You Be The Judge: Afp1996 vs Jason

[Jason B]

Bro. Burk, you know the verses I use. Namely Daniel 9:24-27, specifically verse 27.

The scripture seems to give us a gap between the 69th and 70th weeks. I do realize that this verse is highly debated, many do belive there is a gap, while some do not.
The reason I lean toward there being a gap is that the abomination of desolation is spoken of here, is said to happen in the middle of the 70th week. It is also referenced in Daniel 11:31 and Daniel 12:11.

Jesus spoke of the AOD in Matthew 24:15. He said it would happen in the Holy Place (which is in the temple). Paul told us in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 that someone would stand in the temple of God and claim to be God.

I do not believe the abomination of desolation happened in 70AD. I know you guys almost attribute God-like status to Titus,but he had nothing to do with the AOD.

My reasoning for a gap is that if the abomination of desolation DID NOT happen in the first century-then it must remain future, and there is yet.

If the abomination of desolation did happen in the first century, I will recant. Please PROVE it.

The problem is the FP posistion doesn't provide this event WITH the related events. Sacfices ceasing, 3 1/2 years of great tribulation, a man claiming to be God (which we can see from other scriptures is the "antichrist" or "beast").

I don't belive the FP/PP posistion that teaches the AOD happened in 70AD does not jive with scripture. I will provide reasons why a 70AD AOD is out of line with scripture is you would like.

My issue with the "GAP" is that (most hyper/partial) preterists also have a gap in their eschatology. All-be-it a much shorter gap (40 years). But a gap is still necessary for their theories to make any sense.

I know you diagree with my posistion, but to continually post on the internet that I have no scriptural basis is incorrect and borderline dishonest. It would be better stated that you feel like I have misinterpreted scripture, than to accuse me of not studying, getting a doctrine out of my imagination, or any of the other accusations tossed my way.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Jason

Bro. Burk, you know the verses I use. Namely Daniel 9:24-27, specifically verse 27.

The scripture seems to give us a gap between the 69th and 70th weeks. I do realize that this verse is highly debated, many do belive there is a gap, while some do not.
The reason I lean toward there being a gap is that the abomination of desolation is spoken of here, is said to happen in the middle of the 70th week. It is also referenced in Daniel 11:31 and Daniel 12:11.

Jason either you don't understand English, or you are an expert at dodging questions when you are asked them. Jason, here is where the mix up is, the above is not an answer. The above didn't answer anything. The reason being, is that you don't explain yourself. You give us the classic "maybe," "seems to be," and last but not least, "it's highly debatable?"

Jason you are not proving your position on this subject, you are not explaining how it works and why it is what you claim. Would you kindly wow us by explain why Daniel 70 weeks has a gap in it? Do you understand what it means to EXPLAIN? How about teaching us? Can you do that Mr."Your Right" and we are wrong? It is also referenced in Daniel 11 and 12? What does that mean? Would you like to give it a go and explain those chapters and how they correlate (or don't) with the 70 weeks of Daniel? Again, you throw a paragraph together and then sit back and claim you answered us? When in fact all you did was present that the "scripture SEEMS to say something which you can only hope is true. You need to wake up and apologize.

Originally Posted by Jason

Jesus spoke of the AOD in Matthew 24:15. He said it would happen in the Holy Place (which is in the temple). Paul told us in 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 that someone would stand in the temple of God and claim to be God.

So, you believe in a rebuilt temple? Didn't I ask you before if you believed in a rebuilt temple? I thought you posted that you didn't, forgive me. Yet, the Bible calls this rebuilt temple the HOLY PLACE? This rebuilt temple is going to be rebuilt by people who can't prove they are Biblical Jews like those in Ezra and Nehemiah HAD TOO in order to rebuild the second temple? Please look at your POST and tell me what you wrote. The TEMPLE OF GOD, and Jesus in Matthew 24:15, calls it the HOLY PLACE. Your doctrine becomes even more insane when you propose that this is all future. Yet, you can't explain why? You just say you don't believe, and therefore it must be truth. You must be the life of the party, when you sit down with all the other religions and go back and forth telling each other your truths.

