blatantly false and libelous.
Paul Gates has not only falsely accused me of hiding my beliefs about the body of Christ, he likewise falsely charged me with Docetism.
Gates defines Docetism as the doctrine that says “the manhood of Jesus was apparent not real, that as some Greek myths, a divine being was dressed up as a man in order to communicate revelations, but was not really involved in the human state.”
Once again, Gates has written a blatant falsehood about my beliefs, and this is simply inexcusable. Bearing false witness is a sin before God, and Paul Gates is guilty of bearing false witness against me.
I have never taught Docetism. I have never taught that the manhood of Christ was only an apparent, but not objective, reality. I have always affirmed, “The word became flesh and dwelt among men.” No reservations, no “ifs, ands, or buts.”
I have always taught that Christ was fully man, and that he was “tempted in all points like we are, yet without sin.”
I have always taught that Christ fully took on himself “the form of a servant.. The fashion of a man.”
I have always affirmed that Jesus was truly, objectively, man, and, he was likewise, truly the Son of God. Mr. Gates cannot prove otherwise.
I have NEVER affirmed, suggested or even hinted, that Jesus’ humanity was a sham, a shadow, or simply apparent and not real.
Mr. Gates’ charge is flagrant falsehood.
It strikes me as truly sad that the owners and admins of Reign of Christ blog allow Mr. Gates’ blatantly false, slanderous article to remain visible for all to read, when they know for a fact that I have never taught what Gates claims.
To allow an article that contains flagrant lies to remain readable by the public does not speak well of the integrity of those who have the power to remove it, but who choose not to do so.
Why would anyone, calling themselves Christians, allow lies to be spread on their website? Why is Mr. Gates not being held accountable for his falsehoods, when it is known for a fact that he is indeed making false claims? Is this how the owners and admins of Reign of Christ want to be known, as allowing, and thus promoting, such un-Christian behavior. Do they really want to be known as a site that allows posters to bear false witness?
This is, perhaps, a situation that is more serious than whether Don K. Preston believes that Jesus does or does not have a fleshly, physical body in heaven.