You Be The Judge: Afp1996 vs Jason

[Praxeas]

http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/showthread.php?t=24032

Check out this debate. So far so good. Max word count 700. Topic is "The coming of the Lord", discusses whether Christ returned in 70 AD or not. AFP asserts Christ returned in 70 AD and Jason opposes

[Steve Epley]

Jason it was very good.

Just keep hammering.

It never ceases to amaze me the imagination of preterists.

[TK Burk]

Jason it was very good.

Just keep hammering.

It never ceases to amaze me the imagination of preterists.

Elder, you did not read Jason's response did you?



Actually what's amazing is the contradictions that Dispensationalsists will make even in their own explainations.

Elder, you might want to reread what Jason said and where he disproved himself wrong in his own post.


afp1996, keep up that Good Word!! :thumbsup

[Steve Epley]

Elder, you did not read Jason's response did you?



Actually what's amazing is the contradictions that Dispensationalsists will make even in their own explainations.

Elder, you might want to reread what Jason said and where he disproved himself wrong in his own post.


afp1996, keep up that Good Word!! :thumbsup

It is you my friend that needs reading comphrehension classes.:thumbsup
Keep it up Jason.

[Praxeas]

You guys crack me up :ursofunny

[TJJJ]

I'll say this for what it is worth, AFP is knocking Jason all over the ring!

:boxing

Jason, we know how hard it is to argue with Scripture, so you might want to concede right now and sit down in the seats with Elderest Epley! :ursofunny

.

[mfblume]

I see no profit in these debates, since many involved all over the board will not change no matter what the other viewpoint proposes. This is usually the case in debates. Bro Epley, for example, told us he is closed minded to anything preterite.

However, there is one benefit. The people READING often include actual open-minded people who will accept a bona fide point when they, themselves, may have believed otherwise beforehand.

[Timmy]

I think they're both doing very well. :thumbsup :thumbsup

(J/K. I :bored every time I try to read that stuff! LOL!)

[*AQuietPlace*]

However, there is one benefit. The people READING often include actual open-minded people who will accept a bona fide point when they, themselves, may have believed otherwise beforehand.


This would be me. I enjoy debates because I like to see both points of view clearly laid out. It helps me to formulate my opinions. :)

[edjen01]

This would be me. I enjoy debates because I like to see both points of view clearly laid out. It helps me to formulate my opinions. :)

i must be reading the wrong thread....these guys are clear as mud.

[*AQuietPlace*]

i must be reading the wrong thread....these guys are clear as mud.
Oh, I haven't read this debate yet. :D I was just speaking of debates in general.

[mfblume]

I just read the debate so far. While I agree the Lord came in "A" coming of judgment in AD70, I do not agree that it was the "second coming." I agree with Jason on some of these issues and with afp on others. Hence, partial preterism, which I prefer to call KINGDOM Eschatology since my emphasis is upon the kingdom we are in now because of the prophetic truths and events fulfilled.

ANYWAY.... I would not have used AFP's reference to the Babylonian judgment because nothing in that context says the LORD CAME. I believe it was a coming in judgment, but since it did not use those terms, I felt it was a bad choice for proof reference.

I would have used Isaiah 10 and Assyria's attack on Jerusalem instead since that context actually says it was the Lord judging Israel using Assyria.

[TJJJ]

GO GO GO .... AFP

Get those dispees, sock em in the gut,
Bite their ears and kick em in the....... knee caps!:ursofunny


Just for the sake of EPLEY, ANDERSON, PARSON and all the other DISPEES out there........


Your losing!!!!!


:gotcha


Just kidding'

Enjoying the debate although it seems pretty mellow compared to the last slugfest! Could you at least insult each other once?

[afp1996]

The debate seems to be at a stand still. Jason must really be working up a good response.... or he is out of responses. It's been three days now and no response. He's been on here during that time also.

I'm beginning to wonder what's going on??

[Jason B]

Bro. AFP. I have a response ready since monday evening. I have popped on here a couple of times. I've been working quite a bit this week. (Tuesday was 8AM-1AM). I'm about to run to the store now, but am planning to post my response late this evening.

I am enjoying it thus far.

[afp1996]

So am I Brother. No problem! I get impatient sometimes, that's all.

[Steve Epley]

Jason is doing a great job.

[Timmy]

Jason is doing a great job.

I agree! And afp1996 is, too! I think they're both right! :ursofunny

[Timmy]

I agree! And afp1996 is, too! I think they're both right! :ursofunny

J/K, btw. Like I said before, actually, :bored :bored :bored

(And actually, I think they're both wrong! :winkgrin)

[Steve Epley]

Jesus is coming again and the Preterists can't stop Him.

Maranatha!

[TJJJ]

Jesus is coming again and the Preterists can't stop Him.

Maranatha!

Uh, Elderest,

Most fulfilled prophecy people DO believe that Jesus is coming back again, it is how He is coming that is the controversy!

[afp1996]

Jesus is coming again and the Preterists can't stop Him.

Maranatha!

Brother Epley, you remind me of Baalim. Everytime you open your mouth to curse us, God fills it with the Truth!

G3134
μαρὰν ἀθά
maran atha
mar'-an ath'-ah
Of Chaldee origin (meaning our Lord has come); maranatha, that is, an exclamation of the approaching divine judgment: - Maran-atha.

[TJJJ]

Brother Epley, you remind me of Baalim. Everytime you open your mouth to curse us, God fills it with the Truth!

G3134
μαρὰν ἀθά
maran atha
mar'-an ath'-ah
Of Chaldee origin (meaning our Lord has come); maranatha, that is, an exclamation of the approaching divine judgment: - Maran-atha.



Whoops!:ursofunny:ursofunny

I am sure that Epley will pull a song out of the "Sing Unto the Lord" songbook to counter this one!

[Steve Epley]

Uh, Elderest,

Most fulfilled prophecy people DO believe that Jesus is coming back again, it is how He is coming that is the controversy!

They do NOT believe He is coming again. Death is not the return of Christ.

[Steve Epley]

Brother Epley, you remind me of Baalim. Everytime you open your mouth to curse us, God fills it with the Truth!

G3134
μαρὰν ἀθά
maran atha
mar'-an ath'-ah
Of Chaldee origin (meaning our Lord has come); maranatha, that is, an exclamation of the approaching divine judgment: - Maran-atha.

Now the man is teaching Greek I reject your lexigrapher skills.

[TJJJ]

Now the man is teaching Greek I reject your lexigrapher skills.

Don't just reject it, counter it with something that is more than your opinion. Your opinion means no more than his. If what he is using is Strongs then he is not teaching Greek, all he is doing is quoting what has been written. What are you basing your opinion on?

Sorry Elder, a song book really is not a scholarly work.

[TJJJ]

They do NOT believe He is coming again. Death is not the return of Christ.

Your opinion sir, your opinion!

:thumbsup

[shag]

Matt. 24:29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.


Jesus referred to this paragraph, as well as other verses, when He immediately followed it to describe "somewhat within years", but not the "exact hour", that all these spoken of happenings would take place, in verse 34:



Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place.


I believe Jesus spoke it to them in plane language so that those listening would understand the approximate when. Is it reasonable to think that those listening to Him would think that He meant 1000's of years till all these previously mentioned things would happen, when He said their generation would NOT pass before it ALL happened? I personally dont think so. How in the world could they have thought that?

[TJJJ]

Matt. 24:29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.


Jesus referred to this paragraph, as well as other verses, when He immediately followed it to describe "somewhat within years", but not the "exact hour", that all these spoken of happenings would take place, in verse 34:



Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place.


I believe Jesus spoke it to them in plane language so that those listening would understand the approximate when. Is it reasonable to think that those listening to Him would think that He meant 1000's of years till all these previously mentioned things would happen, when He said their generation would NOT pass before it ALL happened? I personally dont think so. How in the world could they have thought that?

There you go again Shag, using PLANE Scriptures to validate your conclusions!

Just pickin'.

Bro Epley will answer out of "Sing unto the Lord" songbook, pg xx. There, it states that "The days are swifly passing, things are happening every day, the signs of His return are everywhere,"....

:ursofunny

[TK Burk]

Matt. 24:29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.


Jesus referred to this paragraph, as well as other verses, when He immediately followed it to describe "somewhat within years", but not the "exact hour", that all these spoken of happenings would take place, in verse 34:



Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place.


I believe Jesus spoke it to them in plane language so that those listening would understand the approximate when. Is it reasonable to think that those listening to Him would think that He meant 1000's of years till all these previously mentioned things would happen, when He said their generation would NOT pass before it ALL happened? I personally dont think so. How in the world could they have thought that?

Shag, isn't it easy to understand prophecy when you take it for what it says? Good post! ;)

[TK Burk]

Now the man is teaching Greek I reject your lexigrapher skills.

:blink What on earth does that mean???




I guess you believe since you can make up what you believe about the Bible, you can also make up stuff like this too.... ;)

[TK Burk]

Jason is doing a great job.

Eld. Epley, when are you going to get on Jason for not following proper debate protocol? He isn't debating. He is simply posting as he would in the forum and THAT is not debate. Like I said, which you of course ignored, Jason has already disproven his own position with his own contradiction. I hope afp1996 stays with that because it proves Jasons' foundation is nothing but sand. Maybe you could help Jason understand how the debate process is supposed to work?

[Praxeas]

Maranatha means "Lord Come".

maran atha (Aramaic transliterated into Greek)
Thayer Definition:
1) our Lord cometh or will come


The NET bible commentary seems to suggest it can go both ways

The Greek text has μαράνα θά (marana tha). These Aramaic words can also be read as maran atha, translated "Our Lord has come!"

Note....the greek has Marana Tha.....it can be read as Maran Atha...see the difference?

[Praxeas]

Jason made his final opening round remark. We move to the Cross examination. Before we can do that I need both debaters to post that they are on board and agree to the word limit.

As I have noted many times, they both have a final concluding post, with no word limit, to say whatever they did not get to say, say that their points were not addressed or that they did address it or whatever. This will be like the closing argument of two attorneys in a courtroom.

Since the word limit for a post is 10k you will have to fit that much in, that also includes quotes. I might see if I can raise that for these forums to 15k but I am not sure I can

[Jason B]

Eld. Epley, when are you going to get on Jason for not following proper debate protocol? He isn't debating. He is simply posting as he would in the forum and THAT is not debate. Like I said, which you of course ignored, Jason has already disproven his own position with his own contradiction. I hope afp1996 stays with that because it proves Jasons' foundation is nothing but sand. Maybe you could help Jason understand how the debate process is supposed to work?

TK, how am I not obeying debate protocol? Prax is moderating, and has said we are both doing well. To my knowledge His opinion has not changed. As for the actual debate, we got off to a good start, but in recently Bro. AFP is ignoring the majority of things I have presented him, as I pointed out in my latest reponse. But my opinion is that the debate is going well. As I mentioned, this is the first time I've had not only an internet debate, but anykind of formal "debate" with a moderator.

I'm not upset by FP's opinions, your minds are made up anyway, but I do think that the open minded reading the debate can see the that (full)preterism has several things that they can't explain.

Not to say that preterism doesn't have SOME points worthy of discussion and of study. I don't believe that all of preterism is in error, I do believe that teaching Jesus Christ is never coming back is error. It is my opinion that as the church we should be studying, debating, and working together to have as unified a posistion on all doctrine as possible.

[Praxeas]

Ok actually the limit is 10k characters. That is not a lot. A character is one letter....a word can be any number of letters

example Jason's last post was 460 words, but it was just over 2k characters.

I guess we might be alright there.

[Jason B]

Jason made his final opening round remark. We move to the Cross examination. Before we can do that I need both debaters to post that they are on board and agree to the word limit.

As I have noted many times, they both have a final concluding post, with no word limit, to say whatever they did not get to say, say that their points were not addressed or that they did address it or whatever. This will be like the closing argument of two attorneys in a courtroom.

Since the word limit for a post is 10k you will have to fit that much in, that also includes quotes. I might see if I can raise that for these forums to 15k but I am not sure I can

I am okay with everthing so far. 10k is fine with me.

[Steve Epley]

Matt. 24:29 “Immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. 30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. 31 And He will send His angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they will gather together His elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other.


Jesus referred to this paragraph, as well as other verses, when He immediately followed it to describe "somewhat within years", but not the "exact hour", that all these spoken of happenings would take place, in verse 34:



Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all these things take place.


I believe Jesus spoke it to them in plane language so that those listening would understand the approximate when. Is it reasonable to think that those listening to Him would think that He meant 1000's of years till all these previously mentioned things would happen, when He said their generation would NOT pass before it ALL happened? I personally dont think so. How in the world could they have thought that?

I did NOT realize Jesus was flying in a PLANE when he was talking in Mt. 24? Good to know.:thumbsup
Again I do NOT believe THAT generation(Jewish race) have passed away. They are still very visible.:thumbsup

[Steve Epley]

Maranatha means "Lord Come".

maran atha (Aramaic transliterated into Greek)
Thayer Definition:
1) our Lord cometh or will come


The NET bible commentary seems to suggest it can go both ways

The Greek text has μαράνα θά (marana tha). These Aramaic words can also be read as maran atha, translated "Our Lord has come!"

Note....the greek has Marana Tha.....it can be read as Maran Atha...see the difference?

Thank you kind sir.:thumbsup

[Steve Epley]

TK, how am I not obeying debate protocol? Prax is moderating, and has said we are both doing well. To my knowledge His opinion has not changed. As for the actual debate, we got off to a good start, but in recently Bro. AFP is ignoring the majority of things I have presented him, as I pointed out in my latest reponse. But my opinion is that the debate is going well. As I mentioned, this is the first time I've had not only an internet debate, but anykind of formal "debate" with a moderator.

I'm not upset by FP's opinions, your minds are made up anyway, but I do think that the open minded reading the debate can see the that (full)preterism has several things that they can't explain.

Not to say that preterism doesn't have SOME points worthy of discussion and of study. I don't believe that all of preterism is in error, I do believe that teaching Jesus Christ is never coming back is error. It is my opinion that as the church we should be studying, debating, and working together to have as unified a posistion on all doctrine as possible.

Jason you are doing well ignore him.:thumbsup

[Steve Epley]

I googled 'Maranatha' and after reading 3 pages only 2 included 'the Lord has come" ALL the rest said "the Lord shall come of when the Lord comes"
This is a diversion used by these folks go to google and check yourself.:thumbsup
I would post them but I don't know how so go read and weep.:thumbsup

[TJJJ]

I did NOT realize Jesus was flying in a PLANE when he was talking in Mt. 24? Good to know.:thumbsup
Again I do NOT believe THAT generation(Jewish race) have passed away. They are still very visible.:thumbsup

Goes along with the book, God is my co-pilot! Plane language! Like wings, I'll fly away and etc.! :airplane

[TK Burk]

Goes along with the book, God is my co-pilot! Plane language! Like wings, I'll fly away and etc.! :airplane


TJJJ, considering Eld. Epley sometimes posts like the malapropist, Slip Mahoney; him correcting Shag's spelling is really humorous! ;)

What’s sad here is that he ignored what Shag did say, and only focused on his typo. Unfortunately, that is not unusual for him….

[shag]

I did NOT realize Jesus was flying in a PLANE when he was talking in Mt. 24? Good to know.:thumbsup
Again I do NOT believe THAT generation(Jewish race) have passed away. They are still very visible.:thumbsup



Thanks for lining me out on my mispelled word.



So if you were one of those listening to Him tell you that "This generation will by no means pass away till ALL these things are fullfilled", then you would've understood Him to mean that He is referring to the jewish race passing away someday, correct?




In other words, you mean He could just as well have said:
"This jewish race shall not pass away till ALL these things are fullfilled".

[TJJJ]

TJJJ, considering Eld. Epley sometimes posts like the malapropist, Slip Mahoney; him correcting Shag's spelling is really humorous! ;)

What’s sad here is that he ignored what Shag did say, and only focused on his typo. Unfortunately, that is not unusual for him….

Agreed, agreed! I was kind of pickin there on Epley also with the plane language too. Probably too subtle. "I'LL FLY AWAY OH GLORY, I'LL FLY AWAY". Epley likes taking his doctrine out of the "Sing unto the Lord" songbooks, I thought I would help him out, he was kind of struggling!:ursofunny

Marantha, Salom, Paz de Cristo, parley vu france, and all those other foreign words that people who don't know the language try to say!

[Crossfire]

Any man who denies the biblical reality of the rapture is in false doctrine and heresy.

[TK Burk]

Any man who denies the biblical reality of the rapture is in false doctrine and heresy.

