You Be The Judge: Afp1996 vs Jason

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by afp1996

I an glad that we all agree that the rapture is not found in the Old Testament. So then those of you who believe in one will have to take to task the Rapture doctrine and prove that the Apostles believed and taught a doctrine that they could not back up with written Torah. You must remember that Paul made sure he seasoned his doctrine with the scripture. You both have admitted that a rapture is not taught in the only Bible the first century church had to teach out of. So either you guys are teaching extra biblical doctrine or they were. Which is it?

It was a NT revelation. Death was not conquered in the OT so everyone had to die thus the resurrection but death has been conquered in the NT and those WHICH ARE ALIVE AND REMAIN,... WE SHALL NOT ALL SLEEP!!!!!
These men were inspired to speak and write scripture this is the silliest argument I have ever heard. NO ONE was baptized in water in the OT. Good grief.

[afp1996]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

It was a NT revelation. Death was not conquered in the OT so everyone had to die thus the resurrection but death has been conquered in the NT and those WHICH ARE ALIVE AND REMAIN,... WE SHALL NOT ALL SLEEP!!!!!
These men were inspired to speak and write scripture this is the silliest argument I have ever heard. NO ONE was baptized in water in the OT. Good grief.

That is the silliest thing I've ever heard. Paul could not have any solid standing upon which to teach any doctrine without having scriptural foundation. Paul spent his Sabbaths reasoning in the scripture with the Jewish Leaders in the cities he was evangelizing. His doctrine was not based on revelation. Revelation does not work like that brother. Revelation is the revealing of something that is already there. You cannot reveal something that is not already there to be revealed.

It is very simple, brother Epley. You are in a corner. You have already stated that the Old Testament does not contain Rapture Doctrine. So to contend that the Apostles taught such a doctrine would contend that both they and you and brother Blume were/are teaching extra biblical doctrine.

Oh, and have you ever heard of a mizpeh? It is call in the New Testament baptism. John didn't start a new fad on the shores of the Jordan.

Good you may be, and grief you may have, but scriptural foundation for a rapture (meaning, the literal lifting of physical bodies both made immortal and those resurrected into the literal heaven to meet Jesus) you do not have.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by afp1996

That is the silliest thing I've ever heard. Paul could not have any solid standing upon which to teach any doctrine without having scriptural foundation. Paul spent his Sabbaths reasoning in the scripture with the Jewish Leaders in the cities he was evangelizing. His doctrine was not based on revelation. Revelation does not work like that brother. Revelation is the revealing of something that is already there. You cannot reveal something that is not already there to be revealed.

It is very simple, brother Epley. You are in a corner. You have already stated that the Old Testament does not contain Rapture Doctrine. So to contend that the Apostles taught such a doctrine would contend that both they and you and brother Blume were/are teaching extra biblical doctrine.

Oh, and have you ever heard of a mizpeh? It is call in the New Testament baptism. John didn't start a new fad on the shores of the Jordan.

Good you may be, and grief you may have, but scriptural foundation for a rapture (meaning, the literal lifting of physical bodies both made immortal and those resurrected into the literal heaven to meet Jesus) you do not have.

So you believe in NO NT revelation?

[afp1996]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

So you believe in NO NT revelation?

You didn't read what I wrote, Brother Epley.

What I said was:

His doctrine was not based on revelation. Revelation does not work like that brother. Revelation is the revealing of something that is already there. You cannot reveal something that is not already there to be revealed.

If it was not in the Torah then it could not be revealed. Godhead, Resurrection, Coming of the Lord, the Israel of God etc, were revealed in the New Testament because they are in the Old Testament.

Of course I believe in New Testament Revelation. The Old Testament is the New Testament Concealed, and the New Testament is the Old Testament Revealed.

Brother, you are cornered and are trying to shift the spot light away from your foot-in-mouth condition. I am not going to let that happen this time.

