Partial Preterism Tolerable?

[mfblume]

Hi all,

As most know, who know me, I am an advocate of partial preterism. I have this on my website prophecy page, whcih sums up my thoughts:


Is there a physical resurrection coming? YES!

Is there a catching away coming? YES!

Did Jesus Christ resurrect in a physical Body? YES!

Must we watch and pray daily that we may be ready when He catches His Church away? YES!

Was Matthew 24 fulfilled? YES!

Is the resurrection past? NO!

---

My poll is based upon an upcoming decision the UPCI will soon make about this issue.

Personally, I do not think partial preterism should be an issue that divides fellowship in our organization. It's not a heaven or hell issue. Some think otherwise. I believe in toleration for it by those who disagree with it, since we all believe Jesus is physically coming again in "the resurrection" for the church, and that our bodies will be physically changed like unto His own glorious body, anyway. And those are the main issues in prophecy.

You may disagree with my view, or not, but I just wanted your opinion as to whether or not partial preterism, (not full preterism) should be tolerated amongst the UPCI. Full preterism is another issue altogether, and another poll can be made about that issue by someone who perhaps proposes it. :)

Let me note that you may not agree with anybody believing partial preterism, but this is not from that sort of standpoint. It is from the standpoint that if the UPCI tolerates pre mid or post trib rapture, then would they be consistent in tolerating partial preterism, or not. And lastly, if you vote no then that implies partial preterists are lost without God.

[John Atkinson]

Yes, Partial Preterism is tolerable and should not be a barrier for fellowship. Full preterism is a different story. I believe that full preterism falls in the category of the error of Hymaneaus and Philetus.

My hopes and expetations is that Partial pretersists will not be disbarred from fellowship with the UPCI, but if you are, we still love you and know that our fellowship is in Christ, not inwhos card is in our pocket.

If the UPC is going to pull somebody's coat tail, it needs to be these people with their crazy predictions that never happen. There is way more biblical truth in partial preterism than there is in nutty imaginings.

[jbenjesus]

Bro. Mike, please keep us posted on this issue within the UPC, as much as you can when things happen.

Tell us when this will take place and where, if you can.

Lastly, a question:

If the UPC decides to say this pP is heresy and will not accept its preaching among its "ranks", what will you do?

Will you stay within the UPC or have you reserved your decision till you find out the outcome?

BTW, I feel as John does. Your still my brother in Christ and you have a family in Miami, Fl.

[truemessianic]

As a former assaulter of partial preterism, I now know that the Bible is so clear on certain issues. Is Bible prophecy an issue of division of the believers? No. Should this be a point of fellowship? Absolutely not!
JMHO

[Webmaster]

Bro. Blume,

I do believe that partial preterism is tolerable. I am part of an organization known as the ABI who believes according to it's bylaws in futurism, but our Gen. Secretary (Bro. Moon) is a partial preterist. It has caused no division whatsoever, and we have good fellowship and harmony in our ranks. There are certainly more serious issues to worry about in this hour of time in the Apostolic movement. A time when some are even reconsidering our stand on the oneness of God. I don't know about you, but I still like to think Ephesians 4:5 is still in the Bible!

Bro. Flemming

[Kerux]

Is there a physical resurrection coming? YES!

Is there a catching away coming? YES!

Did Jesus Christ resurrect in a physical Body? YES!

Must we watch and pray daily that we may be ready when He catches His Church away? YES!

Was Matthew 24 fulfilled? NO!

Is the resurrection past? NO!

[O2blikehim]

I consider myself a partial preterist, mostly due to MFBlumes infuence and also some other sources. Pastor smith will be defending partial preterism at the symposium in St Louis next week. The futerist veiw will be presented/defended by Dr. David Norris. I will be there to listen.

[mfblume]

Kerux,

While the poll goes forward, what do you say about this:

In Matthew 24, Jesus said the buildings of the temple would be thrown down.

Then the disciples ask him questions that Luke clarifies for us to indicate they ALL dealt with that event and its timing. Compare Matthew 24 and Luke 21:

Mat 24:1-3 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to [him] for to shew him the buildings of the temple. (2) And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down. (3) And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what [shall be] the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

Notice that it APPEARS as though the last two questions are not speaking about the time when the stones of the temple will be thrown down. However, Luke shows us these questions in fact DID speak about that same event.

Luk 21:5-7 And as some spake of the temple, how it was adorned with goodly stones and gifts, he said, (6) [As for] these things which ye behold, the days will come, in the which there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down. (7) And they asked him, saying, Master, but when shall these things be? and what sign [will there be] when these things shall come to pass?