I cannot find any verses that mention the "rapture," just like I cannot find any that mention the "trinity." Maybe you can enlighten us all?
(1) Would you please give the verses that mention the "rapture"?
(2) Also, since the theory of the rapture is based on a gap between the 69th and 70th Weeks of Daniel, would you please give the verse(s) where that gap is mentioned.
(3) And since Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21 are often taught as prophecies that speak of the time of the supposed rapture, would you please give the verses where such a gap is mentioned?


Your ability or inability to give these verse will prove what is "biblical" and who is and who is not teaching "false doctrine and heresy." :thumbsup

[Crossfire]

I cannot find any verses that mention the "rapture," just like I cannot find any that mention the "trinity." Maybe you can enlighten us all?
(1) Would you please give the verses that mention the "rapture"?
(2) Also, since the theory of the rapture is based on a gap between the 69th and 70th Weeks of Daniel, would you please give the verse(s) where that gap is mentioned.
(3) And since Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21 are often taught as prophecies that speak of the time of the supposed rapture, would you please give the verses where such a gap is mentioned?


Your ability or inability to give these verse will prove what is "biblical" and who is and who is not teaching "false doctrine and heresy." :thumbsup
But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore comfort one another with these words. (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 KJV)

Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. (Matthew 24:29-31 KJV)

Notice the key points listed here...

1. A gathering of the saints.
2. A literal resurrection of those saints which sleep in the grave.
2. A gathering of the saints which are alive and remain.
4. The appearance of Jesus in the clouds.

All these are points which proclaim the rapture doctrine true. Your point about the word not appearing in the scriptures is a straw man, and not really a point at all. But, the fact is, this preterist doctrine is a doctrine which denies the reality of the rapture doctrine, thus is a false doctrine.

As touching the 70 Weeks of daniel, I am not a dispensationalist. I believe they have been fulfilled. However, their fulfillment does not negate the future return of the Lord. This doctrine may be able to withstand the trinitarian dispensational doctrine, but not true Apostolic eschatology.

[shag]

But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore comfort one another with these words. (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 KJV)

Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. (Matthew 24:29-31 KJV)

Notice the key points listed here...

1. A gathering of the saints.
2. A literal resurrection of those saints which sleep in the grave.
2. A gathering of the saints which are alive and remain.
4. The appearance of Jesus in the clouds.

All these are points which proclaim the rapture doctrine true. Your point about the word not appearing in the scriptures is a straw man, and not really a point at all. But, the fact is, this preterist doctrine is a doctrine which denies the reality of the rapture doctrine, thus is a false doctrine.

As touching the 70 Weeks of daniel, I am not a dispensationalist. I believe they have been fulfilled. However, their fulfillment does not negate the future return of the Lord. This doctrine may be able to withstand the trinitarian dispensational doctrine, but not true Apostolic eschatology.



Why is it you left out this verse (3 verses later) when U quoted Matt. 24?

34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

Epley thinks He meant the Jewish race. Perhaps you agree with Epley, or maybe you see "THIS GENERATION" as the gentiles, or possibly somebody else other than what the scripure actually says.

BTW, Epley, Why didnt Jesus just say "The jewish race" instead of "this generation?

[Crossfire]

Why is it you left out this verse (3 verses later) when U quoted Matt. 24?

34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

Epley thinks He meant the Jewish race. Perhaps you agree with Epley, or maybe you see "THIS GENERATION" as the gentiles, or possibly somebody else other than what the scripure actually says.

BTW, Epley, Why didnt Jesus just say "The jewish race" instead of "this generation?
Actually, 1Peter 2:9-10 actually answers this question:

But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light: Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy. (1 Peter 2:9-10 KJV)

The Church's departuer shall not take place until all the events pertaining to the tribulation are fulfilled. In preterism's use of generation, it seems to forget that the Church as a whole, from it's inception, is called a generation. This is where we know the Church will go through the tribulation, but will not have a part of the wrath of God poured out during the tribulation.

[shag]

Actually, 1Peter 2:9-10 actually answers this question:

But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light: Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy. (1 Peter 2:9-10 KJV)

The Church's departuer shall not take place until all the events pertaining to the tribulation are fulfilled. In preterism's use of generation, it seems to forget that the Church as a whole, from it's inception, is called a generation. This is where we know the Church will go through the tribulation, but will not have a part of the wrath of God poured out during the tribulation.




So then you DO disagree with Elder Epley's JEWISH RACE theory.


Your scripture does not work because of the fact that 1 Peter is speaking of and to only the NT CHURCH. Jesus was NOT speaking of and to only the NT church in matt. 24. (pre-cross and pre-acts 2 rather)



Simialiarly, Jesus in Matt.'s 16's "generation" was not speaking of the NT church "generation" either:

Matt.16:1 Then the Pharisees and Sadducees came, and testing Him asked that He would show them a sign from heaven. 2 He answered and said to them, “When it is evening you say, ‘It will be fair weather, for the sky is red’; 3 and in the morning, ‘It will be foul weather today, for the sky is red and threatening.’ Hypocrites![a] You know how to discern the face of the sky, but you cannot discern the signs of the times. 4 A wicked and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and no sign shall be given to it except the sign of the prophet[b] Jonah.” And He left them and departed.




The wicked and adultress generation that was seeking a sign was THAT generation 2000 years ago, do you agree?

[Crossfire]

So then you DO disagree with Elder Epley's JEWISH RACE theory.


Your scripture does not work because of the fact that 1 Peter is speaking of and to only the NT CHURCH. Jesus was NOT speaking of and to only the NT church in matt. 24. (pre-cross and pre-acts 2 rather)



Simialiarly, Jesus in Matt.'s 16's "generation" was not speaking of the NT church "generation" either:

Matt.16:1 Then the Pharisees and Sadducees came, and testing Him asked that He would show them a sign from heaven. 2 He answered and said to them, “When it is evening you say, ‘It will be fair weather, for the sky is red’; 3 and in the morning, ‘It will be foul weather today, for the sky is red and threatening.’ Hypocrites![a] You know how to discern the face of the sky, but you cannot discern the signs of the times. 4 A wicked and adulterous generation seeks after a sign, and no sign shall be given to it except the sign of the prophet[b] Jonah.” And He left them and departed.




The wicked and adultress generation that was seeking a sign was THAT generation 2000 years ago, do you agree?
As usual, preterists put words into the mouths of those who seek to expose their false doctrine. I said the Church was the generation, not Jewish nation. Your attempt to deflect my words was very childish and unprofessional. The Church shall not depart from the earth until all the signs Jesus gave shall be fulfilled.

Jesus spoke of generations to several groups. He spoke that the Jewish Pharisees were a wicked and adulterous generation. Since the Pharisees were long before Christ's first coming, and continued after His resurrection, which is a time which extends past the forty years preterists claim, then should all Pharisees be counted in this? You spiritualization of scripture is very troubling, and another proof of the total fallacy of preterist teaching.

You remove the hope of the believers of Christ's return. Our hope is in Christ, which is a hope that includes His return. But, back to the point at hand.

You claim Christ's return was during the forty year period of time in which He was speaking. Tell me then how the Millennial Reign has already taken place, tears were wiped from eyes, and all pain has ceased? Tell me how the Lord has returned and not gathered the saints? When Jerusalem was destroyed, the Church was scattered, not gathered.

Your entire argument is completely flawed.

[Praxeas]

NET bible commentary

This is one of the hardest verses in the gospels to interpret. Various views exist for what generation means. (1) Some take it as meaning "race" and thus as an assurance that the Jewish race (nation) will not pass away. But it is very questionable that the Greek term γενεά (genea) can have this meaning. Two other options are possible. (2) Generation might mean "this type of generation" and refer to the generation of wicked humanity. Then the point is that humanity will not perish, because God will redeem it. Or (3) generation may refer to "the generation that sees the signs of the end" (Mat_24:30), who will also see the end itself. In other words, once the movement to the return of Christ starts, all the events connected with it happen very quickly, in rapid succession.

[TJJJ]

Any man who denies the biblical reality of the rapture is in false doctrine and heresy.

Ah ha ha!

Fresh meat! :woot

You have entered the AFP zone! You who are about to die, we salute you!

:pirates

[Crossfire]

Ah ha ha!

Fresh meat! :woot

You have entered the AFP zone! You who are about to die, we salute you!

:pirates
Beware of those who enter in to your battle who seem unarmed, for their weapons are far stronger than you possibly think.

The preterist folly is a Gnostic style of hermeneutic, falsely interpreting spiritual scriptures, a form of doctrinal interpretation which is condemned by the early church. But, then again, I guess the preterists are satisfied with being extra-biblical, seeing they also take their position from the writings of Josephus and such.

:D

He who seems unarmed is more than dangerous.

[TJJJ]

Beware of those who enter in to your battle who seem unarmed, for their weapons are far stronger than you possibly think.

The preterist folly is a Gnostic style of hermeneutic, falsely interpreting spiritual scriptures, a form of doctrinal interpretation which is condemned by the early church. But, then again, I guess the preterists are satisfied with being extra-biblical, seeing they also take their position from the writings of Josephus and such.

:D

He who seems unarmed is more than dangerous.



Well, here goes!


:popcorn2


You should never bring a knife to a gun fight!

[Crossfire]

Well, here goes!


:popcorn2


You should never bring a knife to a gun fight!
And one should never enter into a battle of wits with unarmed men. :D

[Steve Epley]

Thanks for lining me out on my mispelled word.



So if you were one of those listening to Him tell you that "This generation will by no means pass away till ALL these things are fullfilled", then you would've understood Him to mean that He is referring to the jewish race passing away someday, correct?




In other words, you mean He could just as well have said:
"This jewish race shall not pass away till ALL these things are fullfilled".

I have no idea if they understood that is irrelevant however that is what He meant whether they understood it or not. Folks NOT understanding doen not determine truth.:thumbsup

[Steve Epley]

Any man who denies the biblical reality of the rapture is in false doctrine and heresy.

That is true.

[Steve Epley]

I cannot find any verses that mention the "rapture," just like I cannot find any that mention the "trinity." Maybe you can enlighten us all?
(1) Would you please give the verses that mention the "rapture"?
(2) Also, since the theory of the rapture is based on a gap between the 69th and 70th Weeks of Daniel, would you please give the verse(s) where that gap is mentioned.
(3) And since Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21 are often taught as prophecies that speak of the time of the supposed rapture, would you please give the verses where such a gap is mentioned?


Your ability or inability to give these verse will prove what is "biblical" and who is and who is not teaching "false doctrine and heresy." :thumbsup

Are YOU Apostolic or Oneness??

[Steve Epley]

But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore comfort one another with these words. (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 KJV)

Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. (Matthew 24:29-31 KJV)

Notice the key points listed here...

1. A gathering of the saints.
2. A literal resurrection of those saints which sleep in the grave.
2. A gathering of the saints which are alive and remain.
4. The appearance of Jesus in the clouds.

All these are points which proclaim the rapture doctrine true. Your point about the word not appearing in the scriptures is a straw man, and not really a point at all. But, the fact is, this preterist doctrine is a doctrine which denies the reality of the rapture doctrine, thus is a false doctrine.

As touching the 70 Weeks of daniel, I am not a dispensationalist. I believe they have been fulfilled. However, their fulfillment does not negate the future return of the Lord. This doctrine may be able to withstand the trinitarian dispensational doctrine, but not true Apostolic eschatology.

Thank you. They attempt to place everyone in a neat little box they rejects their heresy. I know many Apostolic preachers that believe the 70 weeks have been fulfilled but preach the literal return of Christ-resurrection of the dead-future judgment of the wicked.

[Steve Epley]

Why is it you left out this verse (3 verses later) when U quoted Matt. 24? 34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled. Epley thinks He meant the Jewish race. Perhaps you agree with Epley, or maybe you see "THIS GENERATION" as the gentiles, or possibly somebody else other than what the scripure actually says. BTW, Epley, Why didnt Jesus just say "The jewish race" instead of "this generation?Why would He have to since He was speaking to Jews? The Irish-English-Germans-Lamites were not there.:thumbsup
This is so absurd.

[Crossfire]

Thank you. They attempt to place everyone in a neat little box they rejects their heresy. I know many Apostolic preachers that believe the 70 weeks have been fulfilled but preach the literal return of Christ-resurrection of the dead-future judgment of the wicked.
I know many of them, Elder. Many believe as I have stated here, and are not polluted by the preterist doctrine.

I believe that as time progresses, people will see the preterist doctrine for what it is, heresy, and more will come out of it. Their reasoning is Gnostic in origin, as is their hermentical understanding and interpretation of scripture.

[Steve Epley]

Beware of those who enter in to your battle who seem unarmed, for their weapons are far stronger than you possibly think.

The preterist folly is a Gnostic style of hermeneutic, falsely interpreting spiritual scriptures, a form of doctrinal interpretation which is condemned by the early church. But, then again, I guess the preterists are satisfied with being extra-biblical, seeing they also take their position from the writings of Josephus and such.

:D

He who seems unarmed is more than dangerous.

Very astute. Their doctrine is as strong as the broth made from the shadow of a skinny chicken.:thumbsup

[Crossfire]

Very astute. Their doctrine is as strong as the broth made from the shadow of a skinny chicken.:thumbsup
Well, I have never heard it put that way, Elder, but you are correct.

Preterism is Gnostic in belief system, because it involves secret interpretations of scripture, not direct understanding, as the Bible declares.

[Steve Epley]

Well, I have never heard it put that way, Elder, but you are correct.

Preterism is Gnostic in belief system, because it involves secret interpretations of scripture, not direct understanding, as the Bible declares.

Their method is so mysticial nothing is as it seems.

[afp1996]

Beware of those who enter in to your battle who seem unarmed, for their weapons are far stronger than you possibly think.

The preterist folly is a Gnostic style of hermeneutic, falsely interpreting spiritual scriptures, a form of doctrinal interpretation which is condemned by the early church. But, then again, I guess the preterists are satisfied with being extra-biblical, seeing they also take their position from the writings of Josephus and such.

:D

He who seems unarmed is more than dangerous.

And futurist from the newspapers. So I guess we are in good company, eh?

[afp1996]

And one should never enter into a battle of wits with unarmed men. :D

Just so you know, to my knowledge, TJJJ is not an AFP.

[Steve Epley]

And futurist from the newspapers... So I guess we are in good company, eh?From folks who quote Josephus like he was inspired.:thumbsup

[afp1996]

Well, I have never heard it put that way, Elder, but you are correct.

Preterism is Gnostic in belief system, because it involves secret interpretations of scripture, not direct understanding, as the Bible declares.

Pure opinion. Your argument is based on your own idea of the the scripture states. You gave reference to some scriptures and then stated your ideas. You will have to do better than that to prove what you believe is correct.

Oh yea, and I could care less what the early Catholic church rejected or not. They could reject Gnosticism all they wanted to. It does not effect our doctrine because our doctrine is not Gnostic. Try again, Brother. You are not even close, and close only counts in horse shoes and hand grenades.

[afp1996]

From folks who quote Josephus like he was inspired.:thumbsup

Brother Epley, Josephus is a historian. History is recorded, we quote historical records to prove what happened in history. This is much different that looking at the newspaper and saying, "see it's the signs of the times!". Tell me have your EVER quoted history before?

If so, then check your comments and retract as necessary.

[TK Burk]

Any man who denies the biblical reality of the rapture is in false doctrine and heresy.

Crossfire, have you claimed to believe in preterism in the past? You sure sound like someone who used to post on AFF. Just wondering. :)

[TK Burk]

Brother Epley, Josephus is a historian. History is recorded, we quote historical records to prove what happened in history. This is much different that looking at the newspaper and saying, "see it's the signs of the times!". Tell me have your EVER quoted history before?

If so, then check your comments and retract as necessary.

afp1996, don't waste your breath. Eld. Epley knows we do not quote Josephus as he claims. He knows we use scriptures as our primary source. He just gets nervous when he is backed into a corner, and when that happens, he starts misrepresenting those he cannot refute. The more he posts this type junk, the more you know he is cornered. :thumbsup

[afp1996]

Then he must stay in the corner. Because every since I came to this forum, this type of stuff is all I have ever seen him do.

It's like a trip to the dentist. You set in the waiting room listening to really bad elevator music for a couple of hours only to spend 10 minutes in a chair with a stranger digging around in your mouth.

When you are through, you don't even get a lollipop.

[afp1996]

But I would not have you to be ignorant, brethren, concerning them which are asleep, that ye sorrow not, even as others which have no hope. For if we believe that Jesus died and rose again, even so them also which sleep in Jesus will God bring with him. For this we say unto you by the word of the Lord, that we which are alive and remain unto the coming of the Lord shall not prevent them which are asleep. For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: Then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we ever be with the Lord. Wherefore comfort one another with these words. (1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 KJV)

Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken: And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory. And he shall send his angels with a great sound of a trumpet, and they shall gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other. (Matthew 24:29-31 KJV)

Notice the key points listed here...

