Apostolic Study Bible

[Lafon]

When I pointed out to my wife this particular "error," and told her that even before I ordered the UPCI KJV Apostolic Study Bible I "suspected" that it would contain many such "errors," she then asked why I would spend almost $100 for something I thought might contain corruption. Here was my response:

I do NOT deal in "third party gossip" or "hearsay"! None of this, "Well, so and so said this or that"! I want to deal exclusively with FACTS! Nothing more, but certainly nothing less"! This is because when, and if, I feel an unction of the Spirit to confront one of my brethren who has been "beguiled" by the subtle, deceitful tactics of the enemy, to embrace and publicly broadcast something that is not true, then what better weapon might I have in my arsenal than the guilty party's own words, especially when they appear in print in the public domain! And that is why I purchased this corrupt publication known as the UPCI KJV Apostolic Study Bible.

And ..... I plan to use it for just such a purpose, if the Lord be willing!

[Lafon]

There is one thing I seemed to have failed to include in Post #30 in response to the remarks of Praxeas .....

I think it important to note in Matthew 27:53, he did NOT state that the event of these resurrected saints took place AT THE SAME TIME our Lord's resurrection transpired, rather it took place AFTER His resurrection (think 40 days AFTERWARDS when He ascended - Acts 1:3, 9).

It should also be noted that it was the "souls" of these saints that were "awakened" from the "sleep of death" (Psalm 13:3), and NOT their "bodies," as stated in the KJV, for bodies do NOT "sleep" in death, instead they return to "the dust" (Genesis 3:19).

[bishoph]

Originally Posted by Lafon

Oh, how I already knew you would respond in such a manner. But ..... I take no pleasure in informing you that, just as those who were responsible for the commentary in the UPCI KJV Apostolic Study Bible, you're WRONG!

The error is truly "fundamental," and so simple I find it rather strange that some of the most educated people (those with PhDs, etc attached to their names) seemed to miss it completely. It involves the small word "the." Do you get it?

The English word "the" is a superlative pronoun, and is used to refer to a specific person, place, or thing! That's elementary "stuff"!

When, in the words of Matthew 27:53 we read "THE Holy City," it means just that. Matthew was not just referring to any city, but a very specific city, "THE Holy City." And you believe that Jerusalem was such a city during the days our Lord's feet trod its streets? Not quite!

Although God had chosen it as a "holy" place where His name was to be exalted, however, when He "visited" it in the person of "the" Christ child, it had become an extremely corrupt place. In fact, so much so that we are told in Revelation 11:8 that it was known "spiritually" as "Sodom and Egypt," places that are associated with evil and wickedness.

So seguidordejesus' question remains unanswered, "So what is THE holy city?" Well, here's the Bible answer ....

Seeing that neither of the gospel accounts discloses what happened to the resurrected saints, we must determine their destiny. Paul the apostle gives us that information in the words of Ephesians 4:8, "Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men."

Therefore doesn't common logic and reasoning allow one to conclude that when these resurrected saints "appeared unto many," this could ONLY have transpired in "the holy city" that is located in the heavens, and NOT the corrupted earthly city of Jerusalem? Likewise, should one not also conclude that this is why Matthew never penned anything about them after they were resurrected? Even Josephus, the noted Jewish historian, never mentioned this event in his writings.

But wait! There's even more to substantiate this conclusion. When John (the Revelator) was given visions of things within "the holy city," please note that which he saw under the altar there:

"And when he had opened the fifth seal, I saw under the altar the souls of them that were slain for the word of God, and for the testimony which they held: and they cried with a loud voice, saying, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell on the earth?

And white robes were given unto every one of them; and it was said unto them, that they should rest yet for a little season, until their fellowservants also and their brethren, that should be killed as they were, should be fulfilled"
(Revelation 6:9-11, KJV).

You guessed it! THESE are those of whom Matthew wrote about, for our Lord took them with Him when He ascended to "THE holy city" and placed them there, where they must await the ending of the present age, at which time, they together with the souls of the righteous dead who will also be resurrected at the soon coming glorious appearance of our Lord. At that time we ALL will be given a "new" heavenly body. The reason these MUST wait, is clearly revealed in the words of Hebrews 11:40, to wit, "that they without us should not be made perfect."

