|
Tab Menu 1
| The D.A.'s Office The views expressed in this forum are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of AFF or the Admin of AFF. |
 |
|
02-03-2009, 07:19 PM
|
 |
Lamb Saved & Shepherd Led
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 3,729
|
|
|
Re: Segraves and OPs re-examine dispensationalism?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sam
Wouldn't it be weird if, after condemning Preterism, the UPC would swing to Pretrrism?
|
All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident. – Arthur Schopenhauer, German philosopher (1788 - 1860)
__________________
The Bible is open to those that want Truth, and if they want Truth, they find Truth. They watch individuals squabble over Bible symbolism on the Internet, and leave the Message boards to enter into the real world where live people dwell, and they find Truth. The World Wide Web is full of Internet Ayatollahs who speak their mind. There is only one Truth, and it is not hidden. No matter what anyone says, Truth still converts the sincere.
-DD Benincasa, 12/06/03
www.tkburk.com
|
02-03-2009, 07:35 PM
|
 |
Follower of Jesus
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: California
Posts: 3,275
|
|
|
Re: Segraves and OPs re-examine dispensationalism?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea
2008 UGST Symposium
Oneness Pentecostals and Dispensationalism: Modification or Replacement?
Daniel L. Segraves, PhD (ABD)
Although the early twentieth century Pentecostal movement did not originally
embrace dispensationalism,2 the dispensational theory soon flourished in some segments
of Pentecostalism among those who “shared the premillennial vision of the future” and
who thus found that “dispensationalism with its intense emphasis on futuristic
eschatology had a strong appeal to them.”3 It was immediately necessary, however, for
Pentecostals to modify Scofieldian dispensationalism, because although the “system . . .
provides a convenient method of organizing biblical history and teaches that it is possible
to fit the full range of prophetic Scripture into something like a complicated puzzle,”4 it
also asserted “that the gifts of the Spirit, especially what has been called ‘the sensational
gifts’ or ‘sign gifts’ (healing, faith, working of miracles, and tongues), were confined to
the apostolic age.”5 Although cessationism was rejected by Pentecostals, “the
dispensational understanding of the church, as well as its eschatology, has influenced
pentecostal theology.”6
MORE HERE: http://www.ugst.org/uploaded/Symposium/2008/Papers/OnenessPentecostalsAndDispensationalism_Segraves.p df
|
This is refreshing to hear, because some of the implications of the usages of dispensationalism that I learned led to many of the things that Segraves discusses. Actually he taught me many of those things. Glad to hear that there is some new thought going into this.
__________________
Please pray for India
My personal mission is to BRING people into a right relationship with God, GROW them up to maturity and SEND them back into the world to minister.
|
02-03-2009, 08:08 PM
|
 |
Supercalifragilisticexpiali...
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 19,197
|
|
|
Re: Segraves and OPs re-examine dispensationalism?
"Is modification enough, or should dispensationalism be replaced
altogether? If so, with what?"
Very provoking - I like it.
__________________
"It is inhumane, in my opinion, to force people who have a genuine medical need for coffee to wait in line behind people who apparently view it as some kind of recreational activity." Dave Barry 2005
I am a firm believer in the Old Paths
Articles on such subjects as "The New Birth," will be accepted, whether they teach that the new birth takes place before baptism in water and Spirit, or that the new birth consists of baptism of water and Spirit. - THE PENTECOSTAL HERALD Dec. 1945
"It is doubtful if any Trinitarian Pentecostals have ever professed to believe in three gods, and Oneness Pentecostals should not claim that they do." - Daniel Segraves
|
02-03-2009, 08:15 PM
|
 |
Registered Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,330
|
|
|
Re: Segraves and OPs re-examine dispensationalism?
I have always had faith in sincere people of God. When they/we are hungry for truth, they/we shall be filled. This will meet with opposition as some theologians in the UPCI have built their entire ministries on this unbiblical conclusion.
I know of some that teach "Search for Truth" and when I mention to them how about "Search for MORE Truth" they do not understand the short comings of that particular bible study, as it teaches as fact, some things that cannot be proven with the Bible.
This is indeed a good sign.
|
02-03-2009, 08:23 PM
|
 |
Registered Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Portage la Prairie, MB CANADA
Posts: 38,161
|
|
|
Re: Segraves and OPs re-examine dispensationalism?
I think if full preterism did not exist, the upc would have tolerated partial preterism. David Bernard said he saw no danger in partial preterism except for it leading to full. I have vehemently stood against full for several years now. The web is full of the majority of preterists being partial preterists by far in the Reformed movement, and the minority is full preterist, with the full preterism being castigated as heretical preterism or hyper-preterism.
Some good men are full preterite, though.
__________________
...MY THOUGHTS, ANYWAY.