1. A gathering of the saints.
2. A literal resurrection of those saints which sleep in the grave.
2. A gathering of the saints which are alive and remain.
4. The appearance of Jesus in the clouds.

All these are points which proclaim the rapture doctrine true. Your point about the word not appearing in the scriptures is a straw man, and not really a point at all. But, the fact is, this preterist doctrine is a doctrine which denies the reality of the rapture doctrine, thus is a false doctrine.

As touching the 70 Weeks of daniel, I am not a dispensationalist. I believe they have been fulfilled. However, their fulfillment does not negate the future return of the Lord. This doctrine may be able to withstand the trinitarian dispensational doctrine, but not true Apostolic eschatology.

Come on Brother, give us some substance. Line upon line. etc. Your bells and whistles may work with the crowd you usually run with, but we don't play those games. Show us some Word or close up shop. The above propaganda is not cutting the mustard.

Your first scripture says nothing about a rapture. It states that the dead in Christ would be resurrected. Those who would remain, as in not be resurrected would be caught up to meet the Lord. If you see this as happening at the same time, then you are not preaching what Paul preached, because he said they were left after the resurrection.

The second scripture is a bit odd being used as you use it. I had no idea that the Holy Spirit needed the angels to carry the physical bodies of those who are being raptured up into the atmosphere to meet Jesus? Are you saying that the Holy Ghost has enough power to resurrect the dead and to change a physical body into a physical body, but can't make it rise? What is the purpose of the angels doing the rapturing here Brother?

[Steve Epley]

Pure opinion. Your argument is based on your own idea of the the scripture states. You gave reference to some scriptures and then stated your ideas. You will have to do better than that to prove what you believe is correct.

Oh yea, and I could care less what the early Catholic church rejected or not. They could reject Gnosticism all they wanted to. It does not effect our doctrine because our doctrine is not Gnostic. Try again, Brother. You are not even close, and close only counts in horse shoes and hand grenades.

The Apostle John who was NOT a Catholic rejected Gnosticism. Good grief the longer it goes the worse it gets.

[Jason B]

I know many of them, Elder. Many believe as I have stated here, and are not polluted by the preterist doctrine.

I believe that as time progresses, people will see the preterist doctrine for what it is, heresy, and more will come out of it. Their reasoning is Gnostic in origin, as is their hermentical understanding and interpretation of scripture.

That is so true, I don't think I have heard anyone else say this, though I taught on it (FP and Gnosticism) for Sunday evening service tonight.

[Steve Epley]

Brother Epley, Josephus is a historian. History is recorded, we quote historical records to prove what happened in history. This is much different that looking at the newspaper and saying, "see it's the signs of the times!". Tell me have your EVER quoted history before?

If so, then check your comments and retract as necessary.

He was a PAID historian bought and paid for by the Romans. Yes I quote history but history is a collection of old newspapers.:thumbsup

[Steve Epley]

afp1996, don't waste your breath. Eld. Epley knows we do not quote Josephus as he claims. He knows we use scriptures as our primary source. He just gets nervous when he is backed into a corner, and when that happens, he starts misrepresenting those he cannot refute. The more he posts this type junk, the more you know he is cornered. :thumbsup

When YOU was helping Smith he was quoting Josephus. :thumbsup

[afp1996]

He was a PAID historian bought and paid for by the Romans. Yes I quote history but history is a collection of old newspapers.:thumbsup

Then why did you bring him up, as if it will change what the Bible says?

[Steve Epley]

Come on Brother, give us some substance. Line upon line. etc. Your bells and whistles may work with the crowd you usually run with, but we don't play those games. Show us some Word or close up shop. The above propaganda is not cutting the mustard.

Your first scripture says nothing about a rapture. It states that the dead in Christ would be resurrected. Those who would remain, as in not be resurrected would be caught up to meet the Lord. If you see this as happening at the same time, then you are not preaching what Paul preached, because he said they were left after the resurrection.

The second scripture is a bit odd being used as you use it. I had no idea that the Holy Spirit needed the angels to carry the physical bodies of those who are being raptured up into the atmosphere to meet Jesus? Are you saying that the Holy Ghost has enough power to resurrect the dead and to change a physical body into a physical body, but can't make it rise? What is the purpose of the angels doing the rapturing here Brother?

The man gives you SUBSTANCE NOT 14 allegories and parables.:thumbsup

[afp1996]

When YOU was helping Smith he was quoting Josephus. :thumbsup

Awww! Isn't it sweet how Brother Epley has taken it upon himself to tells us who we can and cannot quote from history. Thank you Brother Epley for the kind instruction. I'll be eating mine with a grain of salt.

[Jason B]

Hey guys, just curious, what do you think of the debate so far?

[afp1996]

That is so true, I don't think I have heard anyone else say this, though I taught on it (FP and Gnosticism) for Sunday evening service tonight.

Splendid, please send me a copy of your message notes. That should be an interesting read.

[afp1996]

Hey guys, just curious, what do you think of the debate so far?

I think you are suppose to post your first question so we can get on with it.

[Steve Epley]

Awww! Isn't it sweet how Brother Epley has taken it upon himself to tells us who we can and cannot quote from history. Thank you Brother Epley for the kind instruction. I'll be eating mine with a grain of salt.

So if you lived at right after 70 AD and the story had been in the Roman Tribunal it would have been wrong to quote it? The contributor was a guy named F. Josephus?
However we can't quote TODAY"S history?

[afp1996]

The man gives you SUBSTANCE NOT 14 allegories and parables.:thumbsup

Brother we wouldn't need 14 of them to prove your doctrine wrong. One will do nicely.

[Jason B]

Borther,I taught on alot of the things we have been going over on here. I didn't preach so much as have a teaching service. Most of the congregation were shocked that anyone could actually believe Jesus already came back.

I did mention to them "You may think it's stupid to arrive at such a conclusion, but the people who believe this are anything but." You guys problem isn't that your ignorant, but you all have thrown the baby out with the bath water. As I've stated, some of the things you guys write is GOOD STUFF, but you go way to far to teach eVERYTHING is done and over with.

[afp1996]

So if you lived at right after 70 AD and the story had been in the Roman Tribunal it would have been wrong to quote it? The contributor was a guy named F. Josephus?
However we can't quote TODAY"S history?

Never said you couldn't. Remember that you bashed our "supposed" source of AFP doctrine.

[Jason B]

I think you are suppose to post your first question so we can get on with it.

Okay, I just checked the debate thread. I only get to ask 2 questions, then it will be your turn, I will post tomorrow after work. I want to think about which question to ask, and right now, I'm beat-just on here winding down after service and dinner.

[TJJJ]

And one should never enter into a battle of wits with unarmed men. :D

Well, done with service.

As old Arnold would say... I'M BACK!


Concerning the battle of wits, doesn't look like I am in any danger in this circle does it!:gotcha

[TJJJ]

Just so you know, to my knowledge, TJJJ is not an AFP.

Dat's me! Don't claim to be either preterist or dispensationalist. I do know how to read my Bible though. Just an Apostolic that knows how to go to church and pay my tithe, listen to the word and try to live right.

Just watching the fighting! Lot's of popcorn eating on this thread too!:popcorn2

:nothingtoadd

I am letting all the experts work out all the problems between dispees and preterists! just enjoying the show!

Waiting for the debate to really work up.

[TK Burk]

When YOU was helping Smith he was quoting Josephus. :thumbsup

Eld. Epley, not meaning to sound disrespectful, but Elder over the years you've proven that you know nothing about Josephus. Even here it is evident you know nothing about how his writings have been used over the years by the church. Consequently, this is again another area that you really should have no comment about.

[TK Burk]

Then why did you bring him up, as if it will change what the Bible says?

Like I said, Eld. Epley always brings stuff like this up because he has no Bible for what he teaches. Therefore, he uses stuff like this in a diversionary way....

[Steve Epley]

Eld. Epley, not meaning to sound disrespectful, but Elder over the years you've proven that you know nothing about Josephus. Even here it is evident you know nothing about how his writings have been used over the years by the church. Consequently, this is again another area that you really should have no comment about.

Why the whinning it was you asking who quoted Josephus and when I reminded you it was your buddy out of Tx. when YOU was with him was quoting you cry foul. I caught you like I have on your doctrine time and time and again and what do you do? Whine.:sad:sad:sad:groan:reaction:tissue:tissue

[TK Burk]

Why the whinning it was you asking who quoted Josephus and when I reminded you it was your buddy out of Tx. when YOU was with him was quoting you cry foul. I caught you like I have on your doctrine time and time and again and what do you do? Whine.:sad:sad:sad:groan:reaction:tissue:tissue

And again you misrepresent and twist.

Elder, can you prove anything about what you believe on prophecy from your Bible, or are these juvenile diversions the best you can muster??

[afp1996]

:reaction:reaction:reaction:reaction

This has got to be the funniest one I've seen yet! :ursofunny

[Crossfire]

And again you misrepresent and twist.

Elder, can you prove anything about what you believe on prophecy from your Bible, or are these juvenile diversions the best you can muster??
Well, I would like to state that the truth of the rapture doctrine has been proven on here, a teaching which is undenibale through the corpus of scripture. Also, I see a literal bodily resurrection is also clearly taught in scripture, something the AFP openly and vehemently denies. As well as the visible and literal return of Christ, which is yet to come. All of which is proven clearly through scripture.

Without resolving to use allegorical and Gnostic styles of hermeneutical interpretation, can you defend what you believe?

[afp1996]

Well, I would like to state that the truth of the rapture doctrine has been proven on here, a teaching which is undenibale through the corpus of scripture. Also, I see a literal bodily resurrection is also clearly taught in scripture, something the AFP openly and vehemently denies. As well as the visible and literal return of Christ, which is yet to come. All of which is proven clearly through scripture.

Without resolving to use allegorical and Gnostic styles of hermeneutical interpretation, can you defend what you believe?

The scripture does not teach what you have stated it does. You assume you are right. Proving it is quite another thing. Again your show boating will not do you any good here.

[shag]

As usual, preterists put words into the mouths of those who seek to expose their false doctrine. I said the Church was the generation, not Jewish nation. Your attempt to deflect my words was very childish and unprofessional. The Church shall not depart from the earth until all the signs Jesus gave shall be fulfilled.


I dont believe I was attempting to "deflect" your words, whatever thats suppose to mean, but rather to point out, if I understand your position correctly, that you see Jesus as talking to and of the church, while Epley sees Jesus as speaking to and of a Jewish race, concerning the word "generation" in Matt. 24.
Childish and unproffesional? Please keep your descriptive insults to yourself. If youve received the Holyghost since you believed, it shouldnt be a problem.

Jesus spoke of generations to several groups. He spoke that the Jewish Pharisees were a wicked and adulterous generation. Since the Pharisees were long before Christ's first coming, and continued after His resurrection, which is a time which extends past the forty years preterists claim, then should all Pharisees be counted in this? You spiritualization of scripture is very troubling, and another proof of the total fallacy of preterist teaching.

after Jesus spent Matt. 23 "woing (sp ck??) and condemning" the scribes and pharisees he said this:

Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city:

35That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.

36Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.

and John had said who hath warned u to flee from the wrath to come. I dont believe the veangance was to come in 2000 + years, but rather I believe it came on that generation, like Jesus said it would.


You remove the hope of the believers of Christ's return. Our hope is in Christ, which is a hope that includes His return. But, back to the point at hand.

No I do not, thanks 4 getting back to the point.

You claim Christ's return was during the forty year period of time in which He was speaking.

When Jesus repeatedly tells the crowd things like "This generation shall not pass away", or "There is some standing here that shall not taste of death, till...", or the blood of the killings of the prophets will be required of THIS (particular) wicked generation, and veangance is HIS, scripture pretty muvh speaks for itself IMHO.

Tell me then how the Millennial Reign has already taken place, tears were wiped from eyes, and all pain has ceased? Tell me how the Lord has returned and not gathered the saints? When Jerusalem was destroyed, the Church was scattered, not gathered.

Your entire argument is completely flawed.

Not everybody believes in the "millinal reign' doctorine. And BTW, not everbody that believes Matt. 24 is fullfilled, is FP.

[Crossfire]

The scripture does not teach what you have stated it does. You assume you are right. Proving it is quite another thing. Again your show boating will not do you any good here.
I have proven it, afp. The fact is your conscience has been seared by the Gnostic spirit, which perverts the scriptures to declare no rapture, no physical resurrection, and no future second coming. The scriptures clearly state that these things are real, and are yet to come.

While preterists seek to debate to prove their teaching, the Word of God stands strong and secure. No debate is needed, and no spiritualism is required in order to understand the scriptures. The truth is, preterists have failed to see the truth, that Jesus is coming back again, just as He promised He would. This is something that preterism wants to extinguish within the Body. But, God has men and women who will not allow the truths of the Bible to be trampled under foot.

[Sister Alvear]

I am really an old timer...I still think the church will go through tribulation!
all of it....

[Crossfire]

shag, you said the following:

When Jesus repeatedly tells the crowd things like "This generation shall not pass away", or "There is some standing here that shall not taste of death, till...", or the blood of the killings of the prophets will be required of THIS (particular) wicked generation, and veangance is HIS, scripture pretty muvh speaks for itself IMHO.


I do not deny that the destruction of Jerusalem was the judgment of God. However, it was not the coming of the Lord. As for the generation issue, that has already been addressed, seeing the generation is speaking of the enduring church called the Chosen generation. As touching the Kingdom, I believe the Kingdom came spiritually at pentecost when the Spirit fell. However, we have yet to see the full manifestation of the vision of the Kingdom.

As you have seen, time and again, the preterist arguments are very weak and spiritually impotent against the understanding clearly presented within the pages of scripture.

[Crossfire]

I am really an old timer...I still think the church will go through tribulation!
all of it....
And you are correct. The Church is not a past tense, but a future enduring people called by His name. Preterism is a form of spiritual escapism, while the future coming is an enduring doctrine, which the Church has been and continues to be to this day, and shall continue to be until Christ's return.

[afp1996]

I have proven it, afp. The fact is your conscience has been seared by the Gnostic spirit, which perverts the scriptures to declare no rapture, no physical resurrection, and no future second coming. The scriptures clearly state that these things are real, and are yet to come.

While preterists seek to debate to prove their teaching, the Word of God stands strong and secure. No debate is needed, and no spiritualism is required in order to understand the scriptures. The truth is, preterists have failed to see the truth, that Jesus is coming back again, just as He promised He would. This is something that preterism wants to extinguish within the Body. But, God has men and women who will not allow the truths of the Bible to be trampled under foot.

Well first I am not a Gnostic. And second. Do you tack the term spirit to everything you disagree with? Oh I have got to try it! You seem to be led by a literal spirit. Do you see how silly that sounds? Brother or Sister please grow up a little.

[Crossfire]

Well first I am not a Gnostic. And second. Do you tack the term spirit to everything you disagree with? Oh I have got to try it! You seem to be led by a literal spirit. Do you see how silly that sounds? Brother or Sister please grow up a little.
Actual, preterism is a system which implies Gnostic style of scriptural interpretation. It requires the understanding of hidden meanings and secret interpretations instead of seeing what the Bible clearly says. Thus, preterist interpretation is a Gnostic style of interpretation.

Your attempted deflection of the facts concerning your interpretation of scripture does not remove the fact of preterism's working to distort the preparedness of the believer, the removal of hope of Christ's return, and the literal physical resurrection and transformation of the saints from mortal to immortal. It is Gnostic, and yes, I stand by this interpretation.

[TK Burk]

Well, I would like to state that the truth of the rapture doctrine has been proven on here, a teaching which is undenibale through the corpus of scripture. Also, I see a literal bodily resurrection is also clearly taught in scripture, something the AFP openly and vehemently denies. As well as the visible and literal return of Christ, which is yet to come. All of which is proven clearly through scripture.

Without resolving to use allegorical and Gnostic styles of hermeneutical interpretation, can you defend what you believe?

Uh huh...sure.... :nah

Nothing of the sort has been done here. If the above is so "clearly taught in scripture," then please post those scriptures here. I hope that the passages you use (if you do) are used within the context in which they're found. You know what text out of context is, right? It's pretext....

[TK Burk]

Not everybody believes in the "millinal reign' doctorine. And BTW, not everbody that believes Matt. 24 is fullfilled, is FP.

Correct on both points! :thumbsup What you said is something that some Futurists on here seem to forget....

[TK Burk]

shag, you said the following:



I do not deny that the destruction of Jerusalem was the judgment of God. However, it was not the coming of the Lord. As for the generation issue, that has already been addressed, seeing the generation is speaking of the enduring church called the Chosen generation. As touching the Kingdom, I believe the Kingdom came spiritually at pentecost when the Spirit fell. However, we have yet to see the full manifestation of the vision of the Kingdom.

