You Be The Judge: Afp1996 vs Jason

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

Are you just trying to personally insult me?

Eld. Epley, you are the one doing the insulting. You call what we believe things like "foolishness" and compare men like Bro. Benincasa to athiests and agnostics. So Elder, you are the one pushing the envelope on this...

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

I NEVER said there were no immersions in the OT all baptisms are immersions but all immersions are NOT baptisms.

(And all the students of the Bible begin to laugh )

Eld. Epley, again, baptism means IMMERSION. Therefore your statement makes no sense whatsoever. This idea of yours has no Bible and has no evidence in the original language. This is why you made the following blunders:

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.

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

There are ceremonial washings in the OT there are NO baptisms in the OT.

Since "baptism" means "immersion" you certainly did say that there were no "immersions" in the OT. You really need to read you're own posts sometime.

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

However I did answer you and my answer stands.

No you did not. Please stop the storytelling. I am embarassed for you. If you did, then please show where.

Also, where did you ever prove that "GENERATION" in Matthew 24:34 means "RACE" as you claimed? You keep saying you proved that but you will not show where.

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

If someone I taught goes into this heresy I am no better than Paul some of his converts also believed the resurrection was past.

Elder, you are showing the boundaries of your honesty again. How many times has Hymenaeus and Philetust been explained to you ? Elder, you know that we do NOT believe as they did. YOU KNOW IT!! So, please, try to be honest in both your arguments and in your accusations.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by TK Burk

Eld. Epley, you are the one doing the insulting. You call what we believe things like "foolishness" and compare men like Bro. Benincasa to athiests and agnostics. So Elder, you are the one pushing the envelope on this...



(And all the students of the Bible begin to laugh )

Eld. Epley, again, baptism means IMMERSION. Therefore your statement makes no sense whatsoever. This idea of yours has no Bible and has no evidence in the original language. This is why you made the following blunders:





Since "baptism" means "immersion" you certainly did say that there were no "immersions" in the OT. You really need to read you're own posts sometime.



No you did not. Please stop the storytelling. I am embarassed for you. If you did, then please show where.

Also, where did you ever prove that "GENERATION" in Matthew 24:34 means "RACE" as you claimed? You keep saying you proved that but you will not show where.



Elder, you are showing the boundaries of your honesty again. How many times has Hymenaeus and Philetust been explained to you ? Elder, you know that we do NOT believe as they did. YOU KNOW IT!! So, please, try to be honest in both your arguments and in your accusations.

You say I do not answer then post my answers.
ALL baptisms are immersions but all immersions are NOT baptisms.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

You say I do not answer then post my answers.
ALL baptisms are immersions but all immersions are NOT baptisms.

Funny Elder, but Elder Burk also agrees with the above. He never said that jumping in a swimming hole was baptism.

Where did you prove that Matthew 24's generation meant a race of people?

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

You say I do not answer then post my answers.

Where did either of these equate out to an answer? The first was your original statement. The second was you repeating your original statement. Is that what you call an answer?? Wow....

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

ALL baptisms are immersions but all immersions are NOT baptisms.

Elder, you are trying that old Epley shuffle again, aren't you? Elder, "baptism" means "immersion." Please, look it up for yourself. You are only hurting yourself when you post stuff like this....

[Jason B]

A question for FP's:

Does "Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth." or " in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as [they do] also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction."

You guys want every one to see the "light" of your doctrine, but the fruit it produces are insults, arrogance, and bitterness. While I don't agree with some of Bro. Blume's interpretaion, He presents things in a manner by which full preterists would do well to take notes on.

Brother Benicasa, I have answered your questions sir. I give scripture, and why I believe it a certain way. When it comes down to it, you are giving nothing except how you BELIEVE something to be. Really all doctrines are based on what one BELIEVES, so why are you continually harping on what I believe the scriptures to teach?
I read your testimony on AFF of how you came to full preterism, it seems like you were not well versed in what you believed in the first place, perhaps that is why you are a die hard now. I give you reasons why I believe what I believe, I don't know if you are really having that hard a time putting it together, or if you simply don't try to. I'm not asking you to agree, but do you really not understand my posistion yet?