Blessings Brother Epley, AFP's everywhere will be praying for the swift removal of your foot from your mouth.

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

It was a NT revelation. Death was not conquered in the OT so everyone had to die thus the resurrection but death has been conquered in the NT and those WHICH ARE ALIVE AND REMAIN,... WE SHALL NOT ALL SLEEP!!!!!
These men were inspired to speak and write scripture this is the silliest argument I have ever heard. NO ONE was baptized in water in the OT. Good grief.

Eld. Epley, are you sure about that?? The erroneous idea that there is no baptism in the OT is exactly what your buddy Bro. Wiltcher claimed to me last year. Elder, anyone who has studied NT baptism KNOWS that it comes from OT mikvah.

Elder, if you want to learn about this, I will gladly send you my prewritten study on baptism.

[Jason B]

"Baptism" is not mentioned specifically in the Old Testament. The Mikvah is different from baptism, in that it was a purification ritural, done several times.

I do accept that mikvah was a part of the Judaism, and I don't have a problem with one teaching it was a type of baptism. However "baptism" is not in the Old Testament, except in types. (Noah, Abraham,Laver,Naaman,etc).

Anyway, before the FP's take us in a different direction. The debate is nearly complete, all we lack is our closing statements. I do feel like full preterism is as strong as a house of cards in a strong wind about right now.

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by afp1996

I an glad that we all agree that the rapture is not found in the Old Testament. So then those of you who believe in one will have to take to task the Rapture doctrine and prove that the Apostles believed and taught a doctrine that they could not back up with written Torah. You must remember that Paul made sure he seasoned his doctrine with the scripture. You both have admitted that a rapture is not taught in the only Bible the first century church had to teach out of. So either you guys are teaching extra biblical doctrine or they were. Which is it?

AFP, isn't it mind-boggling that there are apostolics that believe NT doctrines are not first found in the OT? These men would be wise to remember Paul said that our apostolic faith is “…built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone” (Eph 2:20). According to Paul, if there is no OT (prophets) example, then it CANNOT be apostolic.

Their argument here is a just another example of the methods Dispensationalists are forced to use in their effort to prove their unbiblical theories.

It is good that they agree that the OT does NOT speak of the rapture. THAT says a LOT about whether it is biblical!!!!

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Jason

"Baptism" is not mentioned specifically in the Old Testament. The Mikvah is different from baptism, in that it was a purification ritural, done several times.

I do accept that mikvah was a part of the Judaism, and I don't have a problem with one teaching it was a type of baptism. However "baptism" is not in the Old Testament, except in types. (Noah, Abraham,Laver,Naaman,etc).

Anyway, before the FP's take us in a different direction. The debate is nearly complete, all we lack is our closing statements. I do feel like full preterism is as strong as a house of cards in a strong wind about right now.

Jason, you are very much in error. Let me help you here...

Originally Posted by TK Burk

No Old Testament scriptures about baptism? Let me help you here:

The Old Testament contains several references to baptism. There it was known as a “MIKVAH.” A mikvah is a pool or a gathering of water.

Leviticus 11:36 Nevertheless a fountain or pit, wherein there is plenty of water, shall be clean: but that which toucheth their carcase shall be unclean.

Baptism is found in the Old Testament sacrifices and rituals. There was immersion for the hands, the hands and the feet, and the whole body. Immersion of the whole body was performed to correct a condition of ritual impurity and to restore the impure to a state of ritual purity. Ritual impurity could be viewed as SIN. The ritually impure person is prohibited from performing certain functions and participating in certain rites, so their immersion (baptism) would then render him again ritually clean.