Brother Jason if the gap is between Matthew 24:14 and 15, would you care to explain with chapter and verse how that works in your world?

The HOLY PLACE which is THE TEMPLE, you posted that. Brother Jason, you have a future rebuilt temple which will be built somewhere off in the future that will be a HOLY PLACE according to God Almighty? Now in what I believe, that makes sense, since the temple was commanded by God through King Cyrus to be rebuilt. Yet, in your mythological eschatology it becomes totally illogical. You have Jesus talking about the temple in the first century and wallah by verse 15 Jesus is speaking of a rebuilt temple thousands of years later? PROVE IT, and try using the Bible.

Originally Posted by Jason

I do not believe the abomination of desolation happened in 70AD.

You don't believe, and Trinitarians don't believe in the water baptism in Jesus name. Yet, why won't you explain how it is impossible? Since Mark 13, and Luke 21 is speaking of the same exact topic why don't you show us how those two chapters back up your claims? Brother Jason, you most likely have lots of things which you dogmatically claim are untrue, yet never can prove them to be untrue with a Bible. Where in this post did you prove beyond the shadow of doubt that the AOD couldn't possibly have happened in the first century AD? Yet, that IS what is being asked of you over and over again. That is what we hound you to do and it's like trying to nail jello to a wall.

You never prove anything, you just make statements and hope that we will accept your statements, which are not based on Biblical facts.

Brother Jason, you were asked to prove it, and do it with a Bible, chapter and verse. You place a gap between 14 and 15? How, and why, and where are these gaps in the two other chapters that speak of the same issue, Mark 13, and Luke 21.

Originally Posted by Jason

I know you guys almost attribute God-like status to Titus,but he had nothing to do with the AOD.

You would do best to prove what you yourself bvelieve instead of attributing anything to us. How about proving your gaps. Remember you are right we are wrong. Since that is the case, it would matter if we thought Hare Krishna was Pontius Pilate. All you need to do is prove what you believe. Prove your gap.

Originally Posted by Jason

My reasoning for a gap is that if the abomination of desolation DID NOT happen in the first century-then it must remain future, and there is yet.

Your reasoning is because you said it's so? Do you have a problem with English? Where did you prove anything? Because you say it DID NOT?
We are asking you to prove it, and not to just say it, but PROVE IT.

This is mind blowing, and what is blowing my mind, is that you are not embarrassed by making the above statement. You were asked to produce why you believe there is gaps in Daniel 70 weeks, Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21. You were to produce the reasons why with chapter and verse. I don't care what you think is truth, I want you to prove with a Bible what is truth.

Originally Posted by Jason

If the abomination of desolation did happen in the first century, I will recant. Please PROVE it.

Hey, I'm wrong remember, I'm the heretic, remember? You are the one who is supposed to PROVE that Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21 have gaps in them of thousands of years. Now we have gotten you to admit a future rebuilt temple, and that you believe that temple will be HOLY and GOD'S TEMPLE. It should be very interesting to see you prove that with a Bible.

Originally Posted by Jason

The problem is the FP posistion doesn't provide this event WITH the related events. Sacfices ceasing, 3 1/2 years of great tribulation, a man claiming to be God (which we can see from other scriptures is the "antichrist" or "beast").

I don't belive the FP/PP posistion that teaches the AOD happened in 70AD does not jive with scripture. I will provide reasons why a 70AD AOD is out of line with scripture is you would like.

Good God from Zion! Are you for real?

Originally Posted by Jason

My issue with the "GAP" is that (most hyper/partial) preterists also have a gap in their eschatology. All-be-it a much shorter gap (40 years). But a gap is still necessary for their theories to make any sense.

I know you diagree with my posistion, but to continually post on the internet that I have no scriptural basis is incorrect and borderline dishonest. It would be better stated that you feel like I have misinterpreted scripture, than to accuse me of not studying, getting a doctrine out of my imagination, or any of the other accusations tossed my way.

You were asked to produce where the gaps are and explain why your position is TRUE. The above is proving anything, you are just blowing and going. How about proving with a Bible your gaps in Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

I never said there were no immersions I said there were NO baptisms. I can dunk myself in a tub but it is not a baptism. Divers dive under but NO baptisms. This is silly.