Notice the reference to THESE THINGS in both Matthew 24 and Luke 21.

So....

This means nothing in Jesus conversation dealt with anything outside of that issue of the time of the temple destruction. Everything in that conversation, in answer to the disciples' questions, dealt with the time of the temple destruction.

What say ye to this?

[ddc101]

Bro.Blume,
I sure hope it does not come to intolerance.lv sis.c

[John Atkinson]

Whether yeah or nay, please don't let the intolerance manifest itself here.

We (Apostolic Network Ministries) have been flamed and falsely accused and maligned over this.

I gotta add, we aren't ParPre's ot Futureist.

But as admin I will not tolerate strife here over this issue.

So everybody continue to play nice.....

[apostle]

Well the way I feel is the futurist, dispensationalists, preterists.
Just an other falsism.

I do not believe in a catching away, or a city beyond the blue, or streets of gold, or fly away beyond the clouds, and no roll called up yonder, or I'm going up yonder, or a uncloudy day, and so on.

If there is a scripture for any of the above, show me.

It's not my job to worry about, that's Johns job.

I believe Jesus is with me now, and there is no other Jesus.
I don't know what you all are waiting for, Im waiting to see the face of him that has been protecting me.

We see through a glass darkly, without this flesh I hope to see clearly.

But anyway, still love you bro.

In Jesus name

[Faithchild]

As I readily confess, prophecy just ain't my bag. However I don't believe that holding to one particular view should be a litmus test for fellowship. Many godly men of God in the UPCI believe in the historical view (Halley's Handbook) which Bro. Blume tells me is not quite partial preterism. I don't think it will come to that because (nothing personal) NO ONE will really know who is right until Jesus comes! But I DO prophecy that a Gen. Conference debate will be interesting.

[witness4jesus]

Partial preterism itself has a few good things, but the thing
that disturbs me are some of the preterist sites themselves.

For one, both apostolics and trinitarians write on those sites.
It bothers me that One God people would feel that they can glean truth from those in false doctrine. Our fellowship is not with
the trinity.

My other concern is that I see on those sites talk of "PRETERIST CHURCHES" as if preterism is the foundation of truth. Also, PRETERIST testimonies.

sis pam

[Oldpreach]

1. Full agreement here with Bro. Blume
2. I think Bro. Blume is with ALJC not UPC.
3. Apostle :"I do not believe in a catching away, or a city beyond the blue, or streets of gold, or fly away beyond the clouds, and no roll called up yonder, or I'm going up yonder, or a uncloudy day, and so on."

He that is an heretic after the first and second admonition , reject....

[Webmaster]

Bro. Blume is UPCI according to this directory I am looking at.

[mfblume]

I am indeed UPCI.

However, Apostle and Witness, do you think it should be tolerated, although you disagree with it?

[truemessianic]

Originally posted by apostle
Well the way I feel is the futurist, dispensationalists, preterists.
Just an other falsism.

I do not believe in a catching away, or a city beyond the blue, or streets of gold, or fly away beyond the clouds, and no roll called up yonder, or I'm going up yonder, or a uncloudy day, and so on.

If there is a scripture for any of the above, show me.

It's not my job to worry about, that's Johns job.

I believe Jesus is with me now, and there is no other Jesus.
I don't know what you all are waiting for, Im waiting to see the face of him that has been protecting me.

We see through a glass darkly, without this flesh I hope to see clearly.

But anyway, still love you bro.

In Jesus name

Apostle,
So, what happens when we die, according to you? I am not being spiteful, but according to you, we have no future place with Christ. From what I read, you are saying that death is it. Is this so? If not, please enlighten me.

[seguidordejesus]

I was wondering that myself, truemessianic. I was laying in bed last night, and I told myself that that was the first thing I was going to do, is ask that same question. If this life is it...what purpose is there in Acts 2:38? What exactly would we be getting saved from anyway? Thanks for your response, apostle.

[mfblume]

Truemessianic,

We went round and round the merry-go-round aboutApsotle's belief in that issue, and you can check it out in GATHERED UNTO JESUS (http://www.goodnewscafe.net/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=223)
and PRETERISM (http://www.goodnewscafe.net/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=171)

[mfblume]

Jbenjesus,

Put it this way. I am not going to stop preaching and believing partial preterism. And I will not cause division over it. If its not tolerated, then I guess I will have been pushed out.

[Sandy]

Rm. 6:
16. Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?