As you have seen, time and again, the preterist arguments are very weak and spiritually impotent against the understanding clearly presented within the pages of scripture.

You use conjecture as your evidence, and do so while ignoring the plain language found within the text, and then claim AFPs have a "weak and spiritually impotent" argument? You really need to stop your theatrics and get in the Book.

[TK Burk]

And you are correct. The Church is not a past tense, but a future enduring people called by His name. Preterism is a form of spiritual escapism, while the future coming is an enduring doctrine, which the Church has been and continues to be to this day, and shall continue to be until Christ's return.

gibberish.... :blah

[TK Burk]

Actual, preterism is a system which implies Gnostic style of scriptural interpretation. It requires the understanding of hidden meanings and secret interpretations instead of seeing what the Bible clearly says. Thus, preterist interpretation is a Gnostic style of interpretation.

Your attempted deflection of the facts concerning your interpretation of scripture does not remove the fact of preterism's working to distort the preparedness of the believer, the removal of hope of Christ's return, and the literal physical resurrection and transformation of the saints from mortal to immortal. It is Gnostic, and yes, I stand by this interpretation.

Again gibberish. Nothing you are saying here is true. Your comments about Gnosticism are ridicules.

[Crossfire]

You use conjecture as your evidence, and do so while ignoring the plain language found within the text, and then claim AFPs have a "weak and spiritually impotent" argument? You really need to stop your theatrics and get in the Book.
I am in the Bible, sir, and not in Josephus' corrupted historical accounts. I studied preterism and other such false doctrines, and know what preterists believe. I even have a copy of Smith's book on my desk beside me as we speak. The truth is, your interpretation of scripture is Gnostic. This is why it is not even closely resembled of Apostolic theology.

You have changed the second coming to a local event, instead of a global one. You pervert the resurrection. You deny the second coming as Jesus said, as well as the Apostles through the scripture.

I would advise you to cease studying Gill, Mauro, and other trinitarians, and start studying the Bible for yourself, repenting of being led astray into such false doctrine.

[afp1996]

Actual, preterism is a system which implies Gnostic style of scriptural interpretation. It requires the understanding of hidden meanings and secret interpretations instead of seeing what the Bible clearly says. Thus, preterist interpretation is a Gnostic style of interpretation.

Your attempted deflection of the facts concerning your interpretation of scripture does not remove the fact of preterism's working to distort the preparedness of the believer, the removal of hope of Christ's return, and the literal physical resurrection and transformation of the saints from mortal to immortal. It is Gnostic, and yes, I stand by this interpretation.
this is your opinion. We do not in ay some secret mystical route to come to our doctrinal stand.

so you say Daniels seventy weeks are fulfilled. So then please show us where Matthew 24 is not fulfilled. if you see a gap then you will have to show us where that has is. this should be literally easy for you.

[TK Burk]

Crossfire, have you claimed to believe in preterism in the past? You sure sound like someone who used to post on AFF. Just wondering. :)

Crossfire, any reason why you did not answer this? :uhoh

[Crossfire]

gibberish.... :blah
Unto the pure all things are pure: but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving is nothing pure; but even their mind and conscience is defiled. They profess that they know God; but in works they deny him, being abominable, and disobedient, and unto every good work reprobate. (Titus 1:15-16 KJV)

Basically describes what the preterist response is to scriptural truth. The doctrine is false.

[Crossfire]

Crossfire, any reason why you did not answer this? :uhoh
I stated I studied the doctrine. Nothing else. why do preterists insist on putting words in my mouth? The truth is, your argument is weak, as is your doctrine.

[Crossfire]

Well, where have you been? Are you still switching what you believe from week to week? Are you a One God believer this week or a trinitarian again? I had an idea you are Crossfire due to your flowery, theatrical statements that contain no substance (this is your always give away).
Who do you think that I am? Come now and spit it out. Who am I, since you know so much? And, what is your proof?

[TK Burk]

Who do you think that I am? Come now and spit it out. Who am I, since you know so much? And, what is your proof?

You in Texas?

[Crossfire]

Well, where have you been? Are you still switching what you believe from week to week? Are you a One God believer this week or a trinitarian again? I had an idea you are Crossfire due to your flowery, theatrical statements that contain no substance (this is your always give away).
The truth is, you are engaged in a defense posture, trying to evade the points made. Your own weakness of doctrinal stance is such that you cannot stand your precious doctrine to be challenged successfully.

Now, please, before slander charges can be brought, let us continue with the discussion.

[Crossfire]

You in Texas?
Have the admins check my IP.

[TK Burk]

Have the admins check my IP.

Why is that needed? A simple yes or no is acceptable.

[Crossfire]

Because I have no need to tell my identity. You want to know who I am, but I have no desire to reveal my name. This is the Internet, and a forum where many are using screen names. Your wanting to know my name is a smoke screen designed to remove focus from the fact that your doctrine is challenged and found wanting.

Also, using invisible mode in forums is allowed, so no one can see when one is online. Will you require all those who discuss to make themselves known by no longer using invisible mode?

[afp1996]

this is your opinion. We do not in ay some secret mystical route to come to our doctrinal stand.

so you say Daniels seventy weeks are fulfilled. So then please show us where Matthew 24 is not fulfilled. if you see a gap then you will have to show us where that has is. this should be literally easy for you.

Bump. His post are leading me to that same conclusion. We shall see.

[TK Burk]

Because I have no need to tell my identity. You want to know who I am, but I have no desire to reveal my name. This is the Internet, and a forum where many are using screen names. Your wanting to know my name is a smoke screen designed to remove focus from the fact that your doctrine is challenged and found wanting.

Ever read the Sherlock Holmes story "The Adventure of Silver Blaze"? In that he solves the case because a dog didn't bark. My simple question of whether or not you are in the huge state of Texas wouldn't necessarily reveal your identity, unless, of course, you know I am correct. Your silence is heard loud and clear!

[TK Burk]

Because I have no need to tell my identity. You want to know who I am, but I have no desire to reveal my name. This is the Internet, and a forum where many are using screen names. Your wanting to know my name is a smoke screen designed to remove focus from the fact that your doctrine is challenged and found wanting.

Also, using invisible mode in forums is allowed, so no one can see when one is online. Will you require all those who discuss to make themselves known by no longer using invisible mode?

For the record, I never asked your name. You asked me to post who I thought you were, but out of respecting your right to use a nic, I did not. I aknowledge a person's right to use a nic. I have not asked you to post who you actually are. Use your nic all you want. Nothing new about such things around here. But asking a person's beliefs is fair game, and that is what I asked you. Seems that hit a nerve from your responses..... :nod

[Crossfire]

I am from Texas, yes. However, the fact remains that much like a house of mirrors, you're attempting to distort the facts presented. Typical from those who hold the preterist argument. Your deflection reveals much, sir.

Why not discuss the issue? because you cannot. Your doctrine is exposed as Gnostic, and false. Just stick with the discussion and prove what I say wrong. Otherwise, admit you are wrong and let's move on.

[TK Burk]

I am from Texas, yes. However, the fact remains that much like a house of mirrors, you're attempting to distort the facts presented. Typical from those who hold the preterist argument. Your deflection reveals much, sir.

Why not discuss the issue? because you cannot. Your doctrine is exposed as Gnostic, and false. Just stick with the discussion and prove what I say wrong. Otherwise, admit you are wrong and let's move on.

Crossfire, I have an entire website dedicated to answering questions about this position. To say I cannot answer your unproven claims is really juvenile. Over the years your usage of such theatrics has never substantiated your arguments, and if anything has only hurt your credibility. So please stop acting like you broke a nail and prove your points with some Scripture. ;)

[Bowas]

Actual, preterism is a system which implies Gnostic style of scriptural interpretation. It requires the understanding of hidden meanings and secret interpretations instead of seeing what the Bible clearly says. Thus, preterist interpretation is a Gnostic style of interpretation.

Your attempted deflection of the facts concerning your interpretation of scripture does not remove the fact of preterism's working to distort the preparedness of the believer, the removal of hope of Christ's return, and the literal physical resurrection and transformation of the saints from mortal to immortal. It is Gnostic, and yes, I stand by this interpretation.

The charge of gnostisim compelled me to check the definition of it.
While I do not agree with everything the APF teach, I do not see it falling into the catorgory of gnostisim. To my kowledge, it seems they use the Bible to interpret the Bible (often with a different conclusion than I do) but to claim they are the only ones with "true knowledge of the Christian religon" would also apply to those oppose to AFP. Yes? Don't you too believe the same? At least they attempt to interpret the Bible by using the Bible. Once again FTR, I am not AFP.

Gnostic
GNOS'TIC, n. nostic. [L. gnosticus; Gr. to know.]

The Gnostics were a sect of philosophers that arose in the first ages of christianity, who pretended they were the only men who had a true knowledge of the christian religion. They formed for themselves a system of theology, agreeable to the philosophy of Pythagoras and Plato, to which they accommodated their interpretations of scripture. They held that all natures, intelligible, intellectual and material, are derived by successive emanations from the infinite fountain of deity. These emanations they called oeons. These doctrines were derived from the oriental philosophy.

GNOS'TIC, a. nostic. Pertaining to the Gnostics or their doctrines.

[TK Burk]

The charge of gnostisim compelled me to check the definition of it.
While I do not agree with everything the APF teach, I do not see it falling into the catorgory of gnostisim. To my kowledge, it seems they use the Bible to interpret the Bible (often with a different conclusion than I do) but to claim they are the only ones with "true knowledge of the Christian religon" would also apply to those oppose to AFP. Yes? Don't you too believe the same? At least they attempt to interpret the Bible by using the Bible. Once again FTR, I am not AFP.

Gnostic
GNOS'TIC, n. nostic. [L. gnosticus; Gr. to know.]

The Gnostics were a sect of philosophers that arose in the first ages of christianity, who pretended they were the only men who had a true knowledge of the christian religion. They formed for themselves a system of theology, agreeable to the philosophy of Pythagoras and Plato, to which they accommodated their interpretations of scripture. They held that all natures, intelligible, intellectual and material, are derived by successive emanations from the infinite fountain of deity. These emanations they called oeons. These doctrines were derived from the oriental philosophy.

GNOS'TIC, a. nostic. Pertaining to the Gnostics or their doctrines.

Thank you for adding this clarification.

The Gnostics that the apostles faced not only believed they had a higher, more enlightened view of all things, but most of them also believed that sin was innately found within the flesh. As a consequence, they taught that anything a man or woman did for their flesh was sinful. Some even took this to the extreme that they labeled eating the food necessary for survival as being sinful. Such teachings was probably the reason why John was lead to describe the spirit of antichrist as being those who denied that Jesus came in the flesh (1Joh 4:3), and why Paul wrote in opposition to those who taught against eating certain meats and against marriage (1Tim 4:3).

Anyway, like you pointed out, anyone who studied the tenets of Gnosticism would know that it is nothing like AFP.

[Sister Alvear]

texas is a BIG state...

[Steve Epley]

Actual, preterism is a system which implies Gnostic style of scriptural interpretation. It requires the understanding of hidden meanings and secret interpretations instead of seeing what the Bible clearly says. Thus, preterist interpretation is a Gnostic style of interpretation.

Your attempted deflection of the facts concerning your interpretation of scripture does not remove the fact of preterism's working to distort the preparedness of the believer, the removal of hope of Christ's return, and the literal physical resurrection and transformation of the saints from mortal to immortal. It is Gnostic, and yes, I stand by this interpretation.

And your interpetation is correct.:thumbsup

[Steve Epley]

I am in the Bible, sir, and not in Josephus' corrupted historical accounts. I studied preterism and other such false doctrines, and know what preterists believe. I even have a copy of Smith's book on my desk beside me as we speak. The truth is, your interpretation of scripture is Gnostic. This is why it is not even closely resembled of Apostolic theology.

You have changed the second coming to a local event, instead of a global one. You pervert the resurrection. You deny the second coming as Jesus said, as well as the Apostles through the scripture.

I would advise you to cease studying Gill, Mauro, and other trinitarians, and start studying the Bible for yourself, repenting of being led astray into such false doctrine.

The poster cuts them off at the knees. Don't shake your head it will come off.:thumbsup
Very good.

[afp1996]

The poster cuts them off at the knees. Don't shake your head it will come off.:thumbsup
Very good.
With what? He gave no Word just show boating. Kinda like you do! hmmm

Now I see why you back him. if deep calls to deep then shallow probably does too.

[TK Burk]

And your interpetation is correct.:thumbsup

The poster cuts them off at the knees. Don't shake your head it will come off.:thumbsup
Very good.

Eld. Epley, some of the people you so readily—and often desperately—align yourself with says a lot about the credibility of your position.... :covereyes

[Steve Epley]

Eld. Epley, some of the people you so readily—and often desperately—align yourself with says a lot about the credibility of your position.... :covereyes

I do NOT agree with every word I am a pre-trib dispensationalist I have said so he is post trib he said so BUT we BOTH are looking for Jesus to return and do not think all the prophecies were fulfilled in a small foot note in history the majority of the population through the ages never heard of that is YOUR postion the greatest day in human history was Titus and his thugs destroying Jerusalem comfort one another with these words.:thumbsup

[afp1996]

I do NOT agree with every word I am a pre-trib dispensationalist I have said so he is post trib he said so BUT we BOTH are looking for Jesus to return and do not think all the prophecies were fulfilled in a small foot note in history the majority of the population through the ages never heard of that is YOUR postion the greatest day in human history was Titus and his thugs destroying Jerusalem comfort one another with these words.:thumbsup
this would be funny if you were not serious.

[Steve Epley]

this would be funny if you were not serious.

It would even be more funny if y'all weren't serious.

Behold the Bridegroom cometh and here comes Titus.
The Lord Himself shall decend from Heaven with a shout and here comes Titus from Rome.
He shall so come in like manner as He went away and hear comes Titus.
Titus is most in important person in Bible prophecy.

[TK Burk]

this would be funny if you were not serious.

Sad, isn't it?? :blink

[Steve Epley]

Sad, isn't it?? :blink

Very sad:
The blessed hope Titus and the boys.
The last trumpt Titus and the boys.
Coming with 10,000 of His angels Titus and the boys
Caught up into the clouds Titus and the boys
The sign of the Son of Man Titus and the boys
I will come again Titus and the boys.
The abomination desolation Titus and the boys
The beast-false prophet-image to the beast Titus and the boys
200,000 army from Ephrates Titus and the boys.


Titus be an important person!!!!!! The MOST important person in prophecy is Titus.

[TK Burk]

It would even be more funny if y'all weren't serious.

Behold the Bridegroom cometh and here comes Titus.
The Lord Himself shall decend from Heaven with a shout and here comes Titus from Rome.
He shall so come in like manner as He went away and hear comes Titus.
Titus is most in important person in Bible prophecy.

Eld. Epley, you only hurt yourself when you post like this. Men that study, including futurist brethren, would view your above statements as totally asinine. Please help yourself and stop advertising your cluelessness….

[TK Burk]

Very sad:
The blessed hope Titus and the boys.
The last trumpt Titus and the boys.
Coming with 10,000 of His angels Titus and the boys
Caught up into the clouds Titus and the boys
The sign of the Son of Man Titus and the boys
I will come again Titus and the boys.
The abomination desolation Titus and the boys
The beast-false prophet-image to the beast Titus and the boys
200,000 army from Ephrates Titus and the boys.


Titus be an important person!!!!!! The MOST important person in prophecy is Titus.

And you had to add more injury to your already hurting position by changing your before post to THIS?? :blink

Like I said Elder, you're only hurting yourself when you show the world how out of touch you are....

[shag]

It would even be more funny if y'all weren't serious.

Behold the Bridegroom cometh and here comes Titus.
The Lord Himself shall decend from Heaven with a shout and here comes Titus from Rome.
He shall so come in like manner as He went away and hear comes Titus.
Titus is most in important person in Bible prophecy.

Very sad:
The blessed hope Titus and the boys.
The last trumpt Titus and the boys.
Coming with 10,000 of His angels Titus and the boys
Caught up into the clouds Titus and the boys
The sign of the Son of Man Titus and the boys
I will come again Titus and the boys.
The abomination desolation Titus and the boys
The beast-false prophet-image to the beast Titus and the boys
200,000 army from Ephrates Titus and the boys.


Titus be an important person!!!!!! The MOST important person in prophecy is Titus.



jason and crossfire even have posted on this thread, they believe the ad 70 event was God's wrath/judgement, but not you Elder. It was just Titus and his boys/thugs. No judgement, that is your position , correct?

