Banned from AMF

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Sweet Pea

I'm not the judge of Spurgeon, Luther, Wesley or of ANYONE else!!!

Luther, Spurgeon, Wesley, and Oral Roberts are burning, snap, crackle, and pop.

SP, you aren't the judge, the Word is the judge.

Mat 7:14
The road is narrow, and the gate is tight which leads to life, and a small number will be able to find it and enter in.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[DAII]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Luther, Spurgeon, Wesley, and Oral Roberts are burning, snap, crackle, and pop.

SP, you aren't the judge, the Word is the judge.

Mat 7:14
The road is narrow, and the gate is tight which leads to life, and a small number will be able to find it and enter in.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

I've heard the same from your peers about full preterists.

[Barb]

Originally Posted by Brother David

It's not a question of "What CAN God do?"

It is a question of "What DID God do?"

God very clearly did not "preserve" an "Acts 2:38, Full Package Three Stepper Church" throughout approximately 1,700 years of the Church Age.

I had just told someone I was going to take a forum break, and then I read your post. Kinda makes me feel like the Godfather..."Just when I thought I was OUT, they pull me back in!!"

David, I'm not sure on what you base your declaration that "God very clearly did not preserve an "Acts 2:38, Full Package Three Stepper Church" throughout approximately 1,700 years of the Church Age."

Is it a lack of historical proof?

Sadly, I thought we had it in the form of a book, only to discover that the book is incorrect.

But be that as it may, I am a believer that the life of the message endured.

Posted below is something I wrote not long ago in response to Daniel. I don't have any thought in the world that my little opinion or belief will make a bit of difference in someone's opinion or belief, but for whatever it is worth, here it is...


Daniel, I say respectfully and sincerely, I do not have your knack for research, nor can I make a claim to your level of intelligence.

You have searched and found information that is both honest and true, and heartbreaking and troublesome.

And though we are at different ends of the view regarding certain points, I appreciate your desire for accuracy in Church history. It is my desire as well.

But I want you to know that despite hands on proof, and regardless of the faulty information in Bro. Arnold's book, which I own and have read numerous times, I yet believe that there has always been a remnant, from the birth of the Church to the present.

No, I cannot prove it, yet in my inner most beings I believe it to be so.

It's not indigestion that I feel, and I am not delusional.

What I do have is strong faith that what God started He would not allow to die, only to be fully resurrected in 1913 or whenever.

I admit to not having all of the answers.

I further admit that some that has been posted on these forums through the years has given me pause. That does not mean I am doubting the Way, just that my arrogance in all of this has ceased.

I do have questions and "hmmmm" moments.

Yet I am confident that God has always had a people down through the ages who have followed the Apostles' Doctrine.

This confidence and trust does not mean that I think the elders you listed were 'soft on the doctrine'.

Nor do I cast aside what they believed simply because, as one elder so coldly told me a few years ago, "They are dead and gone now."

I'm not sure if I'm making sense here at all...

I just don't think that lack of literary proof means it isn't so...

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Barb

I had just told someone I was going to take a forum break, and then I read your post. Kinda makes me feel like the Godfather..."Just when I thought I was OUT, they pull me back in!!"

David, I'm not sure on what you base your declaration that "God very clearly did not preserve an "Acts 2:38, Full Package Three Stepper Church" throughout approximately 1,700 years of the Church Age."

Is it a lack of historical proof?

Sadly, I thought we had it in the form of a book, only to discover that the book is incorrect.

But be that as it may, I am a believer that the life of the message endured.

Posted below is something I wrote not long ago in response to Daniel. I don't have any thought in the world that my little opinion or belief will make a bit of difference in someone's opinion or belief, but for whatever it is worth, here it is...


Daniel, I say respectfully and sincerely, I do not have your knack for research, nor can I make a claim to your level of intelligence.

You have searched and found information that is both honest and true, and heartbreaking and troublesome.

And though we are at different ends of the view regarding certain points, I appreciate your desire for accuracy in Church history. It is my desire as well.

But I want you to know that despite hands on proof, and regardless of the faulty information in Bro. Arnold's book, which I own and have read numerous times, I yet believe that there has always been a remnant, from the birth of the Church to the present.

No, I cannot prove it, yet in my inner most beings I believe it to be so.

It's not indigestion that I feel, and I am not delusional.

What I do have is strong faith that what God started He would not allow to die, only to be fully resurrected in 1913 or whenever.

I admit to not having all of the answers.