Do you still hold to a belief that Matthew was referring to "THE" city of Jerusalem, an earthly locale that even the language of the sacred Writ calls "Sodom and Egypt"? Please don't misunderstand me ... God will again cleanse and sanctify the earthly city of Jerusalem, for it will be from there that He will rule the entire earth in peace and righteousness for 1,000 years!

I appreciate your attempt at defining the "holy city" however, IMHO your conclusion is a far stretching reach. First, in your supporting scripture from Rev. 6, verse nine clearly says the souls were "those who were slain for the word of God." In the Matthew text there is nothing to say these were those killed because of their belief in the word, or their preaching the word, or any other defense of the word. It simply says "the grave were opened: and many bodies of the saints which slept arose." The saints which slept would have been a reference to the righteous souls who had died in the generations prior to the occurrence regardless of whether they had been killed for the word or not. To come to any other conclusion is to replicate what you accuse the others of doing.

Secondly, in every instance that the "holy city" is mentioned prior to the NT it was the city of Jerusalem and it was always a corrupt place. So much so, that it was destroyed and in ruin because of its debauchery and departure from true worship...yet it was referred to as the "holy city." Again, I do enjoy many of your well thought out writings even though I may not agree with you on some points. I just believe in this case, you are trying to build a doctrinal point that is not supported by the scriptures.

[Lafon]

Originally Posted by bishoph

I appreciate your attempt at defining the "holy city" however, IMHO your conclusion is a far stretching reach. First, in your supporting scripture from Rev. 6, verse nine clearly says the souls were "those who were slain for the word of God." In the Matthew text there is nothing to say these were those killed because of their belief in the word, or their preaching the word, or any other defense of the word. It simply says "the grave were opened: and many bodies of the saints which slept arose." The saints which slept would have been a reference to the righteous souls who had died in the generations prior to the occurrence regardless of whether they had been killed for the word or not. To come to any other conclusion is to replicate what you accuse the others of doing.

Secondly, in every instance that the "holy city" is mentioned prior to the NT it was the city of Jerusalem and it was always a corrupt place. So much so, that it was destroyed and in ruin because of its debauchery and departure from true worship...yet it was referred to as the "holy city." Again, I do enjoy many of your well thought out writings even though I may not agree with you on some points. I just believe in this case, you are trying to build a doctrinal point that is not supported by the scriptures.

I think it should be easily understood that the "souls" mentioned are those of what we commonly refer to as "Old Testament saints." Could it be said of them that they were, as you've noted, and as the words of Revelation 6:9 indicate "were slain for the word of God"? Of course! In fact, the writer of Hebrews 11 provides indisputable evidence of such (see vss. 33-38).

Seeing that you do not agree with my expressed understanding of this event, might I call upon your benevolence by asking that you provide myself, as well as others, your understanding of this matter (it is important, you know, for there is nothing recorded in the sacred Writ that is of no value, as I am sure you would readily agree).

[Lafon]

Want more evidence that shows "corruption" of the sacred Writ by the addendums, notes, etc., which appears in the UPCI KJV Apostolic Study Bible? If so, please consider the following:

On Page #1624, printed in the commentary on Luke 18:8, that is, the question our Lord tendered to the Pharisees (see Luke 17:20), saying, "Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?" we find this explanatory note:

"However, Jesus posed a probing rhetorical question (v. 8): upon His return, will His followers actively be exercising their faith after the manner of the widow's tenacious supplicatory prayers?"

First, and perhaps of foremost importance, it MUST be noted that our Lord was NOT, in tendering this question, referring to the faith of His "followers," or whether they would be exercising it at the time of His return, although, admittedly, the purpose of His telling of this parable was to show "that men ought always to pray, and not to faint" - vs. #18:1).

Secondly, our Lord's question was NOT a "rethorical" one at all! A "rethorical" question is one that is stated to which NO answer is expected; sort of a "what if," if you please. And so, I find it quite absurd for anyone to even do so much as suggest that the Almighty God would ever indulge in such frivolity (i.e., words that have no serious purpose or value; carefree, or superficial).

