Jason DEBATE MATTHEW 24 Luke21 Mark 13

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by TK Burk

Three more and I may be "post"!

That would be an improvement so here goes.

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Jason

TK, I know that I believe in a future phyiscal coming of Christ, FP's don't. Just because I'm studying something doesn't mean I don't know what I believe. I have studied oneness and holiness and baptism for years, yet I know what I believe. The Bible is not easily exausted, there is ALWAYS room for more study. Again, that doesn't mean I don't know what I believe-that is a cop out and an excuse not to deal with the issue I'm brining up, and I say that respectfully, because I do not see ill will in your post, but you are misrepresenting me.

Thanks for the explaination. I agree about being open for more Truth. I appreciate that you are honest enough to admit that you are open to more. I agree with that. I feel the same. However, what I asked is since you have said more than once that you have not solidified what you believe on Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21, how do you then feel prepared to debate about them?

I am not trying to misrepresent you at all. It is an honest question.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Brother Burk how's Elder Epley coming along with answering your six questions?

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Brother Burk how's Elder Epley coming along with answering your six questions?

I am making about as much progress as he is answering Elder Andersen's 3 questions. The only difference he said to would answer Elder Andersen when he agree to debate. I have NOT agreed to answer anything.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

I am making about as much progress as he is answering Elder Andersen's 3 questions. The only difference he said to would answer Elder Andersen when he agree to debate.

Elder Epley, Brother Burk did what he was challenged to do when Brother James N Anderson started on him over at Just Preachers Forum. Brother Thomas K Burk then came over here and PMed Praxeas to start the debate.
The debate was about the Christ of Apostolic Pentecostal Fulfilled Eschatology, and Brother Burk answered what was posed to him, some things he didn't answer like the question about communion. Praxeas then came on and said they had to do one debate at a time, and when they finished that one, they could then move on to another topic. What strikes me funny is that you don't think varying different questions are too broad when they are coming out from an individual that you are rooting for. Yet, when I pick three chapters (which are synonymous) you start to cry foul?

The facts remain, Brother James N Anderson quit the debate, plain and simple. If he had a problem with the way an opponent was responding then he needed to go to the moderator. The moderator would of corrected the situation. Since Brother James N Anderson feltt that he was getting in too deep he found any reason (in his own mind) to bail out. In public debate he wouldn't of had that luxury, YOU know that and all the rest of the debating world knows that. Brother James N Anderson, by the rules of debate, would of automatically lost. That is a fact.

Again, if there was a problem the moderator would of corrected it wether either men liked it or not. Yet, Brother James N Anderson, found a way out.
You need to back another horse.

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

I have NOT agreed to answer anything.

Elder Epley, you and I agree on more things than we disagree on, but it's not that you won't answer or that you didn't agree to answer, it's because you cannot answer.



Elder Burk has been asking you to answer those questions since 2003, and you have continually dodged them. Talk about jello? Well, my good dear Elder, your hammer is flying, and the jello is still slipping away.




I appreciate you

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Elder Epley, Brother Burk did what he was challenged to do when Brother James N Anderson started on him over at Just Preachers Forum. Brother Thomas K Burk then came over here and PMed Praxeas to start the debate.
The debate was about the Christ of Apostolic Pentecostal Fulfilled Eschatology, and Brother Burk answered what was posed to him, some things he didn't answer like the question about communion. Praxeas then came on and said they had to do one debate at a time, and when they finished that one, they could then move on to another topic. What strikes me funny is that you don't think varying different questions are too broad when they are coming out from an individual that you are rooting for. Yet, when I pick three chapters (which are synonymous) you start to cry foul?

The facts remain, Brother James N Anderson quit the debate, plain and simple. If he had a problem with the way an opponent was responding then he needed to go to the moderator. The moderator would of corrected the situation. Since Brother James N Anderson feltt that he was getting in too deep he found any reason (in his own mind) to bail out. In public debate he wouldn't of had that luxury, YOU know that and all the rest of the debating world knows that. Brother James N Anderson, by the rules of debate, would of automatically lost. That is a fact.

Again, if there was a problem the moderator would of corrected it wether either men liked it or not. Yet, Brother James N Anderson, found a way out.
You need to back another horse.





Elder Epley, you and I agree on more things than we disagree on, but it's not that you won't answer or that you didn't agree to answer, it's because you cannot answer.



Elder Burk has been asking you to answer those questions since 2003, and you have continually dodged them. Talk about jello? Well, my good dear Elder, your hammer is flying, and the jello is still slipping away.