[mfblume]

I cannot find any verses that mention the "rapture," just like I cannot find any that mention the "trinity." Maybe you can enlighten us all?
(1) Would you please give the verses that mention the "rapture"?

There is a verse that mentions "rapture". 1 Thess 4:17. In the LATIN VULGATE Bible, the LATIN word for CAUGHT UP is RAPTURA or RAPTUS. We get the anglicized word RAPTURE from that Latin term. And the English word means the same thing. So although not used in an English Bible, the root word is used in the Latin version, and means the same thing in english as CAUGHT UP.

[afp1996]

There is a verse that mentions "rapture". 1 Thess 4:17. In the LATIN VULGATE Bible, the LATIN word for CAUGHT UP is RAPTURA or RAPTUS. We get the anglicized word RAPTURE from that Latin term. And the English word means the same thing. So although not used in an English Bible, the root word is used in the Latin version, and means the same thing in english as CAUGHT UP.

It is not the word that we are talking about is missing from the Bible. It is the definion and teaching that is absent from the pages of the Word of God.

[afp1996]

It would even be more funny if y'all weren't serious.

Behold the Bridegroom cometh and here comes Titus.
The Lord Himself shall decend from Heaven with a shout and here comes Titus from Rome.
He shall so come in like manner as He went away and hear comes Titus.
Titus is most in important person in Bible prophecy.

Brother, AFP has no room for your literal/physical interpretation. Keep that in your dispensational doctrine.

[mfblume]

It is not the word that we are talking about is missing from the Bible. It is the definion and teaching that is absent from the pages of the Word of God.

I disagree. Bro Burk said the word is missing from the bible. He brought that up. And

I cannot find any verses that mention the "rapture," just like I cannot find any that mention the "trinity." Maybe you can enlighten us all?
(1) Would you please give the verses that mention the "rapture"?The definition of rapture means exactly what rapturists claim.

G726
ἁρπάζω
harpazō
har-pad'-zo
From a derivative of G138; to seize (in various applications): - catch (away, up), pluck, pull, take (by force).


So how is the meaning not in the bible if the word is used that has that meaning?

It is also found in Acts 8.

Acts 8:39 KJV And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing.


The definition is found in the word. If the term HARPADZO means to rapture, then it is in the bible if HARPADZO is there.

[Crossfire]

Brother, AFP has no room for your literal/physical interpretation. Keep that in your dispensational doctrine.
Yes, according to AFP, Jesus is not coming as He left. He is coming secretly, spiritually, and invisibly, and did so in AD70. So, AFPers need to keep their Gnosticism to themselves, and let the Bible say clearly what it means.

[afp1996]

I disagree. Bro Burk said the word is missing from the bible. He brought that up. And

The definition of rapture means exactly what rapturists claim.

G726
ἁρπάζω
harpazō
har-pad'-zo
From a derivative of G138; to seize (in various applications): - catch (away, up), pluck, pull, take (by force).


So how is the meaning not in the bible if the word is used that has that meaning?

It is also found in Acts 8.

Acts 8:39 KJV And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing.


The definition is found in the word. If the term HARPADZO means to rapture, then it is in the bible if HARPADZO is there.

The problem is not the meaning in the Bible brother, it's what you say it means.

For you to say that a physical body is changed into a physical body and then is risen into the sky is not the meaning of harpadzo.

Harpadzo means: to seize (in various applications): - catch (away, up), pluck, pull, take (by force).

In that word there is no mention of a physical body becoming immortal and flying into the sky. In fact the scripture you quoted shows not a flying of the physical body but the disappearance of said body without a change from mortal to immortal and then a reappearing of the same mortal body in another city. This same body did not live for ever but indeed died after being "raptured".

Like I said, no mention of the meaning you guys force into the scripture.

[afp1996]

Yes, according to AFP, Jesus is not coming as He left. He is coming secretly, spiritually, and invisibly, and did so in AD70. So, AFPers need to keep their Gnosticism to themselves, and let the Bible say clearly what it means.

:chirp

[mfblume]

Like I said, no mention of the meaning you guys force into the scripture

This is really getting tiring, AFP. I have rarely seen someone assume another person believes so many beliefs they simply do not believe, as I have seen with you, brother. Us "guys" do not believe what you claim, if you are talking about me. Show me -- quote me -- where I said anything similar to the term RAPTURE means BODIES CHANGING FROM ONE FORM TO ANOTHER.

The problem is not the meaning in the Bible brother, it's what you say it means.

For you to say that a physical body is changed into a physical body and then is risen into the sky is not the meaning of harpadzo.

Where did I say anything about HARPADZO meaning a physical body changes into a physical body? Harpadzo simply means to catch up, or seize and pluck up. I said nothing more than that.

When I said the meaning of RAPTURE in the bible is what rapturists claim it means, I was trying to say that the idea of a person seized up is in the word HARPADZO. Where did you get the idea I believe RAPTURE means to change bodies from one state to another? Please stick to what I said and not what I did not say. Brother,, we need to learn what the other means by saying something and not assume we know what someone means and make the error of misrepresenting their beliefs.

We are speaking about the meaning of "RAPTURE". "RAPTURE" simply means to seize or pluck up.

When it comes to the belief that a mortal physical body changing into an immortal physical body, I never got that from the meaning of HARPADZO. Where I get the belief of a physical mortal body changing into a physical immortal body when HARPADZO occurs is 1 Cor 15.

Since 1 Thess 4 says the dead in Christ rise and are followed by the saints who are alive and remain on earth, we find a connection in 1 Cor 15:51-52 when it mentions the same thing. Saying not everyone will physically die, but everyone will be changed is referring to dead and living saints being changed. Just as 1 Thess 4 says the dead will resurrect when HARPADZO occurs, 1 Cor 15 says the dead and living both are to be changed.

1 Cor 15:53 says something 1 Thess 4 never said. It adds the understanding that when the dead and living are raised, a change of body occurs, and involves corruption putting on incorruption, and mortality putting on immortality. Since the entire context is speaking about BODIES in 1 Cor 15, or CONTAINERS (which is what a body is if we read 2 Cor 5:4), then it is a mortal body that is CHANGED to become an immortal BODY.

Who said the term RAPTURE means BODIES CHANGING INTO OTHER SORTS OF BODIES? Not me. 1 Cor 15 simply says the change of bodies happens when harpadzo happens.

Harpadzo means: to seize (in various applications): - catch (away, up), pluck, pull, take (by force).

In that word there is no mention of a physical body becoming immortal and flying into the sky.

I never said it did. We get that additional idea from 1 Cor 15 focus on natural physical bodies changing into spiritual physical bodies, which you do not accept since you do not realize spiritual does not mean non-physical.

In fact the scripture you quoted shows not a flying of the physical body but the disappearance of said body without a change from mortal to immortal and then a reappearing of the same mortal body in another city.

Agreed! But you again incorrectly assumed, without any evidence from my writings, that I believe "RAPTURE" means a changing of the body from one physical state to another, when in actuality I always maintained it only means to seize. I agree it only means TO SEIZE. And since 1 Cor says that the SEIZING AWAY of 1 Thess 4 of the dead and living occurs with the associated and additional experience of mortality putting on immortality, while Acts 8 simply says the seizing takes place without anything to do with mortality putting on immortality, your point of Acts 8 is moot. I never said RAPTURE means bodies change from mortal ones to immortal ones. I simply believe change of bodies taught in 1 Cor 15 is said to occur when RAPTURE also occurs.

This same body did not live for ever but indeed died after being "raptured".

Like I said, no mention of the meaning you guys force into the scripture.

I force nothing into scripture. I force nothing into the meaning of words. But you are forcing your assumptions of what I believe into my beliefs without warrant. :) You have done that several times now. Please ensure what you assume is correct before you propose it. :D

You are confusing the teaching of what people believe is associated with the event of the rapture and thinking they are saying the term RAPTURE itself means all of that. Why do you do that? Please get your facts straight about what others believe.

[Bowas]

I am in the Bible, sir, and not in Josephus' corrupted historical accounts. I studied preterism and other such false doctrines, and know what preterists believe. I even have a copy of Smith's book on my desk beside me as we speak. The truth is, your interpretation of scripture is Gnostic. This is why it is not even closely resembled of Apostolic theology.

You have changed the second coming to a local event, instead of a global one. You pervert the resurrection. You deny the second coming as Jesus said, as well as the Apostles through the scripture.

I would advise you to cease studying Gill, Mauro, and other trinitarians, and start studying the Bible for yourself, repenting of being led astray into such false doctrine.

Curious, just curious. Do any trinitarians teach and espouse the same views as you do? I would guess, yes. And chances are, the entire basis of your endtime views probably was originaly devised and promoted by trinitarians. I do not even know what your particular brand is, but i am sure there are many trinitarians the teach it exactly as you do. Oh, most oneness that hold to trinitarian teachings, just don't believe the trinitarians will be saved, but other than that, they are right.
Discalimer: I am just making an assumption of your views.
Regarless of who believes a particular view point or not, does not necesarrily determine weather it is valid or not.

[mfblume]

Is Crossfire the same person as William Price? If so, bro., you know better than to say we are gnostic. Whoever it is, it is someone associated with Gary Reckart, by the term "gnostic" repeated all the time. And if so, you have changed beliefs from preterism to post trib so many times we cannot keep count any more. If you are WP, I always advised you to stay away from prophecy due to your inability to stay in one belief system for a very long time. Still love you, though. If you are not WP, sorry. But you obviously know GR.

[mfblume]

Crossfire: Read this: http://apostolicfriendsforum.com/showpost.php?p=731634&postcount=94

How does one go from DEAD WRONG to calling it truth?

You know GR's spirit is harsh and wrong. Bro., get involved with some good hearted brethren who are right in their attitude as well as strong about their beliefs. Nothing condones such a harsh attitude as what GR portrays, and you manifest the same thing on this thread. Don't stay there, bro. :D :thumbsup

[Steve Epley]

jason and crossfire even have posted on this thread, they believe the ad 70 event was God's wrath/judgement, but not you Elder. It was just Titus and his boys/thugs. No judgement, that is your position , correct?

Yes I believe Titus and his thugs were used to judge Isreal I do not believe they are the return of Christ-the resurrection of the dead-the final judgment of the wicked.
I do not believe Titus was Jesus coming in
the clouds
Jesus coming with the angels
The Lord himself decending from Heaven with a shout
the final fulfillment of ALL Bible prophecy.

[Steve Epley]

There is a verse that mentions "rapture". 1 Thess 4:17. In the LATIN VULGATE Bible, the LATIN word for CAUGHT UP is RAPTURA or RAPTUS. We get the anglicized word RAPTURE from that Latin term. And the English word means the same thing. So although not used in an English Bible, the root word is used in the Latin version, and means the same thing in english as CAUGHT UP.

Thank you but he knows that and it doesn't mean a thing.

[Steve Epley]

It is not the word that we are talking about is missing from the Bible. It is the definion and teaching that is absent from the pages of the Word of God.

1Thess 4:13-18 is NOT in your Bible?

[Steve Epley]

I disagree... Bro Burk said the word is missing from the bible... He brought that up... AndThe definition of rapture means exactly what rapturists claim... G726ἁρπάζωharpazōhar-pad'-zoFrom a derivative of G138; to seize (in various applications): - catch (away, up), pluck, pull, take (by force).So how is the meaning not in the bible if the word is used that has that meaning?It is also found in Acts 8.Acts 8:39 KJV.. And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing.The definition is found in the word... If the term HARPADZO means to rapture, then it is in the bible if HARPADZO is there.Again thank you.

[Steve Epley]

The problem is not the meaning in the Bible brother, it's what you say it means.

For you to say that a physical body is changed into a physical body and then is risen into the sky is not the meaning of harpadzo.

Harpadzo means: to seize (in various applications): - catch (away, up), pluck, pull, take (by force).

In that word there is no mention of a physical body becoming immortal and flying into the sky. In fact the scripture you quoted shows not a flying of the physical body but the disappearance of said body without a change from mortal to immortal and then a reappearing of the same mortal body in another city. This same body did not live for ever but indeed died after being "raptured".

Like I said, no mention of the meaning you guys force into the scripture.

Have you NOT read 1Cor. 15????Jesus is the FIRSTFRUIT and He raised a literal body and THAT body ascended INTO Heaven. Acts 1:9-11

[Steve Epley]

This is really getting tiring, AFP. I have rarely seen someone assume another person believes so many beliefs they simply do not believe, as I have seen with you, brother. Us "guys" do not believe what you claim, if you are talking about me. Show me -- quote me -- where I said anything similar to the term RAPTURE means BODIES CHANGING FROM ONE FORM TO ANOTHER.



Where did I say anything about HARPADZO meaning a physical body changes into a physical body? Harpadzo simply means to catch up, or seize and pluck up. I said nothing more than that.

When I said the meaning of RAPTURE in the bible is what rapturists claim it means, I was trying to say that the idea of a person seized up is in the word HARPADZO. Where did you get the idea I believe RAPTURE means to change bodies from one state to another? Please stick to what I said and not what I did not say. Brother,, we need to learn what the other means by saying something and not assume we know what someone means and make the error of misrepresenting their beliefs.

We are speaking about the meaning of "RAPTURE". "RAPTURE" simply means to seize or pluck up.

When it comes to the belief that a mortal physical body changing into an immortal physical body, I never got that from the meaning of HARPADZO. Where I get the belief of a physical mortal body changing into a physical immortal body when HARPADZO occurs is 1 Cor 15.

Since 1 Thess 4 says the dead in Christ rise and are followed by the saints who are alive and remain on earth, we find a connection in 1 Cor 15:51-52 when it mentions the same thing. Saying not everyone will physically die, but everyone will be changed is referring to dead and living saints being changed. Just as 1 Thess 4 says the dead will resurrect when HARPADZO occurs, 1 Cor 15 says the dead and living both are to be changed.

1 Cor 15:53 says something 1 Thess 4 never said. It adds the understanding that when the dead and living are raised, a change of body occurs, and involves corruption putting on incorruption, and mortality putting on immortality. Since the entire context is speaking about BODIES in 1 Cor 15, or CONTAINERS (which is what a body is if we read 2 Cor 5:4), then it is a mortal body that is CHANGED to become an immortal BODY.

Who said the term RAPTURE means BODIES CHANGING INTO OTHER SORTS OF BODIES? Not me. 1 Cor 15 simply says the change of bodies happens when harpadzo happens.



I never said it did. We get that additional idea from 1 Cor 15 focus on natural physical bodies changing into spiritual physical bodies, which you do not accept since you do not realize spiritual does not mean non-physical.



Agreed! But you again incorrectly assumed, without any evidence from my writings, that I believe "RAPTURE" means a changing of the body from one physical state to another, when in actuality I always maintained it only means to seize. I agree it only means TO SEIZE. And since 1 Cor says that the SEIZING AWAY of 1 Thess 4 of the dead and living occurs with the associated and additional experience of mortality putting on immortality, while Acts 8 simply says the seizing takes place without anything to do with mortality putting on immortality, your point of Acts 8 is moot. I never said RAPTURE means bodies change from mortal ones to immortal ones. I simply believe change of bodies taught in 1 Cor 15 is said to occur when RAPTURE also occurs.



I force nothing into scripture. I force nothing into the meaning of words. But you are forcing your assumptions of what I believe into my beliefs without warrant. :) You have done that several times now. Please ensure what you assume is correct before you propose it. :D

You are confusing the teaching of what people believe is associated with the event of the rapture and thinking they are saying the term RAPTURE itself means all of that. Why do you do that? Please get your facts straight about what others believe.

A slam dunk. Let me warn AFP Elder Blume is one of the best I have ever read on the bodily resurrection he will eat your lunch.:thumbsup

[mfblume]

I do not believe Titus was Jesus coming in
the clouds

By the way, LT Smith was accused of proposing Jesus came in clouds when Titus' army stirred dust from the roads, and he never taught nor ever believed that, or the record.

[mfblume]

A slam dunk. Let me warn AFP Elder Blume is one of the best I have ever read on the bodily resurrection he will eat your lunch.:thumbsup

After all those thanks from you, let me thank you in return. ;)

[Steve Epley]

After all those thanks from you, let me thank you in return. ;)

Elder Blume I certainly wish you were not a PP we have disagreed on that for years now. In my opinion your materials are the best written on that subject though I fervently disagree.
However your writings on the resurrection should be a must for every Pentecostal preacher they are excellent.
Also your treatment of the end of wickness on the earth is also a good study.
With those I disagree with I can compliment with what I see as material of value.

[Bowas]

Is Crossfire the same person as William Price? If so, bro., you know better than to say we are gnostic. Whoever it is, it is someone associated with Gary Reckart, by the term "gnostic" repeated all the time. And if so, you have changed beliefs from preterism to post trib so many times we cannot keep count any more. If you are WP, I always advised you to stay away from prophecy due to your inability to stay in one belief system for a very long time. Still love you, though. If you are not WP, sorry. But you obviously know GR.