Indeed, to me at least, the publication of such a flippant explanatory statement as that I've taken note of which appears in the UPCI KJV Apostolic Study Bible almost "borders" on blasphemy!

I do NOT point out these things in an effort to belittle or harange anyone, especially my brethren. However, my concern is this: because those whom I personally know and love among my brethren, and who are not as knowledgeable as they ought to be concerning many of the writings of the Scriptures that are "hard to be understood," and have, or will purchase this publication, expecting to increase their understanding of truth, will, instead, be lead further into ignorance about some things from which they may never recover.

I've stated it many times during these past 27+ years following my conversion from Trinitarianism to Oneness Apostolic Pentecostalism, and I do so here once again; The gravest of all human endeavors occurs when imperfect mortals, such as we all are, takes the book containing the sacred written Oracles of God in hand, opens its covers, and proceeds to employ their understanding of it in an attempt to influence or establish the fundamental beliefs of their fellow man. There is just NO greater endeavor that we mortals could even willingly and knowingly engage ourselves in doing!

As for me, I would rather leave the covers of this sacred book tightly sealed, should it be that I was not absolutely confident of that portion of it I might use to accomplish such an important endeavor, than to presumptiously think myself to be capable of knowing its contents by my own flawed intellect rather than being given an understanding of it by the Spirit Himself. If I have not been assured by the Spirit of the veracity of that which I publicly express as truth, I simply refrain from publishing it!

To this end I always try to be mindful of the words of our Lord: ""But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned" (Matthew 12:36-37, KJV).

Remember, Paul the apostle advises us: "A LITTLE leaven leaveneth the WHOLE lump" (Galatians 5:9, KJV).

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Lafon

Want more evidence that shows "corruption" of the sacred Writ by the addendums, notes, etc., which appears in the UPCI KJV Apostolic Study Bible? If so, please consider the following:

On Page #1624, printed in the commentary on Luke 18:8, that is, the question our Lord tendered to the Pharisees (see Luke 17:20), saying, "Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find faith on the earth?" we find this explanatory note:

"However, Jesus posed a probing rhetorical question (v. 8): upon His return, will His followers actively be exercising their faith after the manner of the widow's tenacious supplicatory prayers?"

First, and perhaps of foremost importance, it MUST be noted that our Lord was NOT, in tendering this question, referring to the faith of His "followers," or whether they would be exercising it at the time of His return, although, admittedly, the purpose of His telling of this parable was to show "that men ought always to pray, and not to faint" - vs. #18:1).

Secondly, our Lord's question was NOT a "rethorical" one at all! A "rethorical" question is one that is stated to which NO answer is expected; sort of a "what if," if you please. And so, I find it quite absurd for anyone to even do so much as suggest that the Almighty God would ever indulge in such frivolity (i.e., words that have no serious purpose or value; carefree, or superficial).

Indeed, to me at least, the publication of such a flippant explanatory statement as that I've taken note of which appears in the UPCI KJV Apostolic Study Bible almost "borders" on blasphemy!

I do NOT point out these things in an effort to belittle or harange anyone, especially my brethren. However, my concern is this: because those whom I personally know and love among my brethren, and who are not as knowledgeable as they ought to be concerning many of the writings of the Scriptures that are "hard to be understood," and have, or will purchase this publication, expecting to increase their understanding of truth, will, instead, be lead further into ignorance about some things from which they may never recover.

I've stated it many times during these past 27+ years following my conversion from Trinitarianism to Oneness Apostolic Pentecostalism, and I do so here once again; The gravest of all human endeavors occurs when imperfect mortals, such as we all are, takes the book containing the sacred written Oracles of God in hand, opens its covers, and proceeds to employ their understanding of it in an attempt to influence or establish the fundamental beliefs of their fellow man. There is just NO greater endeavor that we mortals could even willingly and knowingly engage ourselves in doing!