While I agree what you believe is not an issue of salvation. But it could be an issue of blatant disobedience to the Lord if He desired for you to preach this, and you did not do so because you could not, ending up obeying man over God because of their rule.

[apostle]

truemessianic
I would be happy to take it up on an other post.

Bro. Blume.
I'm not sure. I would have to feel that there needs to be lines drawn. I'm not UPCI, nor would I ever want to be.
They hold onto to many trinity teaching, even have had them teach behind a apostolic pulpit, And even seen on TBN t.v. as one of them like brothers. Why?
what fellowship have light with darkness?
the bible is my dividing line, not what UPCI say.

Bro. I believe the UPCI and its rapture teaching might be a stumbling block for you. If they will not except partial preterism, that would surprise me because thier church don't preach the same things. pre, mid, post, pan. They don't even know the truth.

UPCI will no way allow what comes out of my mouth in there churches. I have seen very bad behaviour from the UPC and other pentecostles over the rapture issue.
I have chosen to tell the truth no matter what.

Now has far as I'm concerned, I would eat and drink with you almost any time. You only have about 4 yrs, coming out from the futuer great tribuilation teachings. There is so much more in the word of God that we can learn if we stick to what we should teach. (What happened at Jerusaem) The gospel.

The UPC and other organizations say as long as you speak in tonges and are baptized in Jesus name and believe rapture, your in the truth. I dissagree.

I believe If someone believes a lie, it's a lie.
Trinity teaching do not belong in apostolic churches.
The UPC as far as I'm concerned, leans more toward trinity then one God.

The prophets and teachers in the bible understood prophesy and saying the same thing.
They all understood the coming of the Lord. and the great day of God. Why can't the UPC and other apostolic groups?

I do not think it is my concern how UPCI deals with Preterists.
It should not be yours either.
The bible is what we hold on to not the UPCI manual and by-laws.
The UPC is not what I want to please. I want to please God.

I would hope you will not bend to presure from them.
Are you lead by the Holy Ghost, or the UPC?

Are you really concerned what UPCI does? And the way they handle this issue?

I think your a stong man, because God would not have given you as much as you have gotten if you are weak.

In Jesus name

[Sandy]

Bro. Blume,

In reading my post over again, I did not mean to suggest that you was not choosing the right way to go, but was meant to say I agree with your choice for the reasons I gave there.

Apostle, do you believe that when someone is anointed as such that they are then called to apostle all others? I know this is off the subject somewhat, but just curious as to what you believe about this.

[ddc101]

I think the bashing UPC spirit ought to come to a screaching halt.
For one thing those who are baptised in Jesus Name and filled with the Holy Ghost are our brothers and sisters and it is displeasing to God.The UPCI is just a vehicle to help the gospel get out and fellowship for ministers.As are other oneness organizations.Disrespect to any minister hurts everyone concerned.lv sis.c

[Kerux]

Mike,
To that I say, exactly what was the "abomination of desolation, spoken of by Dan`-iel the prophet," How was it also fulfilled? for Jesus also spoke of it.

The Word like Jesus has a duality to it, there is a literal meaning and a spiriial meaning, sometimes I think people get too caught up in the literal, and forget the spirit.

[Kerux]

Hmm, the latter partion of my post sounded like i was trying to make an insinuation, but I honestly didnt mean it that way, please dont take offense by that comment, It was just a comment "thrown in for free" as our assistant pastor some times says.

[Faithchild]

Yep! Micheal F. Blume is one of ours and I'm proud of it!

Apostle, I'm having problems with your blanket statements condemning the association of ministers that I'm a part of. "They don't even know the truth." If you want to discuss things, do so. But don't just indict without specificity. In one of your statements, "Trinity teaching doesn't belong in apostolic churches."(or something like that!). If you mean the teaching of the Trinity, I agree. If you mean teaching FROM Trinitarians, I disagree. If God doesn't give relevation to people who are in error, how does ANYONE come to the truth? You are saved because Truth penetrated your own level of revelation at some time.

Does your personal library reflect your stand against "Trinity teaching" that you arbitrarily demand of all Apostolic churches? Do you use a translation of the Bible NOT translated by Trinitarians? I believe your statement is foolish, prideful, mean-spirited, and inherently inconsistent.:mad:

[jbenjesus]

Originally posted by Faithchild
I believe your statement is foolish, prideful, mean-spirited, and inherently inconsistent.:mad: Many feel the same way about a lot of his thrown out statements in a lot of the threads.

Your not alone, my brother.

[Faithchild]

Apostle . . .where are you?

