Covenant Apostolic Congrgations Intl

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Nicodemus1968

That’s false. I have more faith now then I did in all those horsemen series. You better watch what you call cancer, while your waiting for a 5’6” Jew to come from the skies.

So are you one of those that believe Jesus is married to the church, and God is married to Israel? Then claim to be one God?

Oh, the poster is saying we are Hymanaus and Philitus.

If the resurrection past already why didn’t Paul tell his readers to go find the open graves? Hymaneus was obviously teaching that Jesus’ predictions came to pass while the temple was STILL IN PLACE.

[Ehud]

Originally Posted by coksiw

No necessarily. People believe in things because of being taught that way, or because they were confused by somebody while they were not prepared enough to handle it, or also because of emotional things like community acceptance, or also to justify sin, etc..., and bunch more stuff.

As I said, we can chalk that up to differences in perception, but Brother Benincasa wasn't the only one to read your post as an insult.

I also didn't call the doctrine moronic. I said it is like a cancer, that sickens the body of Christ and destroy the faith of many.

I'm not sure why you think cancerous is less insulting than moronic, but yes, moronic was my phraseology, not yours.

Believing something is different than active teaching it. Regarding active teachers, it depends on the intentions. We are not living in a period the apostles lived. They faced many "new" false doctrines from inside the church as people mixed stuff with existing beliefs that used to give them more sinful freedom. Today we face many "old" false doctrines coming into the church. We face a lot more people with good intention but wrong, than people with carnal intentions that are wrong.

If preterism is a salvation issue that lands one in hell, I'm certainly not understanding how believing it and teaching it are any different in effect. Both earn you eternal damnation.

I just hope few of you that believe in preterism reconsider what you believe, as that doctrine and the basis for it can truly shake your faith and hope.

And I hope those of you who believe an incorrect eschatology is a heaven/hell issue will remember that such a stance is much more judgmental than someone poking fun at UFOs.

For the record, I am much more settled and at peace than I ever was when I knew of no alternative to futurism. While you continue to look for a hope in tomorrow, I'm gonna praise God I'm in the kingdom today.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Ehud

As I said, we can chalk that up to differences in perception, but Brother Benincasa wasn't the only one to read your post as an insult.



I'm not sure why you think cancerous is less insulting than moronic, but yes, moronic was my phraseology, not yours.



If preterism is a salvation issue that lands one in hell, I'm certainly not understanding how believing it and teaching it are any different in effect. Both earn you eternal damnation.



And I hope those of you who believe an incorrect eschatology is a heaven/hell issue will remember that such a stance is much more judgmental than someone poking fun at UFOs.

For the record, I am much more settled and at peace than I ever was when I knew of no alternative to futurism. While you continue to look for a hope in tomorrow, I'm gonna praise God I'm in the kingdom today.

I’m not waiting for Jesus to be crowned, He is crowned, seated in heavenly places.

[coksiw]

Full preterism (at least the people I know personally), deny the need of baptism anymore. Partial preterism is in danger zone as they accepted already allegorical interpretation of the Scripture as valid. Where are you going to stop allegorizing?

If you can't preach the Gospel as the Apostles did, then you are technically preaching a different Gospel. If you can't preach of the resurrection in the future tense, the one the apostles were talking about, you know, the one they said Jesus was the firstfruit, and then the brethren at his coming, leaving the empty grave as Jesus did, ....then, you are preaching a different Gospel.

[Nicodemus1968]

Originally Posted by coksiw

Full preterism (at least the people I know personally), deny the need of baptism anymore. Partial preterism is in danger zone as they accepted already allegorical interpretation of the Scripture as valid. Where are you going to stop allegorizing?

If you can't preach the Gospel as the Apostles did, then you are technically preaching a different Gospel. If you can't preach of the resurrection in the future tense, the one the apostles were talking about, you know, the one they said Jesus was the firstfruit, and then the brethren at his coming, leaving the empty grave as Jesus did, ....then, you are preaching a different Gospel.

Ok.... You don’t believe Jesus has full power on the throne. Wow, I’m more of a Christian than you.

You know, some people I guess need that constant “Jesus is coming back, are you ready” phrase going on in their mind. Some people can’t live for God without that fear.

[Ehud]

Originally Posted by coksiw

Full preterism (at least the people I know personally), deny the need of baptism anymore. Partial preterism is in danger zone as they accepted already allegorical interpretation of the Scripture as valid. Where are you going to stop allegorizing?