I thought WP went trintarian.

[mfblume]

I thought WP went trintarian.

He did at one point, maybe twice. Not sure. But lastly he was with GR.

[TK Burk]

There is a verse that mentions "rapture". 1 Thess 4:17. In the LATIN VULGATE Bible, the LATIN word for CAUGHT UP is RAPTURA or RAPTUS. We get the anglicized word RAPTURE from that Latin term. And the English word means the same thing. So although not used in an English Bible, the root word is used in the Latin version, and means the same thing in english as CAUGHT UP.

Well, nothing like using the Vulgate to prove a point....

Bro. Blume, you should listen to what Bro. Kelly Wilson used to say about this. When asked if he believed in the rapture he’d say, “I can't believe in something that isn't in the Bible.”

The Vulgate is hardly the source that can prove otherwise. The men behind its translation helped to popularize the Trinity theory. Like I originally said, there are as many scriptures that mention the “Trinity” as there is scriptures that mention the “rapture.” That holds true unless you lean toward RCC translations and theories.

[TK Burk]

I disagree. Bro Burk said the word is missing from the bible. He brought that up. And

The definition of rapture means exactly what rapturists claim....

Of course you agree with the Dispensationalists on this, futurists often stick together in effort to compensate for their lack of scripture.... ;)

Bro. Blume, the word “rapture” is not found in the pages of the KJV. If you still disagree, then please give the verse where it is found.

You really believe that “the definition of rapture means exactly what rapturists claim....” So you now believe in a secret rapture? Wow!

[TK Burk]

A slam dunk. Let me warn AFP Elder Blume is one of the best I have ever read on the bodily resurrection he will eat your lunch.:thumbsup

I've gotta hand it to you Eld. Epley, you sure get around. Within a few hours you've agreed with both Bill Price and Bro. Blume (no offense intended to either). Like I said, you will amen anybody regardless of who they are or what they believe. Elder, neither of these men believes like you. Will you ever get around to speaking for yourself instead of riding on the coattails of anyone that remotely sounds like they may be right to you?

[TK Burk]

By the way, LT Smith was accused of proposing Jesus came in clouds when Titus' army stirred dust from the roads, and he never taught nor ever believed that, or the record.

You are correct. He made this clear many times, and yet some of the same men he said this to still misrepresented him.

As a matter of fact, I have never read anyone who believed what Eld. Epley says about Titus and the clouds. But he has been told that for many years too. Seems he ignores what's told him also.

[Crossfire]

Preterists sure seem to love to throw focus away from their false doctrine. The truth is, they siritualize so much of scripture that they cannot understand what is being said without some hidden interpretation that only they understand.

They take the spiritual and make it physical, and that which is interpreted as being spiritual, they make literal. For example, the cloud issue. They say that this is a sign of judgment, and not Jesus coming in clouds. However, when we read how Jesus ascended, and was taken up into a cloud, and how the Word says He would return in the same manner as He left, we cannot help but see Christ's coming as literal, physical, and visible.

Despite all their deflections, all their misinterpretations, and their Gnosticism in their interpretations, preterists cannot be reconciled with scripture. While they seek to invoke personal attacks when their doctrine is discussed, the fact is, what I have said on here is proven to be true and accurate. Their inability to handle this shows the weakness of their doctrinal beliefs.

Jesus Christ is coming back again. This is true. He is coming back as He said, physically, literally, and visibly, every eye seeing Him on that day. he is coming to gather the saints, first those who sleep in the grave, and those who are alive and remain. So shal we ever be with the Lord. These beliefs of the faith have no waivered, and shall never change. For preterism to deny the future second coming, the rapture of the Church, and the physical resurrection of the body is to deny what is clearly taught in the Bible.

One last point in this post. Mamy preterists are recorded in their messages declaring that salvation is a resurrection, even claiming salvation as the first resurrection. Since we know that salvation was instituted before Paul was converted, thus this implies a form of past resurrection, a doctrine which reflects that of Hymenaeus and Philetus. This is spoken against by Paul.

Despite their deflections, preterists cannot evade the truth, that their doctrine has been proven false on here by myself, Elder Epley, and others.

[TJJJ]

Preterists sure seem to love to throw focus away from their false doctrine. The truth is, they siritualize so much of scripture that they cannot understand what is being said without some hidden interpretation that only they understand.

They take the spiritual and make it physical, and that which is interpreted as being spiritual, they make literal. For example, the cloud issue. They say that this is a sign of judgment, and not Jesus coming in clouds. However, when we read how Jesus ascended, and was taken up into a cloud, and how the Word says He would return in the same manner as He left, we cannot help but see Christ's coming as literal, physical, and visible.

Despite all their deflections, all their misinterpretations, and their Gnosticism in their interpretations, preterists cannot be reconciled with scripture. While they seek to invoke personal attacks when their doctrine is discussed, the fact is, what I have said on here is proven to be true and accurate. Their inability to handle this shows the weakness of their doctrinal beliefs.

Jesus Christ is coming back again. This is true. He is coming back as He said, physically, literally, and visibly, every eye seeing Him on that day. he is coming to gather the saints, first those who sleep in the grave, and those who are alive and remain. So shal we ever be with the Lord. These beliefs of the faith have no waivered, and shall never change. For preterism to deny the future second coming, the rapture of the Church, and the physical resurrection of the body is to deny what is clearly taught in the Bible.

One last point in this post. Mamy preterists are recorded in their messages declaring that salvation is a resurrection, even claiming salvation as the first resurrection. Since we know that salvation was instituted before Paul was converted, thus this implies a form of past resurrection, a doctrine which reflects that of Hymenaeus and Philetus. This is spoken against by Paul.

Despite their deflections, preterists cannot evade the truth, that their doctrine has been proven false on here by myself, Elder Epley, and others.

So are you Bill Price?

[Crossfire]

So are you Bill Price?
Why should I have to tell my name? If every single person on this forum that uses a screen name will open identify themselves as to their real name, address, and church home, I'll tell my real identity then. Until then, I still have the right to withhold my identity.

Burk and others are so wrong for trying to figure out who I am, because they want to deflect from their heretical doctrine. If they would reinforce their arguments instead of deflecting them, then maybe they would be taken seriously.

Until they repent of their heresies, their Gn osticism, their false doctrine, they will not escape the end results of their perverting the truth. My identity will not change this fact one bit.

So, I refuse to answer the question.

[TK Burk]

Why should I have to tell my name? If every single person on this forum that uses a screen name will open identify themselves as to their real name, address, and church home, I'll tell my real identity then. Until then, I still have the right to withhold my identity.

Burk and others are so wrong for trying to figure out who I am, because they want to deflect from their heretical doctrine. If they would reinforce their arguments instead of deflecting them, then maybe they would be taken seriously.

Until they repent of their heresies, their Gn osticism, their false doctrine, they will not escape the end results of their perverting the truth. My identity will not change this fact one bit.

So, I refuse to answer the question.

TJJJ, remember what I said to Crossfire about Sherlock Holme's dog that wouldn't bark? With that in mind, you can take the above response as a "YES".

[TJJJ]

TJJJ, remember what I said to Crossfire about Sherlock Holme's dog that wouldn't bark? With that in mind, you can take the above response as a "YES".

:ursofunny

That is funny, I don't know Mr Price but it was kind of obvious that he was not discounting the assumption that it was him, so I figured it was.

Just stirring the pot, you know how I am.

Enjoying the posts,

Everyone, Lord Bless

TJJJ

[afp1996]

pardon me brother blume. it has been so long since last we spoke til I forgot to ask for your textbook of terms before speaking with you.

ill make sure of what you do believe from now on.

[afp1996]

wow he is explosive

[Steve Epley]

I've gotta hand it to you Eld. Epley, you sure get around. Within a few hours you've agreed with both Bill Price and Bro. Blume (no offense intended to either). Like I said, you will amen anybody regardless of who they are or what they believe. Elder, neither of these men believes like you. Will you ever get around to speaking for yourself instead of riding on the coattails of anyone that remotely sounds like they may be right to you?

A broke clock is correct twice a day, too bad they didn't put the hands on yours.:thumbsup

[TK Burk]

A broke clock is correct twice a day, too bad they didn't put the hands on yours.:thumbsup

Ouch! :smack


Elder, you are missing it again. Digital clocks don't need hands. See, once again you miss the facts because you don't read! ;)

[mfblume]

pardon me brother blume. it has been so long since last we spoke til I forgot to ask for your textbook of terms before speaking with you.

...As if it is unreasonable for me to expect you to check what I believe before accusing me of something I do not believe? lo.. Whatever.

ill make sure of what you do believe from now on.
Had this been the rule used before we ever chatted, that would have saved a lot of time before in the chats we had in the past. :) It would have been easier to have always abode by this rule. :)

[mfblume]

So are you Bill Price?

Yes he is Bill Price. I could sense that GR spirit anywhere, and he was amongst GR lately. And notice, speaking about what HE KNOWS is heretical or not, he even said he was done with this forum, and here he is again on the forum. It's not just doctrinal leaps and returns, but statements on what forums he will speak on, too, that changes so much. Hence, the alias and refusal to acknowledge his identity. I pray he gets away from GR's harsh attitude and influence and come to an environment of more kindness. WP is sincere, and I have always kept the door open for him. He will not stay with the harsh attitude and gnostic labels forever.

[Jason B]

Bro. Blume, do you recall this:

there is an internet site really ripping you, some of it theological, but some of it seems personal, what is that all about?

That guy made outright lies about me, which I corrected him about. I said I do not mind anyone ripping up genuine beliefs I adhere to, but to make claims of my beliefs that are not true at all is simply lying about my beliefs. he said he'd keep them on anyway. Go figure.

It goes back to a time when I was post trib as he is, and he noticed I disagreed with him on some minor details and he requested all the books he wrote and sent me to be sent back to him. And from then on he ripped me up. When I came into partial preterism he went ballistic! lol Control freak, sort of. Either agree with all HE says, or you are destroyed. Haha.

Some people...

I count it all joy! :)
Keep away from that demonically influenced man from Florida, for the sake of your sanity and your soul, please. I know about him firsthand, and he is a heretic and a strife causer among the brethren.

Isn't this GR that is being discussed?

[Crossfire]

Notice how Blume attacks Gary Reckart using Price's words from the past. Notice also how Blume left holiness when he ventured into Smith's church in El Campo, and has been shown the fruits of his personal doctrines.

Price repented to Bishop reckart, and was reconciled with Bishop. When other Apostolics attacked Price and treated him like trash, even attacking his family, Reckart alone showed Price compassion. I guess everyone is afforded mistakes but Price, who is now standing for true Apostolic truth.

But, since we have seemed to resort to personal attacks and slander instead of dealing with doctrinal issues, I see this thread no longer serves the purpose it originally proposed. The AFPers have almost succedded in removing focus from their false doctrine... almost. And now Blume joins them in their attacks. How surprising that the preterists, all breeds, join forces when one brand is attacked.

Despite it all, not a single preterist on here has been able to refute my charge of Gnosticism. They have said they are not, yet provide no proof of their not being Gnostic in hermeneutical interpretation. They are Gnostic, meaning they claim the scriptures do not plainly speak, but instead have hidden meanings and secret interpretations that only those who have studied preterism can understand.

So, please, keep trying to remove the focus off of your folly. The truth is presented as to the spirit of your doctrine.

[Crossfire]

Elder Epley believes in holiness, believes in the future return of the Lord, believes in a literal physical resurrection, believes in salvation according to Acts 2:38, and believes in the Oneness of God. He may be off on some issues, but the fact remains he still preaches a Gospel that contians a future hope for the believers, not in a fulfilled destiny which has no future.

[TJJJ]

:popcorn2

Wow!:uhoh

One thing I have discovered about CR, just by his sight, is that the guy has a tendency to go nuclear over everything.:nuke

I still think the funniest thing in the world is his HALL OF SHAME! :banghead

Don't know the guy but his actions, reflected on his website, look moronic!

Also, isn't he the one who offers Doctorate and ministerial degrees? So that would make him a Doctor like Chalfant?

[Scott Hutchinson]

I don't have time to post alot as I am on lunch hour at work.
Let me say this I love GR and Brother Price I wish them the best and I hope their families are doing well,and I hope they are well and are in good health.
We all make mistakes I have made mine,when I look in my mirror my hands are full.
If those brothers were broke down on the side of the road I would stop and help them or if they were hungry I would feed them.

[Crossfire]

Gary Reckart is one of the greatest men of God of our time. His doctrine is sound, and though I do not agree with every point of his beliefs, I think he is far greater than most we have on here. He has never waivered, despite the personal attacks of some on here against his character.

As for his doctorate, if one is so curious, ask him. Oh, that's right... he is not a pre-terrorist... I mean preterist. :D

[Scott Hutchinson]

I wish nobody illwill cause my Holy Ghost says to love and look beyond faults and see the needs of folks.

[Scott Hutchinson]

Crossfire I love you dearly and I hope you are doing well these days can I help you in anyway if so please let me know ?

[Bowas]

Price repented to Bishop reckart, (that demonically influenced man) (is a heretic )and was reconciled with Bishop.(that demonically influenced man) (is a heretic )When other Apostolics attacked Price and treated him like trash, even attacking his family, Reckart (that demonically influenced man) (is a heretic )alone showed Price compassion. I guess everyone is afforded mistakes but Price, who is now standing for true Apostolic truth.

Keep away from that demonically influenced man that demonically influenced man from Florida, for the sake of your sanity and your soul, please. I know about him firsthand, and he is a heretic and a strife causer among the brethren.

I do not know if you are BP or not, no matter, but if you see him, please encourage him to flee from that demonically influenced man (is a heretic ), (by his own admission). Bro. Price is a very sincere young man and GR knows how to take full advantage of him.
Lord bless you.

[Steve Epley]

Guys I am not jumping into this fray.

[Crossfire]

What Price does is up to him. He is grown enough to make his own trek, and he has strong men supporting him now. From what I know, he no longer is influenced by emotionalism as he once was. The man has lost everything, and is rebuilding. So, would you all please leave Price out of this.

[Bowas]

What Price does is up to him. He is grown enough to make his own trek, and he has strong men supporting him now. From what I know, he no longer is influenced by emotionalism as he once was. The man has lost everything, and is rebuilding. So, would you all please leave Price out of this.

I quite agree with you. I am just concerned BP does not get hurt more and again.
Despite some of the nonsense that does come on this forum, BP is loved here. Seriously.

[mfblume]

Bro. Blume, do you recall this:

Isn't this GR that is being discussed?

Yes it is.

[mfblume]

Gary Reckart is one of the greatest men of God of our time. His doctrine is sound, and though I do not agree with every point of his beliefs, I think he is far greater than most we have on here. He has never waivered, despite the personal attacks of some on here against his character.

Personal attacks??? How ironic! Reckart has personally attacked everyone he ever disagreed with in a very harsh manner. He even lied about what I personally believe and when I corrected him, telling him what I actually believe, and told him I did not mind him attacking what I actually believed, but that he was attacking me publicly for things I never believed, he refused to change his false accusations and continued to attack me personally. He cannot stay impersonal. Let's not talk about anyone personally attacking him when he has been famous for that.

[mfblume]

Notice how Blume attacks Gary Reckart using Price's words from the past. Notice also how Blume left holiness when he ventured into Smith's church in El Campo, and has been shown the fruits of his personal doctrines.

Price repented to Bishop reckart, and was reconciled with Bishop. When other Apostolics attacked Price and treated him like trash, even attacking his family, Reckart alone showed Price compassion. I guess everyone is afforded mistakes but Price, who is now standing for true Apostolic truth.

You are Bill Price, and I have always left the door opened for you.

Remember... http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/showpost.php?p=457097&postcount=115

You personally criticized Reckart to my face for his harshness and attitude, one day in El Campo.

Brother, you know better than to associate yourself with harsh spirits and ungodly attitudes. Stand with post tribbers if you like. But get away from the harshness and the ungodly attitudes.

I once asked Reckart why he was so inflammatory with myself and preterists, when he could speak lovingly if he truly felt we were in error, and obey Paul's words to Timothy about not striving but being gentle to those whom he felt were in the snare of the enemy. He mocked that and by saying he could not help preterists, as though he was excused from dealing with us with a godly attitude. You know that is off the wall, Bill.

Bro, I love you in the Lord, but this association you hold is ungodly.

[rava61]

I thought Josephus was inspired........

[Jason B]

Crossfire (...if that is your realname):)

I'm not condemning you, but since your identity was found out, I found it odd that you are back with GR, seeing how I recalled your former recent opinions. If you repented, that is great, too often people are to proud or embarrased to be reconciled to someone .