I appreciate you

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

I can read and Elder Burk made NO attempt to answer Elder Andersen's questions and very LITTLE attempt to follow the affirmative speech. He just posted his own prewritten stuff with a couple of references to the affirmative speech. Yes Elder Burk and myself along with you and sometimes Elder Blume have been bantering for years now. Yet after all this bantering he still assigns to me that which I have said I do NOT believe but it matters little since he is going to post his prewritten stuff. So in truth there is NOT much of a discussion just the recycling of his prewritten stuff. I commend him on his much work he has done on teaching his veiws. But from the years I have read him he does very little discussing in pages of threads he just posts his prewritten stuff and calls it discussing.
He challenges me to prove stuff I do NOT believe and calls that debating? He is confused.

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

I can read and Elder Burk made NO attempt to answer Elder Andersen's questions and very LITTLE attempt to follow the affirmative speech. He just posted his own prewritten stuff with a couple of references to the affirmative speech. Yes Elder Burk and myself along with you and sometimes Elder Blume have been bantering for years now. Yet after all this bantering he still assigns to me that which I have said I do NOT believe but it matters little since he is going to post his prewritten stuff. So in truth there is NOT much of a discussion just the recycling of his prewritten stuff. I commend him on his much work he has done on teaching his veiws. But from the years I have read him he does very little discussing in pages of threads he just posts his prewritten stuff and calls it discussing.
He challenges me to prove stuff I do NOT believe and calls that debating? He is confused.

There you go, Bro. Benincasa; you are a liar, and so am I.




Bro. Epley, Bro Anderson used PREWRITTEN quotes from MacArthur, Zodhiates, and Hannegraff. He also said he had studied the notes from one of his Professor's (maybe from Farwell's Liberty University?) and was ready to debate. How in the name of Heaven, can you fault me for using my OWN studies when he was depending on stuff like that?

Bro. Epley, MUCH of what I write is NOT prewritten. As a matter of fact, a lot of my studies were forged in discussions on these forums. In other words, I wrote them for the first time in a post, and went back later and completed them.

Bro. Epley, how can you fault me for using the same arguments if you cannot show where they are wrong?

Bro. Epley, do YOU use NEW scriptures and NEW explanations every time you teach on Jesus' name baptism, or the Holy Ghost, or on holiness, or on any other doctrine that you hold dear? Do you make up "new stuff" for every Bible study YOU DO, or do you repeat the same studies because you know they are time tested and work?

The real deal is that you cannot refute what is taught in AFP, so you just shoot at the mailman. That, my dear Brother, does little to disprove AFP, but it sure exposes the weaknesses in your position. Like I said to you yesterday, you help in more ways than you know….




I have asked you to produce SIX scriptures that actually say what you believe since 2003. Now, six years later, you are still making excuses why you won't do that.

I think you'd do yourself and others good to take a little time in study yourself and produce some of your own material from which YOU can quote.

Now, how about answering with those scriptures that ACTUALLY say what you believe is on the Bible??? verybody reading these posts are watching to see if you can....

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by TK Burk

There you go, Bro. Benincasa; you are a liar, and so am I.




Bro. Epley, Bro Anderson used PREWRITTEN quotes from MacArthur, Zodhiates, and Hannegraff. He also said he had studied the notes from one of his Professor's (maybe from Farwell's Liberty University?) and was ready to debate. How in the name of Heaven, can you fault me for using my OWN studies when he was depending on stuff like that?

Bro. Epley, MUCH of what I write is NOT prewritten. As a matter of fact, a lot of my studies were forged in discussions on these forums. In other words, I wrote them for the first time in a post, and went back later and completed them.

Bro. Epley, how can you fault me for using the same arguments if you cannot show where they are wrong?

Bro. Epley, do YOU use NEW scriptures and NEW explanations every time you teach on Jesus' name baptism, or the Holy Ghost, or on holiness, or on any other doctrine that you hold dear? Do you make up "new stuff" for every Bible study YOU DO, or do you repeat the same studies because you know they are time tested and work?

The real deal is that you cannot refute what is taught in AFP, so you just shoot at the mailman. That, my dear Brother, does little to disprove AFP, but it sure exposes the weaknesses in your position. Like I said to you yesterday, you help in more ways than you know….




I have asked you to produce SIX scriptures that actually say what you believe since 2003. Now, six years later, you are still making excuses why you won't do that.

I think you'd do yourself and others good to take a little time in study yourself and produce some of your own material from which YOU can quote.

Now, how about answering with those scriptures that ACTUALLY say what you believe is on the Bible??? verybody reading these posts are watching to see if you can....

I do not fault you for your well written material I applaud your studiousness(if that is a word) for that. And it works well with teaching no doubt. HOWEVER you cannot comphrehend YOU was in the rebuttal NOT in the AFFIRMATIVE thus you FOLLOW where he leads even if he is quoting Hitler and Carl Marx!!!!
You do NOT introduce no matter how well written material NOT under discussion.
Concerning me you assign unto me positions I have NEVER affirmed then want me to defend what I have never committed to. And you call that debating???
All this dancing around (you could teach Fred Astair new steps) just because you will NOT answer the questions Elder Andersen asked you?
Folks are reading BUT they are NOT reading your answers since you have written none.