As for me, I would rather leave the covers of this sacred book tightly sealed, should it be that I was not absolutely confident of that portion of it I might use to accomplish such an important endeavor, than to presumptiously think myself to be capable of knowing its contents by my own flawed intellect rather than being given an understanding of it by the Spirit Himself. If I have not been assured by the Spirit of the veracity of that which I publicly express as truth, I simply refrain from publishing it!

To this end I always try to be mindful of the words of our Lord: ""But I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned" (Matthew 12:36-37, KJV).

Remember, Paul the apostle advises us: "A LITTLE leaven leaveneth the WHOLE lump" (Galatians 5:9, KJV).

Don't be so hard on the edition, brother. If your notes were in there instead, people would say the precise same thing about it that you said here.

[Lafon]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Don't be so hard on the edition, brother. If your notes were in there instead, people would say the precise same thing about it that you said here.

Bro Mike, THAT is precisely what I would want someone to do for me if they discovered that ANYTHING I publish as truth in the public domain stands in conflict with the purity of God's sacred written Oracles! It has everything to do with this that I've aready published .....

I do NOT point out these things in an effort to belittle or harange anyone, especially my brethren. However, my concern is this: because those whom I personally know and love among my brethren, and who are not as knowledgeable as they ought to be concerning many of the writings of the Scriptures that are "hard to be understood," and have, or will purchase this publication, expecting to increase their understanding of truth, will, instead, be lead further into ignorance about some things from which they may never recover.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Lafon

Bro Mike, THAT is precisely what I would want someone to do for me if they discovered that ANYTHING I publish as truth in the public domain stands in conflict with the purity of God's sacred written Oracles! It has everything to do with this that I've already published .....

That fact remains that everything you or I state even on this forum is and will be critiqued as you did with the edition of the bible you referred to. And we've both said things here that we've critiqued as error, and refused to change our positions, anyway. So, why bother with such a strong stand like that? We're all guilty of what you speak against.

[BrotherEastman]

I bought one of these bibles and I am somewhat disappointed that there are not MORE footnotes.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Lafon

So seguidordejesus' question remains unanswered, "So what is THE holy city?" Well, here's the Bible answer ....

Seeing that neither of the gospel accounts discloses what happened to the resurrected saints, we must determine their destiny. Paul the apostle gives us that information in the words of Ephesians 4:8, "Wherefore he saith, When he ascended up on high, he led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men."

Therefore doesn't common logic and reasoning allow one to conclude that when these resurrected saints "appeared unto many," this could ONLY have transpired in "the holy city" that is located in the heavens, and NOT the corrupted earthly city of Jerusalem?

The Holy City...is it in Heaven?
Mat 4:5 Then the devil took him to the holy city and set him on the pinnacle of the temple
Mat 4:6 and said to him, "If you are the Son of God, throw yourself down, for it is written, "'He will command his angels concerning you,' and "'On their hands they will bear you up, lest you strike your foot against a stone.'"

So...using your logical, the Devil took Jesus up into heaven, tempted him to fall off and gravity take him down to the ground and die...Ok

Mat 27:52 The tombs also were opened. And many bodies of the saints who had fallen asleep were raised,
Mat 27:53 and coming out of the tombs after his resurrection they went into the holy city and appeared to many.

Reading this again. It does not sound like they appeared UP IN HEAVEN to the people that were there (how would Matthew know?) The miraculous nature of this is that living people here on earth SAW the dead raised and appearing to them

Despite being corrupt, the bible calls it the Holy City in Revelation
Rev 11:2 but do not measure the court outside the temple; leave that out, for it is given over to the nations, and they will trample the holy city for forty-two months.

Are you telling me the nations were trampling through heaven for 42 months?

It's called the Holy City because that was/is where the temple of God is at.

Dan 9:24 "Seventy weeks are decreed about your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to put an end to sin, and to atone for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal both vision and prophet, and to anoint a most holy place.
Dan 9:25 Know therefore and understand that from the going out of the word to restore and build Jerusalem to the coming of an anointed one, a prince, there shall be seven weeks. Then for sixty-two weeks it shall be built again with squares and moat, but in a troubled time.