Elder, "BAPTISM" means "IMMERSION." What are you arguing exactly? You are the one who first made it an issue. What was the purpose of your original statement?

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by afp1996

Elder baptism and immersion are the same things. You are not correct.

It seems that Eld. Epley is one of the few apostolic preachers that doesn't know this....

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by TJJJ

Did Elderest Epley really say there were no baptisms in the Old Testament? I have been working alot so I have not kept track of the posts!

That is FUNNY!!!!!


What about Matthew, Mark, Luke and John? Aren't all those OLD TESTAMENT?

All he is doing is proving that he has never studied OT baptisms/mikvahs. It is sad how some men will argue for or against things that they've never first studied.....

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Jason either you don't understand English, or you are an expert at dodging questions when you are asked them. Jason, here is where the mix up is, the above is not an answer. The above didn't answer anything. The reason being, is that you don't explain yourself. You give us the classic "maybe," "seems to be," and last but not least, "it's highly debatable?"

Jason you are not proving your position on this subject, you are not explaining how it works and why it is what you claim. Would you kindly wow us by explain why Daniel 70 weeks has a gap in it? Do you understand what it means to EXPLAIN? How about teaching us? Can you do that Mr."Your Right" and we are wrong? It is also referenced in Daniel 11 and 12? What does that mean? Would you like to give it a go and explain those chapters and how they correlate (or don't) with the 70 weeks of Daniel? Again, you throw a paragraph together and then sit back and claim you answered us? When in fact all you did was present that the "scripture SEEMS to say something which you can only hope is true. You need to wake up and apologize.




So, you believe in a rebuilt temple? Didn't I ask you before if you believed in a rebuilt temple? I thought you posted that you didn't, forgive me. Yet, the Bible calls this rebuilt temple the HOLY PLACE? This rebuilt temple is going to be rebuilt by people who can't prove they are Biblical Jews like those in Ezra and Nehemiah HAD TOO in order to rebuild the second temple? Please look at your POST and tell me what you wrote. The TEMPLE OF GOD, and Jesus in Matthew 24:15, calls it the HOLY PLACE. Your doctrine becomes even more insane when you propose that this is all future. Yet, you can't explain why? You just say you don't believe, and therefore it must be truth. You must be the life of the party, when you sit down with all the other religions and go back and forth telling each other your truths.

Brother Jason if the gap is between Matthew 24:14 and 15, would you care to explain with chapter and verse how that works in your world?

The HOLY PLACE which is THE TEMPLE, you posted that. Brother Jason, you have a future rebuilt temple which will be built somewhere off in the future that will be a HOLY PLACE according to God Almighty? Now in what I believe, that makes sense, since the temple was commanded by God through King Cyrus to be rebuilt. Yet, in your mythological eschatology it becomes totally illogical. You have Jesus talking about the temple in the first century and wallah by verse 15 Jesus is speaking of a rebuilt temple thousands of years later? PROVE IT, and try using the Bible.





You don't believe, and Trinitarians don't believe in the water baptism in Jesus name. Yet, why won't you explain how it is impossible? Since Mark 13, and Luke 21 is speaking of the same exact topic why don't you show us how those two chapters back up your claims? Brother Jason, you most likely have lots of things which you dogmatically claim are untrue, yet never can prove them to be untrue with a Bible. Where in this post did you prove beyond the shadow of doubt that the AOD couldn't possibly have happened in the first century AD? Yet, that IS what is being asked of you over and over again. That is what we hound you to do and it's like trying to nail jello to a wall.

You never prove anything, you just make statements and hope that we will accept your statements, which are not based on Biblical facts.

Brother Jason, you were asked to prove it, and do it with a Bible, chapter and verse. You place a gap between 14 and 15? How, and why, and where are these gaps in the two other chapters that speak of the same issue, Mark 13, and Luke 21.




You would do best to prove what you yourself bvelieve instead of attributing anything to us. How about proving your gaps. Remember you are right we are wrong. Since that is the case, it would matter if we thought Hare Krishna was Pontius Pilate. All you need to do is prove what you believe. Prove your gap.