Your viewpoint is not much of an alternative. If I were to change my view of eschatology, it would have to be to a posistion that can answer questions. Which full preterism clearly cannot do.

Bro. Burk, to save all kinds of discussion off internet forums, and try to use it against someones former pastor, just to win them to your error seems awfully shady, and certainly not Christ like.

Both of you men are much better people and Christians than what you give on. Every now and then this discussion gets off track, and needs to be set straight.

Gentlemen, please focus on the issue, which is your proof that ALL prophecy has been fulfilled. Are there only 3 chapters in FP escahtology? If needed to cause the discussion to go on, I will concede those chapters for now. Do you have any thing else to base your BELIEF that Jesus has already returned? How about explaining some things from the book of Revelation, like the Eurphrates rived drying up and a 200 million man army, a false prophet calling fire down from heaven, and a mark of the beast. And how Satan is bound, and we are all living gloriously in the millenial reign of Jesus Christ right now, or why the Bible tells us there will be no war on this earth-when in fact that has never been, and doesn't look to ever be the case? There are plenty more explanations needed if you guys are going to want legitimacy.

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Jason

A question for FP's:

Does "Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth." or " in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as [they do] also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction."

You guys want every one to see the "light" of your doctrine, but the fruit it produces are insults, arrogance, and bitterness. While I don't agree with some of Bro. Blume's interpretaion, He presents things in a manner by which full preterists would do well to take notes on.

Brother Benicasa, I have answered your questions sir. I give scripture, and why I believe it a certain way. When it comes down to it, you are giving nothing except how you BELIEVE something to be. Really all doctrines are based on what one BELIEVES, so why are you continually harping on what I believe the scriptures to teach?
I read your testimony on AFF of how you came to full preterism, it seems like you were not well versed in what you believed in the first place, perhaps that is why you are a die hard now. I give you reasons why I believe what I believe, I don't know if you are really having that hard a time putting it together, or if you simply don't try to. I'm not asking you to agree, but do you really not understand my posistion yet?


Your viewpoint is not much of an alternative. If I were to change my view of eschatology, it would have to be to a posistion that can answer questions. Which full preterism clearly cannot do.

Bro. Burk, to save all kinds of discussion off internet forums, and try to use it against someones former pastor, just to win them to your error seems awfully shady, and certainly not Christ like.

Both of you men are much better people and Christians than what you give on. Every now and then this discussion gets off track, and needs to be set straight.

Gentlemen, please focus on the issue, which is your proof that ALL prophecy has been fulfilled. Are there only 3 chapters in FP escahtology? If needed to cause the discussion to go on, I will concede those chapters for now. Do you have any thing else to base your BELIEF that Jesus has already returned? How about explaining some things from the book of Revelation, like the Eurphrates rived drying up and a 200 million man army, a false prophet calling fire down from heaven, and a mark of the beast. And how Satan is bound, and we are all living gloriously in the millenial reign of Jesus Christ right now, or why the Bible tells us there will be no war on this earth-when in fact that has never been, and doesn't look to ever be the case? There are plenty more explanations needed if you guys are going to want legitimacy.

Drying up the Euphrates? It looks like what you believe is drying up.

Brother Jason, you angry little man, how about explaining how your future temple will be "THE" HOLY PLACE?

Good people of the free thinking world, please look and see how our dear Brother Jason runs like a scalded ape when he is called on to EXPLAIN his idea of the gaps and his temple?

Brother Jason gave us Matthew 24:15 as his gap of a future event that would happen thousands of years after Jesus said it. Let's examine what Jesus said:


Mat 24:15

"When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet, STAND IN THE HOLY PLACE, (whoso readeth, let him understand: )"

Notice, Jesus didn't say, some temple, a temple, or the rebuilt temple, but Jesus said THE HOLY PLACE. Emphasis on "THE."

Brother Jason, presented his thesis and yet, did it without scriptural backing on how the verse of Matthew 24:15 fits with Mark 13, and Luke 21.
Brother Jason also failed to produce any Biblical reason why a future temple being built by modern day Jews will be "THE" HOLY PLACE. I offered Brother Jason, Ezra, and Nehemiah, and that the temple must be built by individuals who can produce the same lineage as the Jews did in 516 B.C.