Many different examples of immersions are mentioned in the Old Testament.
1. Leviticus 13:1-32 .......Cleansing of leprosy.
2. Numbers 19:18-19 .......Exposure to a dead body.
3. Leviticus 15:5-14 .......Exposure to a person with an unclean issue. An example is the woman with the issue of blood (Matt 9:20-22).
4. Leviticus 15:19-31 .......Cleansing from state of Niddah (“Set apart”) woman's monthly cycle. This was seen in 2 Samuel 11:2-4 in the story of David and Bathsheba's bath-time escapade. It was also used for Fasting or for a Nazarite oath.
5. Leviticus 12:2-4 .......Cleansing of a mother after childbirth. This was found in Luke 2:22, when Mary partook in a cleansing after Jesus’ birth.
6. Numbers 19:20 .......Ceremonially clean for worship in the Temple.
7. Exodus 29:4, 40:12 .......Installation/Consecration of the Priests.
8. Numbers 8:15 .......Levites to the service of God.
9. Leviticus 16:24-26 .......Priests on Yom Kippur/Day of Atonement had to before they would enter the Holy of Holies. It required an Immersion and a change of garments five times for that one service. The High Priest was not ritually impure, but there was a change of status with each time he stood before the LORD. “Having therefore, brethren, boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus,” (Hebrews 10:19)
10. Leviticus 16:26 .......Priest with the scapegoat.
11. Leviticus 16:28 .......Priest with the ox sin offering.
12. Numbers 15:15 .......Immersion of a Proselyte/Jewish Convert. Males had to undergo circumcision and immersion. Females were converted at their Immersion.
13. Leviticus 19:8 .......Priests who burned the red heifer for its ashes.

The Children of Israel knew that these mikvahs were not the one true mikvah which was to come. They knew that that cleansing would come from their Messiah. This next scripture is a prophetic reference to this coming Messiah—Jesus. Here it calls Him the “hope of Israel.” The word HOPE in the Hebrew is the word MIKVAH. It literally says that Jesus will be the “BAPTISM” of Israel! The remaining scriptures amen that fact!

Jeremiah 17:13
(13) O LORD, the hope of Israel, all that forsake thee shall be ashamed, and they that depart from me shall be written in the earth, because they have forsaken the LORD, the fountain of living waters.

The DAY of the Messiah was to be a time of cleansing from sins and disobedience.

Zechariah 13:1
(1) In that day there shall be a fountain opened to the house of David and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem for sin and for uncleanness.

Ezekiel 36:25-27
(25) Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.
(26) A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh.
(27) And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

This is exactly what the scriptures said of Jesus’ purpose.

Matthew 1:21
(21) And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.

John 7:38
(38) He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.

John 19:34
(34) But one of the soldiers with a spear pierced his side, and forthwith came there out blood and water.

Parson, if you do not know about the history of baptism, it is little wonder why you can be so easily lead to believe as you do about prophecy.

[Jason B]

Bro. Burk, you don't belive the scriptures about sprinkling to be made clean, and about a fountain opened to the house of David speak of the blood of Christ rather than water baptism?

According to your interpretation sprinkling for baptism should be perfectly acceptable.

[afp1996]

Originally Posted by afp1996

That is the silliest thing I've ever heard. Paul could not have any solid standing upon which to teach any doctrine without having scriptural foundation. Paul spent his Sabbaths reasoning in the scripture with the Jewish Leaders in the cities he was evangelizing. His doctrine was not based on revelation. Revelation does not work like that brother. Revelation is the revealing of something that is already there. You cannot reveal something that is not already there to be revealed.

It is very simple, brother Epley. You are in a corner. You have already stated that the Old Testament does not contain Rapture Doctrine. So to contend that the Apostles taught such a doctrine would contend that both they and you and brother Blume were/are teaching extra biblical doctrine.

Oh, and have you ever heard of a mizpeh? This word should have been mikvah. It is call in the New Testament baptism. John didn't start a new fad on the shores of the Jordan.

Good you may be, and grief you may have, but scriptural foundation for a rapture (meaning, the literal lifting of physical bodies both made immortal and those resurrected into the literal heaven to meet Jesus) you do not have.

Needed to edit, so I posted the edit.