If you can't preach the Gospel as the Apostles did, then you are technically preaching a different Gospel. If you can't preach of the resurrection in the future tense, the one the apostles were talking about, you know, the one they said Jesus was the firstfruit, and then the brethren at his coming, leaving the empty grave as Jesus did, ....then, you are preaching a different Gospel.

Says who? You? I'm sorry you've ran into some quacks, but you might wanna put away the broadbrush.

Paul wrote:

Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you—unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve.

As such, please be careful in how you define the gospel when it comes to excluding brothers and sisters. The sermon that brought about repentance and baptism in the name of Jesus Christ was not preterism or futurism. It was the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

[diakonos]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Still waiting to find out when these guys are going to be beaten in the synagogue in front of the Bet Din.

Good grief.

How long have I been asking that question.

[diakonos]

Originally Posted by coksiw

He should know what it is happening in his congregation, and you may find some good teaching challenging your beliefs. Something that you definitely want. Maybe something good comes out of that conversation .

The last time I brought it up (different church) there was a series of sermons that could have been taken from the Left Behind Series. I’m good.

And what is happening?? Nothing is happening.

[coksiw]

Originally Posted by Ehud

Says who? You? I'm sorry you've ran into some quacks, but you might wanna put away the broadbrush.

Paul wrote:

Now I would remind you, brothers, of the gospel I preached to you, which you received, in which you stand, and by which you are being saved, if you hold fast to the word I preached to you—unless you believed in vain. For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received: that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the Scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the Scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve.

As such, please be careful in how you define the gospel when it comes to excluding brothers and sisters. The sermon that brought about repentance and baptism in the name of Jesus Christ was not preterism or futurism. It was the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

[1Co 15:12-23 NKJV] 12 Now if Christ is preached that He has been raised from the dead, how do some among you say that there is no resurrection of the dead?

See his logic? He preached Jesus was raised from the dead to give you also hope that there is real resurrection from the dead for those that believe in him.

13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then Christ is not risen. 14 And if Christ is not risen, then our preaching [is] empty and your faith [is] also empty.

Consequences of stop having the hope of real resurrection.

15 Yes, and we are found false witnesses of God, because we have testified of God that He raised up Christ, whom He did not raise up--if in fact the dead do not rise. 16 For if [the] dead do not rise, then Christ is not risen.

You can't say there is no real resurrection from the dead as Jesus did and also say that Christ resurrected from the dead.

17 And if Christ is not risen, your faith [is] futile; you are still in your sins!

Consequences again, if you don't believe in a future real resurrection, you don't believe in Christ real resurrection according to Paul, or basically, you nullify it.

18 Then also those who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished. 19 If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men the most pitiable.

Real resurrection from the dead into eternal life is a promise and a necessity.

20 But now Christ is risen from the dead, [and] has become the firstfruits of those who have fallen asleep. 21 For since by man [came] death, by Man also [came] the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ all shall be made alive. 23 But each one in his own order: Christ the firstfruits, afterward those [who are] Christ's at His coming.

If you can't preach that, if you can't say we will resurrect from the dead as Jesus did at his coming, then you are preaching a different Gospel.

I'm not trying to win an argument, I'm just trying to help some of you in this thread to open you eyes to see the danger of that doctrine.

[diakonos]

Originally Posted by corkscrew

I just hope few of you that believe in preterism reconsider what you believe, as that doctrine and the basis for it can truly shake your faith and hope.

Shake my faith? Do you know how I arrived to where I’m at?

I was post-trib before I was apostolic. Then I got saved. I attended a UPCI that was dispensationalist. Charts and all. But, the pastor didn’t teach much. He would state that he was pan-trib; it will all pan out in the end. I learned from his son that he was really pre-trib, but his wife was post-trib.

Anyway.

I was a member of a now defunct forum whose focus was eschatology. The mods would refute preterism. I was all on board. I stopped attending a church that had a pastor that believed in partial preterism. (The pastor has since lost his mind. KIDDING)

However, it was in refuting that I learned that I was on the wrong side of the argument.

These things are not worth mentioning in the local assembly. I attend a UPCI that is probably going to be “home” for a while. The UPCI tossed out fulfilled eschatologists like they were yesterday’s garbage.

I want to be part of a body and live in peace.