Brother Jason, it is clear as crystal that you are refusing to produce something you are incapable of producing.

Brother Jason, you play the same hand over and over, and use the same attack. You play Brother Burk and I against Brother Blume, and try to play to ego. Brother Jason, your smoke screening, buddy. Try to strengthen your arguments, and prove your unexplainable doctrine of a restored Israel and an animal sacrificing temple. Please give it another try and show us the gaps in Mark 13, and Luke 21, and how they fit with your rebuilt temple.

Prove how Jesus goes from talking of the temple in the first century to one in some far off future time? I'm sorry but we all don't have available peep stones to determine which temple is which.

Instead of getting upset over your lack of study concerning eschatology and being in a learning curve, admit that you just don't know.

Sorry, but you need to apologize.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Jason

Bro. Burk, to save all kinds of discussion off internet forums, and try to use it against someones former pastor, just to win them to your error seems awfully shady, and certainly not Christ like.

Jason, how many times have you seen Eld. Epley claim he has asked me things that I've never answered, or seen him make accusations that I said he's made before? How many times did I refer to posts he made years before that answered him? That is why I save what I do. When I say I can show him that I answered him already on this, I can prove it. And if you haven't noticed, such information often comes in handy.

Jason, many of your posts show that you do not have a full understanding of how these things work. The above is one such case. I've been involved in the ministry for over 22 years. Many of those was working with ministries that dealt specifically with eschatology. I do what I do because I learned it from experience. Jason, I appreciate your right to your opinion, but in this case you are seeing it completly in the wrong light....

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by TK Burk

Jason, how many times have you seen Eld. Epley claim he has asked me things that I've never answered, or seen him make accusations that I said he's made before? How many times did I refer to posts he made years before that answered him? That is why I save what I do. When I say I can show him that I answered him already on this, I can prove it. And if you haven't noticed, such information often comes in handy.

Jason, many of your posts show that you do not have a full understanding of how these things work. The above is one such case. I've been involved in the ministry for over 22 years. Many of those was working with ministries that dealt specifically with eschatology. I do what I do because I learned it from experience. Jason, I appreciate your right to your opinion, but in this case you are seeing it completly in the wrong light....

Elder Burk, it has absolutely nothing to do with wether Brother Jason sees these issues correctly. If you and I were futurists he would be lifting us high on his shoulders and prading us down the aisle. He has become what he dislikes. He claims to be misunderstood when he himself once presented an unpopular doctrine to another Brother? Yet, he displays all the ear marks of a agenda motivated individual who can only see what he himself holds to be true. Telling him how many years you been in the ministry, and time with Irving Baxter Jr is wasting your breath. Brother Jason could give a care what you or anyone else who disagrees with him believes.

When he finally blurted out where his gap was, his dice ended up on Matthew 24:15. When I asked to explain, he offered us a rebuilt temple. When asked to prove the temple was the same one spoken by Jesus Christ to be THE HOLY PLACE, Brother Jason, jumped down the rabbit hole, and try to lead everyone away from the fact that he doesn't know his doctrine well enough to explain it with a Bible. Can he ask questions? But of course, he loves to be the one firing the questions. Yet, when our dear Brother is the one in the cat seat, he tends to weave and wander, making the questioner to be the bad guy. Brother Jason, will one day have his turn at the wheel. He will not have a computer screen between him and the individual of who Brother Jason is trying to discredit. It will be face to face, and in a world where answers cannot be dodged with flights of fancy, and accusations of mistreatment.

Brother Jason, all you need to do is wake up and apologize.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

[Steve Epley]

Elder Burk we have had head buttings for years and discussed this subject. I have enjoyed it but since you have decided to make this personal I have no more to say to you. I have attacked your stance-arguments-positions and yes been pointed. However YOU have decided to make it personal so it is over between us.
I will discuss this subject with others but not with you.
I will allow the readers to judge whether I have answered you or not.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

Elder Epley are you saying that I'm equaled to an Atheist and an Agnostic?

I want you to ask Jesus Christ before you answer.

I was over the line. I simply meant in looking for the return of Christ but it was over the line. I apologize.