Second, I beleive that you are currently correct about preterisms intepretaion of the Bible. I realize that you may not still believe the same way next week.

Thirdly, I am not a preterist. My comment wasn't about flockng to Bro. Blume.

And beyond that this thread is supposed to be based on the debate concerning the second coming of Christ, found here: http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...ad.php?t=24032

In which you will notice several futurists arguments that are ignored by the debater representing full preterism.

[Praxeas]

It's always funny when someone "outs" themselves. Anyways...from what I know a lot more than Reckart held out a welcome to BP. If you know Bill I sure hope he mentioned others that tried to help Bill like Daniel who never trashed him in a public forum.



I find it sad how some of us can do a character assasination in public over a non salvational issue like eschatology when both parties believe in acts 2:38 and the Oneness of the godhead.

And some of the posts between people who agree on important issues sound so hateful...over eschatology...that's nuts

[Praxeas]

Gary Reckart is one of the greatest men of God of our time. His doctrine is sound, and though I do not agree with every point of his beliefs, I think he is far greater than most we have on here. He has never waivered, despite the personal attacks of some on here against his character.

As for his doctorate, if one is so curious, ask him. Oh, that's right... he is not a pre-terrorist... I mean preterist. :D
How can his doctrine be sound.....when you don't agree with every point of his beliefs?

Not waivering does not make someone a great man of God. I don't see Louis Farrakhan waivering either

[TJJJ]

Guys I am not jumping into this fray.

:ursofunny

I'm reminded. Elderest, of a verse,

Pro 26:17 He that passeth by, and meddleth with strife belonging not to him, is like one that taketh a dog by the ears.

Needless to say, I've been bit a lot!:thumbsup

[Crossfire]

Since I have been outed, let me state why I am back with Bishop Gary Reckart.

A few months back, I suffered something that almost crippled me, both emotionally and almost physically. I was afterwards so badly injured by men that I left the faith, feeling I was persona non grata. The wounds I suffered were the deepest I ever endured, and the pain was almost to the point of killing me.

While other so-called men of God mocked me, belittled me, and even refered to me as a vomiting dog, the only man of God who showed me any compassion was Gary Reckart. While you all seem to hate Bishop Reckart, I know the man behind the screen, behind the keyboard. He has a father's heart, and is very compassionate. In my own immaturity, I spoke against him, but, he has shown a godly spirit which enabled me to see the errors of my backsliding, and repent openly.

I wish I had stayed with him all during that time. But, when men of God slammed me and my family in the darkest times of my personal life, when they decided to promote themselves by stepping on my almost completely broken back, only Bishop Reckart, in spite of all I said about him, picked me up, brushed off the dust, and prayed for me.

So, while every one of you revile Bishop, I will not. As I said, I disagree with some points of his doctrine, but hsi beliefs are more sound than most I have seen and studied. I maybe a lot of things, but I am not stupid nor gullible. I know who has it right.

[Crossfire]

Crossfire (...if that is your realname):)

I'm not condemning you, but since your identity was found out, I found it odd that you are back with GR, seeing how I recalled your former recent opinions. If you repented, that is great, too often people are to proud or embarrased to be reconciled to someone .


Second, I beleive that you are currently correct about preterisms intepretaion of the Bible. I realize that you may not still believe the same way next week.

Thirdly, I am not a preterist. My comment wasn't about flockng to Bro. Blume.

And beyond that this thread is supposed to be based on the debate concerning the second coming of Christ, found here: http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...ad.php?t=24032

In which you will notice several futurists arguments that are ignored by the debater representing full preterism.
When I received my deliverance, when I prayed back through again, the Lord placed something in me, and spoke into my spirit, "Stand for what you believe and know why you believe it." From then on, I endeavored to study the Bible, to find out what I believed, and I am more sure of this post-tribulation rapture doctrine than I have ever been.

Do not be concerned about next week. Bill is still going to be here.

[Crossfire]

You are Bill Price, and I have always left the door opened for you.

Remember... http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com/showpost.php?p=457097&postcount=115

You personally criticized Reckart to my face for his harshness and attitude, one day in El Campo.

Brother, you know better than to associate yourself with harsh spirits and ungodly attitudes. Stand with post tribbers if you like. But get away from the harshness and the ungodly attitudes.

I once asked Reckart why he was so inflammatory with myself and preterists, when he could speak lovingly if he truly felt we were in error, and obey Paul's words to Timothy about not striving but being gentle to those whom he felt were in the snare of the enemy. He mocked that and by saying he could not help preterists, as though he was excused from dealing with us with a godly attitude. You know that is off the wall, Bill.

Bro, I love you in the Lord, but this association you hold is ungodly.
Let me see... a missionary, a pastor of a growing church, a man who has more compassion and godliness in his pinky finger than most have in their entire lives, and a man who has never waivered on issues of holiness, Jesus name baptism, and Oneness.

I think this association I have is very godly.

[afp1996]

And beyond that this thread is supposed to be based on the debate concerning the second coming of Christ, found here: http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...ad.php?t=24032

In which you will notice several futurists arguments that are ignored by the debater representing full preterism.

You would have to actually put a position on the table instead of asking questions for the Apostolic Full Preterist to debate with you about it.

My answer to your first question is now posted, Brother.

[Crossfire]

How can his doctrine be sound.....when you don't agree with every point of his beliefs?

Not waivering does not make someone a great man of God. I don't see Louis Farrakhan waivering either
For you to compare Bishop Reckart with that Islamic hater of God is truly a reproach, Prax. That is a showing of an ungodly attitude.

[Crossfire]

Personal attacks??? How ironic! Reckart has personally attacked everyone he ever disagreed with in a very harsh manner. He even lied about what I personally believe and when I corrected him, telling him what I actually believe, and told him I did not mind him attacking what I actually believed, but that he was attacking me publicly for things I never believed, he refused to change his false accusations and continued to attack me personally. He cannot stay impersonal. Let's not talk about anyone personally attacking him when he has been famous for that.
When you put yourself out as a minister, a teacher of God's people, and your doctrine is not only false but spiritually dangerous, you should be exposed as such. As much as you have been against Bishop, he has been against you. And you have given bit for bite on this forum and in person against Bishop. Seems to me both ways, you are the pot calling the kettle black.

:D

[Crossfire]

I quite agree with you. I am just concerned BP does not get hurt more and again.
Despite some of the nonsense that does come on this forum, BP is loved here. Seriously.
Love is a powerful word. I have seen some great love on this forum towards me, and some great attacks from some. I think a forum is just that, a forum, and nothing else.

[Crossfire]

Maybe, since all is opened, we can get back to the debate, and discuss the debate, as this thread was originally intended to do.

I just read the debate, and I have to say that Jason is doing a magnificent job of proving the preterist doctrine as false. His use and interpretation of scripture is admirable. Keep up the good work, brother.

[afp1996]

Maybe, since all is opened, we can get back to the debate, and discuss the debate, as this thread was originally intended to do.

I just read the debate, and I have to say that Jason is doing a magnificent job of proving the preterist doctrine as false. His use and interpretation of scripture is admirable. Keep up the good work, brother.
you must be reading a different debate. all he has food is ask questions . he prove nothing he states as truth.

[Crossfire]

Actually, Jason is using a back ended approach to proving his point. You see, through your lack of answering his poignant and straightforward questions, you in fact are helping him prove his points. In so doing, he is proving his points.

It would be different if you answered all the points he has raised.

[TK Burk]

Actually, Jason is using a back ended approach to proving his point. You see, through your lack of answering his poignant and straightforward questions, you in fact are helping him prove his points. In so doing, he is proving his points.

It would be different if you answered all the points he has raised.

But such an approach is not what is done in a debate. Yet it is the approach that Futurist mostly take. The sad reality is that they cannot explain the very question they ask the AFPs.

Carry on afp1996! ;)

[Crossfire]

But such an approach is not what is done in a debate. Yet it is the approach that Futurist mostly take. The sad reality is that they cannot explain the very question they ask the AFPs.

Carry on afp1996! ;)
From what I have read, Jason has answered afp's questions. The opposite however is not true.

Good job, Jason.

[afp1996]

no, sir. we had a question time in the debate. he should have presented his position. he did not.

[Praxeas]

Since I have been outed, let me state why I am back with Bishop Gary Reckart.

A few months back, I suffered something that almost crippled me, both emotionally and almost physically. I was afterwards so badly injured by men that I left the faith, feeling I was persona non grata. The wounds I suffered were the deepest I ever endured, and the pain was almost to the point of killing me.

While other so-called men of God mocked me, belittled me, and even refered to me as a vomiting dog, the only man of God who showed me any compassion was Gary Reckart. While you all seem to hate Bishop Reckart, I know the man behind the screen, behind the keyboard. He has a father's heart, and is very compassionate. In my own immaturity, I spoke against him, but, he has shown a godly spirit which enabled me to see the errors of my backsliding, and repent openly.

I wish I had stayed with him all during that time. But, when men of God slammed me and my family in the darkest times of my personal life, when they decided to promote themselves by stepping on my almost completely broken back, only Bishop Reckart, in spite of all I said about him, picked me up, brushed off the dust, and prayed for me.

So, while every one of you revile Bishop, I will not. As I said, I disagree with some points of his doctrine, but hsi beliefs are more sound than most I have seen and studied. I maybe a lot of things, but I am not stupid nor gullible. I know who has it right.
I witnessed others even on this board try to extend a hand to you but you rejected it. Further Bill you didn't just leave the faith once, you went from being a hate filled UC to a hate filled liberal Apostolic to a Trinitarian, back to a UC, back to a Trinitarian and back to a UC again. You need to stop blaming others and look at your self to see why you do what you do.

[Praxeas]

For you to compare Bishop Reckart with that Islamic hater of God is truly a reproach, Prax. That is a showing of an ungodly attitude.
I didn't compare him Mr Judgemental. I simply pointed out by example that not compromising on your beliefs does NOT make one a man of God. It's more than that. BTW It's so sad to see the old bill back. I would have preferred you became Oneness with out that attitude. You never changed Bill, other than doctrinal affiliations, in all these years. You waffled from affiliation and peer groups back and forth, but the attitude...Bill it's the attitude that you have that is your problem. Your judgmental, smug spiritual superiority that is your downfall.

You had it as a hate filled UC. You had it when you went liberal. You had it when you returned to the Trinity. You had it when you went back to Oneness. You had it when you again went back to Trinity and you had it again when you returned to being an Ultra Con.

[Praxeas]

Love is a powerful word. I have seen some great love on this forum towards me, and some great attacks from some. I think a forum is just that, a forum, and nothing else.
But according to you the only one was Reckart...now you are admitting there were some on this forum Bill. Please stop. Bill you are your own worst enemy

[TK Burk]

I witnessed others even on this board try to extend a hand to you but you rejected it. Further Bill you didn't just leave the faith once, you went from being a hate filled UC to a hate filled liberal Apostolic to a Trinitarian, back to a UC, back to a Trinitarian and back to a UC again. You need to stop blaming others and look at your self to see why you do what you do.

Very good words of advice! BP, you'd be wise to listen to Prax. He is trying to help you. This is the same thing we have talked about before.

[TK Burk]

From what I have read, Jason has answered afp's questions. The opposite however is not true.

Good job, Jason.

BP, you have articles that you wrote FOR AFP on websites that also has articles from you that are AGAINST AFP. If you were right now in your FP mode, you'd be saying the opposite. BP, a vote either way from you really means little considering your ever changing positions.... :nod

[mfblume]

Bill, you know I always was kind with you, even if firm. But listen to your own words. Your big reason for associating with Bro Reckart is:

A few months back, I suffered something that almost crippled me, both emotionally and almost physically. I was afterwards so badly injured by men that I left the faith, feeling I was persona non grata. The wounds I suffered were the deepest I ever endured, and the pain was almost to the point of killing me.

While other so-called men of God mocked me, belittled me, and even referred to me as a vomiting dog, the only man of God who showed me any compassion was Gary Reckart. While you all seem to hate Bishop Reckart, I know the man behind the screen, behind the keyboard. He has a father's heart, and is very compassionate. In my own immaturity, I spoke against him, but, he has shown a godly spirit which enabled me to see the errors of my backsliding, and repent openly.


It was not a doctrinal issue that drew you to him, but his alleged acceptableness for you when others treated you harshly. And from my observation over the years, you accept whatever doctrine someone whom you are drawn to preaches. No matter what doctrine it is, you repeat it word for word when you accept the person. The person is, therefore, not accepted as a mentor due to truth, but due to something kind about the way they treated you. And that is not the right reason to be drawn to someone.

When you last leaned toward partial preterism, and then accepted it before you went to full preterism after that, I purposely did not throw all kinds of laurels to you for agreeing with me, since I did not want you to agree with me just because I was showing you special treatment. I wanted you to believe that you believe for belief's sake, and nothing else. I remained kind, but did not take advantage of you, for I knew that anyone who gives you any amount of attention becomes someone to whom you are drawn and begin to emulate. I would not do that to you, for I am concerned for your soul and whether it stands for truth for truth's sake or for other reasons.

Once again, you know the wrong spirit GR has. You deserve better.

[Crossfire]

I see some things now that I should have when I got on. I should not have come back to this forum. I knew eventually I would be ganged up on, and be confronted for my mistakes.

Admin, please delete this account. I should have known better than to try to come back. I knew that I would be pounced on. Will not make the same mistake twice.

[Scott Hutchinson]

I'm not pouncing on you as I have made mistakes myself,I will offer you mercy and point you to the grace of God for healing.

[Admin]

Since I have been outed, let me state why I am back with Bishop Gary Reckart.

A few months back, I suffered something that almost crippled me, both emotionally and almost physically. I was afterwards so badly injured by men that I left the faith, feeling I was persona non grata. The wounds I suffered were the deepest I ever endured, and the pain was almost to the point of killing me.

While other so-called men of God mocked me, belittled me, and even refered to me as a vomiting dog, the only man of God who showed me any compassion was Gary Reckart. While you all seem to hate Bishop Reckart, I know the man behind the screen, behind the keyboard. He has a father's heart, and is very compassionate. In my own immaturity, I spoke against him, but, he has shown a godly spirit which enabled me to see the errors of my backsliding, and repent openly.

I wish I had stayed with him all during that time. But, when men of God slammed me and my family in the darkest times of my personal life, when they decided to promote themselves by stepping on my almost completely broken back, only Bishop Reckart, in spite of all I said about him, picked me up, brushed off the dust, and prayed for me.

So, while every one of you revile Bishop, I will not. As I said, I disagree with some points of his doctrine, but hsi beliefs are more sound than most I have seen and studied. I maybe a lot of things, but I am not stupid nor gullible. I know who has it right.

Bill Price is assuming a new nick because his old one was restricted from being here per his own request. This has happened many times before and as it turns out his last time he requested his account be closed as he did not want to have any association with this board full of reprobates..

He returns under a new nick, a rule violation, and lies about who he really is.

Any member that wants to be reinstated needs to not subvert the rules but approach the Admin team and demonstrate good faith on their part that they have indeed changed.

Admin may remove any offensive post, or ban any members at the sole discretion of the Admin on duty at that time. In the event a thread is closed, or a person is banned, Admin staff will review the situation, and either agree to uphold the ban, or reinstate the poster. If you are banned, you have forfeited your right to communicate and post in the forums. Persons attempting to access AFF via another user ID (new or existing) are in further violation of their previous banning condition(s) and may be subject to an immediate, permanent banning. Persons relaying communications from banned users may also be banned at Admin discretion. You may receive no warning before you are banned. It is your responsibility to have read the rules and to know them. If you break them it will be assumed that at the time you knew you were breaking them. With the exception of those that are just "out of control", we will follow the following guidelines for banning:

* First Offense: 3 day ban
* Second Offense: 7 day ban
* Third Offense: 1 month ban
* Fourth Offense: 3 months - 1 year OR Permanent ban (at Admin's discretion)

Any member who is banned can petition Admin via email to ask for reinstatement prior to the ban being lifted. Admin will review this and make their decision.

[Jason B]

You would have to actually put a position on the table instead of asking questions for the Apostolic Full Preterist to debate with you about it.

My answer to your first question is now posted, Brother.


Brother, I have a posistion easily recognized: Jesus Christ will visibly return to this earth again, as scripture bears out. And that Full Preterism cannot explain a great many of scriptures concering prophecy.

However, I do thank you for the debate, I think you are doing a pretty decent job of getting across Full Preterism. The problem is not you, you have gained my respect on this board. The problem is that you are upholding a posistion that is shooting blanks.