Your reasoning is because you said it's so? Do you have a problem with English? Where did you prove anything? Because you say it DID NOT?
We are asking you to prove it, and not to just say it, but PROVE IT.

This is mind blowing, and what is blowing my mind, is that you are not embarrassed by making the above statement. You were asked to produce why you believe there is gaps in Daniel 70 weeks, Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21. You were to produce the reasons why with chapter and verse. I don't care what you think is truth, I want you to prove with a Bible what is truth.



Hey, I'm wrong remember, I'm the heretic, remember? You are the one who is supposed to PROVE that Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21 have gaps in them of thousands of years. Now we have gotten you to admit a future rebuilt temple, and that you believe that temple will be HOLY and GOD'S TEMPLE. It should be very interesting to see you prove that with a Bible.



Good God from Zion! Are you for real?




You were asked to produce where the gaps are and explain why your position is TRUE. The above is proving anything, you are just blowing and going. How about proving with a Bible your gaps in Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

My dear Brother Benincasa, thank you for saving me both time and effort tonight. This is an excellent response! I hope Jason carefully reads it and takes it into account....

[TK Burk]

AGAIN

Eld. Epley, why do you keep ignoring this?

Originally Posted by TK Burk

Eld. Epley? You never did prove your assertion that the word "GENERATION" in Matthew 24:34 is “RACE.” Any reason why you did not do this??

To help your memory, the following is where you first claimed this and where I first asked you to explain.…

Elder, you made the assertion that "GENERATION" in Matthew 24:34 means "RACE." AFPs believe it means exactly what it says, "GENERATION." If we are correct, then Jesus was saying that all written in Matthew 24 was to be fulfilled during His generation. If you cannot prove your argument that "GENERATION" means "RACE," then you also would have to agree that Matthew 24 was fulfilled in AD70.

Eld. Epley, can you prove that "RACE" is the proper meaning of "GENERATION" in that verse? If not, please do the honest thing and admit your error.

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by TK Burk

My dear Brother Benincasa, thank you for saving me both time and effort tonight. This is an excellent response! I hope Jason carefully reads it and takes it into account....

I would like to request to admins to add POM-POMS smileys, especially for you FP's. You guys hands are probably swollen from patting each other on the back all of the time.

Anyway, I posted my final (lengthy) response to AFP in the debate tonight. He hasn't posted His, I assume He will do so tommorrow, we had agreed to post on Friday evening.

It is past midnight, so I am going to bed soon. I will answer Bro. Benicasa's post sometime soon (brother please don't get offende like the last time I posted I was too tired to delve into eschatology).

I have a birthday cookout tomorrow evening, a church cookout on Sunday, and a personal vacation day (and cookout) on Monday, (that's how we do things in Texas) but will be posting on AFF in passing.

God bless you bretheren (may your eyes be opened as Paul's were)
Good night

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Jason

I would like to request to admins to add POM-POMS smileys, especially for you FP's. You guys hands are probably swollen from patting each other on the back all of the time.

Anyway, I posted my final (lengthy) response to AFP in the debate tonight. He hasn't posted His, I assume He will do so tommorrow, we had agreed to post on Friday evening.

It is past midnight, so I am going to bed soon. I will answer Bro. Benicasa's post sometime soon (brother please don't get offende like the last time I posted I was too tired to delve into eschatology).

I have a birthday cookout tomorrow evening, a church cookout on Sunday, and a personal vacation day (and cookout) on Monday, (that's how we do things in Texas) but will be posting on AFF in passing.

God bless you bretheren (may your eyes be opened as Paul's were)
Good night

Jason I congradulate you on your last post it was totally wonderful. You buried them in the Word of God.
Concerning your last statement about Paul in this post. Paul never did believe that foolishness.

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

Jason I congradulate you on your last post it was totally wonderful. You buried them in the Word of God.
Concerning your last statement about Paul in this post. Paul never did believe that foolishness.

Thank you elder.
The comment on Paul was just a general "He saw the light comment". FP's should see the light. Certainly no one would be so foolish as to think Paul believed in the doctrine these men espouse.......then again, I've seen some outrageous hermenutics from some fellows.

Thanks for pointing that out so I could clarify.