"Many Christians do not try to understand what was written in a verse in the Bible. Instead they approach the passage to prove what they already believe."
|
02-03-2009, 08:23 PM
|
|
Guest
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: H-Town, Texas
Posts: 18,009
|
|
|
Re: Segraves and OPs re-examine dispensationalism?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bowas
I have always had faith in sincere people of God. When they/we are hungry for truth, they/we shall be filled. This will meet with opposition as some theologians in the UPCI have built their entire ministries on this unbiblical conclusion.
I know of some that teach "Search for Truth" and when I mention to them how about "Search for MORE Truth" they do not understand the short comings of that particular bible study, as it teaches as fact, some things that cannot be proven with the Bible.
This is indeed a good sign.
|
I was thinking about these bible studies today ... in relation to what DS is proposing here ....
Again ... the ramifications of even modifying this stance ... if not replacing it would mean mainstays like this would need to be re-written ... or thrown out ...
This is bigger than some think ....
|
02-03-2009, 08:36 PM
|
|
Registered Member
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,330
|
|
|
Re: Segraves and OPs re-examine dispensationalism?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea
I was thinking about these bible studies today ... in relation to what DS is proposing here ....
Again ... the ramifications of even modifying this stance ... if not replacing it would mean mainstays like this would need to be re-written ... or thrown out ...
This is bigger than some think ....
|
Glory! Let Truth Reign! And unbiblical tradition taught as infalible Biblical truths be cast away from the children of God!
|
02-03-2009, 08:51 PM
|
|
Registered Member
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Portage la Prairie, MB CANADA
Posts: 38,161
|
|
|
Re: Segraves and OPs re-examine dispensationalism?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea
I was thinking about these bible studies today ... in relation to what DS is proposing here ....
Again ... the ramifications of even modifying this stance ... if not replacing it would mean mainstays like this would need to be re-written ... or thrown out ...
This is bigger than some think ....
|
I think it is a great temptation to stay away from this issue as much as possible, and simply close one's mind to wondering about it, once folks know the ramifications of it. Of course, what God would expect us to do is something else!
__________________
...MY THOUGHTS, ANYWAY.
"Many Christians do not try to understand what was written in a verse in the Bible. Instead they approach the passage to prove what they already believe."
|
02-03-2009, 11:25 PM
|
 |
Unvaxxed Pureblood too
|
|
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 41,044
|
|
|
Re: Segraves and OPs re-examine dispensationalism?
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfblume
I think if full preterism did not exist, the upc would have tolerated partial preterism. David Bernard said he saw no danger in partial preterism except for it leading to full.
|
Brother Chalfant and many others agreed that Partial Preterism leads to Fulfilled Eschatology. Myself and other Brothers who are Fulfilled Eschatologists have converted Partial Preterists to fulfilled, it's very easy to do.
Brother Bernard, and the rest of the UPCI Brothers are just making a logical and honest statement, by following the consistent path.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfblume
I have vehemently stood against full for several years now.
|
That's because you made it more a personal problem than a theological one.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfblume
The web is full of the majority of preterists being partial preterists by far in the Reformed movement, and the minority is full preterist, with the full preterism being castigated as heretical preterism or hyper-preterism.
|
The Reformed movement are cessationists. The MAJORITY of the Partial Preterists on the web are CESSATIONISTS, and Trinitarians, also believe in infant baptism. Brother Blume, you fellowship Presbyterians?
We are Apostolics who believe in Fulfilled Eschatology, and we are Apostolic FIRST, and Eschatology last.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mfblume
Some good men are full preterite, though.
|
Yet, you call what they believe DEVILISH? So they are good men who believe DEVILISH THINGS?
Incredible.
In Jesus name
Brother Benincasa
www.OnTimeJournal.com
__________________
"all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."
~Declaration of Independence
|
02-04-2009, 06:21 AM
|
|
Standing fast in liberty!
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 798
|
|
|
Re: Segraves and OPs re-examine dispensationalism?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bowas
I have always had faith in sincere people of God. When they/we are hungry for truth, they/we shall be filled. This will meet with opposition as some theologians in the UPCI have built their entire ministries on this unbiblical conclusion.
I know of some that teach "Search for Truth" and when I mention to them how about "Search for MORE Truth" they do not understand the short comings of that particular bible study, as it teaches as fact, some things that cannot be proven with the Bible.
This is indeed a good sign.
|
Funny that the man responsible in large part for the "Search for Truth" Bible study is, in fact, now himself a preterist!
__________________
Instead of studying to make sure what we believe is supported by Scripture, we MUST study the Scripture to see what IT TEACHES... then BELIEVE THAT! 
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth. 2 Timothy 2.15 KJV
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 10:31 AM.
| |
Linear Mode