I further admit that some that has been posted on these forums through the years has given me pause. That does not mean I am doubting the Way, just that my arrogance in all of this has ceased.

I do have questions and "hmmmm" moments.

Yet I am confident that God has always had a people down through the ages who have followed the Apostles' Doctrine.

This confidence and trust does not mean that I think the elders you listed were 'soft on the doctrine'.

Nor do I cast aside what they believed simply because, as one elder so coldly told me a few years ago, "They are dead and gone now."

I'm not sure if I'm making sense here at all...

I just don't think that lack of literary proof means it isn't so...

You are technically correct that lack of proof doesn't necessarily mean something didn't happen. Lack of proof is a good indicator that something didn't happen though, especially when there is 1700 years of history to search through and there isn't even one person that can be named that believed repentance, baptism in jesus name, and tongues were essential for salvation.

What I really want to know Barb, is what implications would it have for you and your beliefs if there really wasn't one person who believe that in 1700 years?

[Barb]

Originally Posted by jfrog

You are technically correct that lack of proof doesn't necessarily mean something didn't happen. Lack of proof is a good indicator that something didn't happen though, especially when there is 1700 years of history to search through and there isn't even one person that can be named that believed repentance, baptism in jesus name, and tongues were essential for salvation.

What I really want to know Barb, is what implications would it have for you and your beliefs if there really wasn't one person who believe that in 1700 years?

None, absolutely none. This belief is firmly implanted deep in my inner beings, and no argument to the contrary can change that.

For whatever it is worth, I believe there WERE people who experienced repentance, baptism is the Name, and Spirit infilling, with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues.

I do not judge harshly those who disagree with me on this. I just know what I know, and it is a knowing that cannot be described.

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Barb

None, absolutely none. This belief is firmly implanted deep in my inner beings, and no argument to the contrary can change that.

For whatever it is worth, I believe there WERE people who experienced repentance, baptism is the Name, and Spirit infilling, with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues.

I do not judge harshly those who disagree with me on this. I just know what I know, and it is a knowing that cannot be described.

In other words you believe that its impossible for there not to have been people in that 1700 years who repented, were baptized in Jesus name and received the initial evidence of speaking in tongues?

[Barb]

Originally Posted by jfrog

In other words you believe that its impossible for there not to have been people in that 1700 years who repented, were baptized in Jesus name and received the initial evidence of speaking in tongues?

Yes...

[Sweet Pea]

Originally Posted by DAII

Hey, SweetPea ... why is "you" in quotes ... am I not really a "me"?

No, there are contrasts ... but mostly similarities .... especially in how we view God's grace and the totality of the Body/Bride of Christ.

I don't ever recall him being naive enough to think that there is historical evidence to the unproven and fictitious notion of remnant theology ...

True "light doctrine", through the restorationist impulse, makes allowance for what is obvious to 99.99% of Christianity ... and does not hang onto the Catholic teaching of Apostolic succession, nor a faulty interpretation of the remnant theology's pet core verse in Matthew 16:18. We are to accept their remnant doctrine without a shred of biblical witness and historical evidence by "faith" in the same manner Trinitarians behoove believers to accept the mystery of the Trinity by faith ... while disregarding the concrete realities set before us that are orchestrated by a Sovereign, all-powerful God regarding His Kingdom and Church.

What is painfully obvious, however, through the lens of recent history .... is that preceding generatons from the the pioneering modern OP movement have drifted from their founders' more inclusive view of the Body ... to a more isolated, judgmental and exclusivist view ... but thank God that is changing.

Once again,yes, there are differences in our theology as not to digress .... just as there are some stark differences to what you believe in contrast to what your dad believes.
Moreover, I am confident the gracious elder would agree on the nature of God's grace as well.

Jesus remains our plan of salvation.

Daniel - I meant nothing by putting "you" in quotes other that to emphasize my thoughts that YOU don't preach/teach everything exactly like YOUR Dad did. This was in reference to your comment that if KH believed in a remnant church through the dark ages, it put HIM at odds with what HIS Dad believed....


We are in total agreement agree on the bolded above! KH is a very gracious man - and He teaches/preaches the grace of God in a strong way!!! He believes it and he extends grace and mercy to many that others would condemn! He is an awesome man of God! I am so thankful for the years I was able to sit under his ministry!

[Sweet Pea]

Barb - thank you so much for expressing your thoughts so well! I agree with you - but you stated it much better !

[Scott Hutchinson]

This would be of interest concerning the beginning of The Christian church.
http://www.middletownbiblechurch.org/dispen/begin.htm