[afp1996]

Brother, I have a posistion easily recognized: Jesus Christ will visibly return to this earth again, as scripture bears out. And that Full Preterism cannot explain a great many of scriptures concering prophecy.

However, I do thank you for the debate, I think you are doing a pretty decent job of getting across Full Preterism. The problem is not you, you have gained my respect on this board. The problem is that you are upholding a posistion that is shooting blanks.

You too have my respect. However, an easily recongnized position does not establish the right not to defend that position in a debate. The scriptures do not bare out what you prepose. I thank you in kind for the debate as well. The blanks that are being shot are in the gap in Matthew 24.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Since I have been outed, let me state why I am back with Bishop Gary Reckart.

A few months back, I suffered something that almost crippled me, both emotionally and almost physically. I was afterwards so badly injured by men that I left the faith, feeling I was persona non grata. The wounds I suffered were the deepest I ever endured, and the pain was almost to the point of killing me.

While other so-called men of God mocked me, belittled me, and even refered to me as a vomiting dog, the only man of God who showed me any compassion was Gary Reckart. While you all seem to hate Bishop Reckart, I know the man behind the screen, behind the keyboard. He has a father's heart, and is very compassionate. In my own immaturity, I spoke against him, but, he has shown a godly spirit which enabled me to see the errors of my backsliding, and repent openly.

I wish I had stayed with him all during that time. But, when men of God slammed me and my family in the darkest times of my personal life, when they decided to promote themselves by stepping on my almost completely broken back, only Bishop Reckart, in spite of all I said about him, picked me up, brushed off the dust, and prayed for me.

So, while every one of you revile Bishop, I will not. As I said, I disagree with some points of his doctrine, but hsi beliefs are more sound than most I have seen and studied. I maybe a lot of things, but I am not stupid nor gullible. I know who has it right.

I guess I got here too late Brother Burk.

Some things never change.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[mfblume]

I see some things now that I should have when I got on. I should not have come back to this forum. I knew eventually I would be ganged up on, and be confronted for my mistakes.

Admin, please delete this account. I should have known better than to try to come back. I knew that I would be pounced on. Will not make the same mistake twice.

No one minds a person's opinion about various topics. But to decry people for false doctrine, as you did in this thread, that you have personally bounced in and out of for years, crosses the line. People just laugh at such a declaration. You disproved your veracity for dependability in that area of theology. You did this to yourself. I told you this before. Do not convince yourself of any other reason for the words spoken to you. Stay away from saying what is right or wrong in prophecy, and speak anything you wish. I warned you again and again that anything you say about prophecy will be laughed at due to your eschatological-chameleon track record.

We must forgive those who 70X70 times in one day make the same mistake, but we cannot trust you for prophetic theology any more.

Had you joined in and discussed what you DO believe without bashing others, it would have been VERY different.

Love you, bro.

[Evang.Benincasa]

And your interpetation is correct.:thumbsup

The poster cuts them off at the knees. Don't shake your head it will come off.:thumbsup
Very good.

Eld. Epley, some of the people you so readily—and often desperately—align yourself with says a lot about the credibility of your position.... :covereyes


Guys I am not jumping into this fray.

Brother Burk, the most embarrassing thing is that in dear Elder Epley's zeal to find a hero to cling to, he latched on to an individual who is as unstable as nitroglycerin. Bill Price is so fouled up that one minute he is a defender of the faith and the next he is the attacker of the faith. I'm sorry, but to be that desperate to latch on to any Bozo who posts against what we believe is pitiful. Brother Burk, true or false, when you were reading the insanity of Crossfire to me over the phone, did I or did I not say it was Bill Price?

Now, If I can get that fibbers foolishness from you just reading a few lines to me over the phone, you would think our dear Brother Elder Epley, would of picked up the dishonesty and flagrant falseness of every word that was posted by William "can't tell the truth" Price?

Ladies and Gentlemen, Brothers and Sisters, boys and girls, and children of all ages, allow me to say this without drawing anyone's offence.

Bill Price always says he is sorry. Yet, sorry can become a sorry word when actions never follow. This is what we have with Bill Price.

Bill Price doesn't care when any of us tell him we welcome him back or that we love him, or so on and so on. Bill is having a blast while he taunts the Christians. Bill Price believes in nothing. He changes as he feels the need, and he loves to get attention. Instead of taking the long hard path of hard knocks to earn credibility, he takes the short cut of bad behavior. Since his bad behavior gains him what he wants most, he continues in it. One minute he is a Trinitarian, the next a Preterist, Ultra Con, Ultra Lib, Post Trib, or Pre Trib, it doesn't matter. He does it for the effect, the feel, and to watch men like Elder Epley amen him.

Elder Epley, I really suggest you think about what happened here in this thread. I mean, you would in league yourself to anyone or anything just because they disagree with what we believe? Is that how it is? You have not produced anything to make me believe what you teach on eschatology is correct. You have said time and time again when asked about the temple and salvation after the rapture that you don't know how those things will be accomplished.

Elder Epley the reason you don't know is because what you believe concerning eschatology is not in the Bible. That doesn't make you a bad man, or not my Brother, it just means you don't know. That is not a crime, or sin. Yet, when you agree and amen every slime ball who posts anything remotely close to a futurist slant, it makes you look bad. Elder Epley, I am not your enemy, I'm not your foe, I'm your Brother. We believe in more things than we disagree on. Stop taking sides against us with flagrant weirdos. The posting, “amen, good post!” gets a little old when a good read through of the post you just amended, doesn’t even agree with what you yourself believe.

With respect and love. :heart

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Jason B]

When you agree and amen every slime ball who posts anything remotely close to a futurist

whatcha trying to say bro?:foottap

j/k:ursofunny:ursofunny

[shag]

I did NOT realize Jesus was flying in a PLANE when he was talking in Mt. 24? Good to know.:thumbsup
Again I do NOT believe THAT generation(Jewish race) have passed away. They are still very visible.:thumbsup

Yes I believe Titus and his thugs were used to judge Isreal I do not believe they are the return of Christ-the resurrection of the dead-the final judgment of the wicked.
I do not believe Titus was Jesus coming in
the clouds
Jesus coming with the angels
The Lord himself decending from Heaven with a shout
the final fulfillment of ALL Bible prophecy.

Brother Epley, (above) U said U do believe that God judged Israel thru Titus and his thugs, please give the scriptures you use to come to that conclusion.

[Steve Epley]

Brethren our friend's position of the week is known by everyone who has posted from FCF onward but do you think this is comely to do all this dumping on him. We all should recognize there is a real problem let's not do this plead with you.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Brethren our friend's position of the week is known by everyone who has posted from FCF onward but do you think this is comely to do all this dumping on him. We all should recognize there is a real problem let's not do this plead with you.

Elder Epley, Bill Price needs to wake up and apologize. Bill Price needs to do it with snot bubbles and tears at an Apostolic altar. There can be no excuses made for such a trouble maker and dishonest man.

Elder Epley, the Lord bless you and keep you in good health.

With love and respect.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Steve Epley]

Elder Epley, Bill Price needs to wake up and apologize. Bill Price needs to do it with snot bubbles and tears at an Apostolic altar. There can be no excuses made for such a trouble maker and dishonest man.

Elder Epley, the Lord bless you and keep you in good health.

With love and respect.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

My friend because I would agree with a poster on a subject does not vindicate the poster. I had no idea who he was though I do agree with what he wrote THIS TIME.:thumbsup
However I do believe there is a real problem here and you are wise enough to understand that.

[Scott Hutchinson]

I'm off to work,but let me say this Elder Epley is a good man and lives what he preaches and preaches what he lives and if he isn't saved and going to heaven what chance do I have ?

Elder Epley lives the life I believe and I highly respect him.

[shag]

Concerning the "This generation" listening to Jesus in Matt. 24:

I have no idea if they understood that is irrelevant however that is what He meant whether they understood it or not. Folks NOT understanding doen not determine truth.:thumbsup

I believe it is relevant. Jesus WAS trying to tell them plainly, so that they would understand. As to your interpretation to mean "The Jewish race", please tell me what would lead them to interpret "This generation" as "The Jewish Race"? Why wouldn't He simply have said "The Jewish race shall not pass away..." if that is what He meant? Also, why would Jesus waste His breathe telling them, if their understanding Him, as you said, is not irrelevent? Are you considering at all, what their probable interpretation of what He said was, and that He DID want them to comprehend what He meant? Do you believe (sincerely)that they understood Him to mean what you say He meant?



Brother Epley, (above) U said U do believe that God judged Israel thru Titus and his thugs, please give the scriptures you use to come to that conclusion.

bump for Bro. Epley

[shag]

If "This generation" meant "This Jewish Race", please explain how "The Jewish Race" will pass away, as opposed to any other or all other races "passing away". And when (approx.) is the passing away of the Jewish race in particular, expected to take place? Why did He distinctively say "THIS", instead of "The" Jewish Race" shall not pass away till....? Also, in Acts 2 when Peter said save yourselves from THIS(untoward) Generation, did he also mean save yourselves from the entire "Jewish race"?

[Steve Epley]

Concerning the "This generation" listening to Jesus in Matt. 24:



I believe it is relevant. Jesus WAS trying to tell them plainly, so that they would understand. As to your interpretation to mean "The Jewish race", please tell me what would lead them to interpret "This generation" as "The Jewish Race"? Why wouldn't He simply have said "The Jewish race shall not pass away..." if that is what He meant? Also, why would Jesus waste His breathe telling them, if their understanding Him, as you said, is not irrelevent? Are you considering at all, what their probable interpretation of what He said was, and that He DID want them to comprehend what He meant? Do you believe (sincerely)that they understood Him to mean what you say He meant?





bump for Bro. Epley

The word itself means race. He is making them a promise or rather comfirming it. They are NOT going to be wiped out. And in case you haven't noticed they haven't been. Titus didn't do it-Hitler did do it-and the Arabs can't do it. God keeps his promises.

[TK Burk]

The word itself means race. He is making them a promise or rather comfirming it. They are NOT going to be wiped out. And in case you haven't noticed they haven't been. Titus didn't do it-Hitler did do it-and the Arabs can't do it. God keeps his promises.

Eld. Epley, you are forever making claims that you cannot substanciate. Let me make this easy for you. Here is the verse Shag asked you about and the Strong's definitions for both "THIS" and "GENERATION":

Mat 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

This: G3778
οὗτος, οὗτοι, αὕτη, αὕται
houtos houtoi hautē hautai
hoo'-tos, hoo'-toy, how'-tay, how'-tahee
Including the nominative masculine plural (second form), nominative feminine signular (third form), and the nominate feminine plural, (fourth form). From the article G3588 and G846; the he (she or it), that is, this or that (often with the article repeated): - he (it was that), hereof, it, she, such as, the same, these, they, this (man, same, woman), which, who.

Generation: G1074
γενεά
genea
ghen-eh-ah'
From (a presumed derivative of) G1085; a generation; by implication an age (the period or the persons): - age, generation, nation, time.

Eld. Epley, please explain where the Bible says these words mean "RACE" as you claim.

[Steve Epley]

Eld. Epley, you are forever making claims that you cannot substanciate. Let me make this easy for you. Here is the verse Shag asked you about and the Strong's definitions for both "THIS" and "GENERATION":

Mat 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

This: G3778
οὗτος, οὗτοι, αὕτη, αὕται
houtos houtoi hautē hautai
hoo'-tos, hoo'-toy, how'-tay, how'-tahee
Including the nominative masculine plural (second form), nominative feminine signular (third form), and the nominate feminine plural, (fourth form). From the article G3588 and G846; the he (she or it), that is, this or that (often with the article repeated): - he (it was that), hereof, it, she, such as, the same, these, they, this (man, same, woman), which, who.

Generation: G1074
γενεά
genea
ghen-eh-ah'
From (a presumed derivative of) G1085; a generation; by implication an age (the period or the persons): - age, generation, nation, time.

Eld. Epley, please explain where the Bible says these words mean "RACE" as you claim.

NATION thus race.

[Steve Epley]

Jason I just read your last post it was excellent. Be ready for the most far out explanation you ever heard.(well maybe not):thumbsup
Satan is bound
No more pain
No more weeping
No more death
No more sorrow.
What planet are these folks living on?

[Jason B]

Thank you Elder Epley. It is so obvious that these things have yet to happen, it baffles me that Holy Ghost "filled" men could come to any other conclusion .

[Jason B]

Oh brother (afp1996), where art thou?

[Steve Epley]

Thank you Elder Epley. It is so obvious that these things have yet to happen, it baffles me that Holy Ghost "filled" men could come to any other conclusion .

There is an old saying 'imagination is the biggest nation in the world.':thumbsup

[afp1996]

crossing my T's and dotting my I's.

[mfblume]

If "This generation" meant "This Jewish Race", please explain how "The Jewish Race" will pass away, as opposed to any other or all other races "passing away". And when (approx.) is the passing away of the Jewish race in particular, expected to take place? Why did He distinctively say "THIS", instead of "The" Jewish Race" shall not pass away till....? Also, in Acts 2 when Peter said save yourselves from THIS(untoward) Generation, did he also mean save yourselves from the entire "Jewish race"?

I reasoned the same thing, once. Who said the race would pass away, if it WAS a race? The Jews were in no danger of genocide. lol.

But, alas, the Jews will tell you they are not a race, themselves. But some futurists are too afraid to ask a rabbi if that is so, since stone edifices are sometimes less reassuring when revealed to actually be houses of cards.

Good point about "this untoward generation." Man, you're coming up with some good ones lately! Bravo!

[TK Burk]

NATION thus race.

Where is the word "NATION" found in Matthew 24:34?




and before you answer, you may want to check on the meaning of "nation" in your NT





Strong's NATION: G1484
ἔθνος
ethnos
eth'-nos
Probably from G1486; a race (as of the same habit), that is, a tribe; specifically a foreign (non-Jewish) one (usually by implication pagan): - Gentile, heathen, nation, people.

[TK Burk]

Oh brother (afp1996), where art thou?

Well, since it is Sunday, and since he is a Pastor, he may be doing what a pastor does on Sunday...FISHING! :ursofunny

[TK Burk]

crossing my T's and dotting my I's.

Well, unless you were using them as bait, I guess it is a "NO" on the fishing, right??

[Steve Epley]

I reasoned the same thing, once. Who said the race would pass away, if it WAS a race? The Jews were in no danger of genocide. lol.

But, alas, the Jews will tell you they are not a race, themselves. But some futurists are too afraid to ask a rabbi if that is so, since stone edifices are sometimes less reassuring when revealed to actually be houses of cards.

Good point about "this untoward generation." Man, you're coming up with some good ones lately! Bravo!

I know you ae glad about that ole rabbi out of the cave.:thumbsup

[Steve Epley]

Where is the word "NATION" found in Matthew 24:34?and before you answer, you may want to check on the meaning of "nation" in your NTStrong's NATION: G1484ἔθνοςethnoseth'-nosProbably from G1486; a race (as of the same habit), that is, a tribe; specifically a foreign (non-Jewish) one (usually by implication pagan): - Gentile, heathen, nation, people.Do you not read your own definition? The word nation was included. Go back and read your prepared stuff.:thumbsup

[mfblume]

I know you ae glad about that ole rabbi out of the cave.:thumbsup

It's all the rabbis, brother! Please prove me wrong. :) Ask your local rabbi. You should take me up on this since you are making a real serious public charge about my honesty. I think you owe me this. ;)

Also, I have an official Judaic book called the JEWISH BOOK OF WHY. And it has a distinct chapter in it, that I quoted to you futurists years ago. lol. It said JEWS ARE NOT A RACE. Want me to quote it again?

Also, note this. GENERATION cannot mean RACE, because the context disallows it:

Matthew 23:30-36 KJV And say, If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets. (31) Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets. (32) Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers. (33) Ye serpents, ye generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell? (34) Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and some of them ye shall kill and crucify; and some of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute them from city to city: (35) That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar. (36) Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation.


Jesus said these people of His day were of their fathers and committed the same sins. But notice the wrath of God from Abel's death onward was no t poured out upon those fathers. In fact it was not poured out until the time of the people to whom Jesus spoke in that chapter! If GENERATION meant race, then the fathers would have experienced the wrath of God against Abel's death as well as every descendant since Abraham! But Jesus did not say that. He said it would be poured out ON THAT GENERATION after contrasting it with "your fathers".

Their fathers were part of the same race. So how can anyone say GENERATION means race when Jesus contrasted the people of his day from their fathers by calling them a GENERATION?

[TK Burk]

Do you not read your own definition? The word nation was included. Go back and read your prepared stuff.:thumbsup

Elder, I sure don't need anything prepared to answer you. HA!

Now, again, what was asked is :WHERE IS "NATION" FOUND IN MATTHEW 24:34?