ARCHIVE: Zakath is Genuine!
- Thread starter wickwoman
- Start date
I folllow God and don't idolize men like Bob Enyart. Paul told us not to follow men, but Christ.
Regardless of whether Bob Enyart is convicted, I don't find enough credibility in hiim to follow him. That's all. He has a questionable past and a condescending style. I don't like it. I can have my opinion, and I don't condemn the man. Doc, if you can't handle the fact that I don't like him and won't follow him, oh well.
Regardless of whether Bob Enyart is convicted, I don't find enough credibility in hiim to follow him. That's all. He has a questionable past and a condescending style. I don't like it. I can have my opinion, and I don't condemn the man. Doc, if you can't handle the fact that I don't like him and won't follow him, oh well.
What I said is that Bob Enyart is questionable in my mind. I don't follow him because of what I saw, and the fierce devotion to him on this board is evident, and makes me wonder what's so great about him compared to other preachers. People defend him like he's this untouchable, amazing man and he's just a dude with a church and a radio show. That's all. I'm sure you all don't love John MacArthur, but that does not mean you judged him or that anyone who does read MacArthur "idolizes" him. The man (BE) made a mistake and did not repent for it as far as I can see. Maybe he did, and if he did, cool beans.
Last edited:
julie21
New member
In your opinion...in my opinion, it's an unknowable situation until the End of the Age.drbrumley said:
1 John 2 : 6 "He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he did." KJV
" Whoever claims to live in him must walk as Jesus did." NIV
Question...Would Jesus have beaten a child to that extent for refusing to take a shower?
Case closed
Last edited:
drbrumley said:
I do not know all the facts. It is possible Enyart crossed the line and the discipline was borderline abusive. If he is totally innocent, then he has not violated the Word and God does not go against it. If he was quilty of unbiblical and illegal discipline, then he is convicted in God's court and human courts (Rom. 13). The State is not always right. They think any spanking is abusive, which is contrary to the Word. If it was done in anger or left marks or was against a teenager, etc., then it is not defensible. This is somewhat subjective. We do not want to side with pop psychology that minimizes any discipline. We also do not want to hide behind the Bible and justify excessive force. There are Christians that are guilty of abuse. Not that Dobson is the end all and be all, but I suspect his expertise would question this case if it is true it was over a shower and left significant marks.
One should be careful to not assume a high profile leader can do no wrong or should not be held accountable if they cross the line. As a leader, it would be wiser to be more temperate and not open the door to false accusations or give credence to others who may not have self-control and use him as a justification for excessive force. The point can be made with one spank, not 3. Did he use his hand or an object. Objects are perceived as weapons and excessive abuse.
I agree with this post.godrulz said:
To answer your question, Godrulz, Enyart took the 7 year old boy who was his stepson out to a shed and used a belt to beat the child until he had welts and was bleeding with broken skin, as the boy's mother protested the punishment.
I'm all for spanking; I use it myself. But not leaving marks, and the parents need to be united in how they deal with the children.
Enyart's kid not only got an excessively abusive beating, but his parents were not united; they fought amongst themselves. And the other important fact is that Enyart was unremorseful in court. So he crossed the line and does not think he made a mistake.