[mfblume]

Kerux,

Once again we must compare scripture with scripture. Watch this:

Whatever the abomination of desolation is, it occurred in 67 AD or so.

Mat 24:15-16 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:) (16) Then let them which be in Judaea flee into the mountains:

Comapred with:

Luk 21:20-21 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh. (21) Then let them which are in Judaea flee to the mountains; and let them which are in the midst of it depart out; and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.

Since the three questions in Matthew 24:3 are indeed synonymous, having to do with the 70 AD destruction, according to Luke 21:7, and since the same indication for the Judaeans to flee to the mountains is noted in both Gospels, while Luke tells them the abomination of desolation was nigh when they saw the city encompassed with armies, then it had something to do with Roman armies. Did you know that the Roman standards were idols? And they planted those standards in the temple. That is an abomination. And furthermore, a fanatic killed the high priest and stood in the holiest of holies claiming to be God's man for the hour.

[witness4jesus]

For the record, full preterism is not the error of Hymenaues and Philetus. Their error was in saying that the resurrection was past, over, done, which would leave no hope. It would be saying, the door to the ark is shut.

Full preterism does not do that.

sis pam

[mfblume]

Although I disagree with full preterism, I must also say that Paul's words about Hymenaeus and Philetus were spoken before 70 AD, and the full prets will nail a person with that.

[In His Service]

Bro. Blume,
I wonder if you might have the time to tell us what parts of Revelation that you feel are past and which still lie ahead.

Thanks
Bro. timothy

[apostle]

I put this on an other post.

Revelation is the writting of the end of Jerusalam.

Mat 23:31 Wherefore ye be witnesses unto yourselves, that ye are the children of them which killed the prophets.
Mat 23:32 Fill ye up then the measure of your fathers.
Mat 23:33 [Ye] serpents, [ye] generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell?
Mat 23:34 Wherefore, behold, I send unto you prophets, and wise men, and scribes: and [some] of them ye shall kill and crucify; and [some] of them shall ye scourge in your synagogues, and persecute [them] from city to city:
Mat 23:35 That upon you may come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel unto the blood of Zacharias son of Barachias, whom ye slew between the temple and the altar.
Mat 23:36 Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon THIS GENERATION.
Mat 23:37 O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, [thou] that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under [her] wings, and ye would not!
Mat 23:38 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.

Mat 24:34 Verily I say unto you, THIS GENERATION shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

Mar 13:29 So ye in like manner, when ye shall see these things come to pass, know that it is nigh, [even] at the doors.
Mar 13:30 Verily I say unto you, that THIS GENERATION shall not pass, till all these things be done.

Luk 21:32 Verily I say unto you, THIS GENERATION shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.

WOW! what generation is this?
Also what about?

Dan 8:26 And the vision of the evening and the morning which was told [is] true: wherefore shut thou up the vision; for it [shall be] for MANY DAYS.

Dan 10:14 Now I am come to make thee understand what shall befall thy people in the latter days: for yet the vision [is] for [MANY] DAYS.

In Daniel the words many days are used.

Luk 21:31 So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass, know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh AT HAND.
Luk 21:32 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.

1Pe 4:4 Wherein they think it strange that ye run not with [them] to the same excess of riot, speaking evil of [you]:
1Pe 4:5 Who shall give account to him that is ready to judge the quick and the dead.
1Pe 4:6 For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.
1Pe 4:7 But the end of all things is AT HAND: be ye therefore sober, and watch unto prayer.

Rev 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified [it] by his angel unto his servant John:

Rev 1:3 Blessed [is] he that readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep those things which are written therein: for the time [is] AT HAND.

Rev 22:10 And he saith unto me, Seal not the sayings of the prophecy of this book: for the time is AT HAND.

Now Jesus said AT HAND and so did Peter, and John.

So the AT HAND is speaking of the Jerusalem, and so is the words MANY DAYS spoken by Daniel.

So what is the differance of the words MANY DAYS and AT HAND?
OR SHORTLY COME TO PASS?

All of Revelation was at hand when it was written

In Jesus name

[apostle]

Oh yeah, one more thing.
I'm not a preterist.

I believe Jesus first came born of a woman, and then came a second time born of the grave.
Then Jesus appeared on the day of pentecost with ALL POWER!

There was war and Jesus won.

And if any do as Jerusalam did, they will get the same result!
Who will be next?

In Jesus name

[In His Service]

Bro. Blume,
Did Jesus say that the buildings of the temple would be thrown down, or that not one stone would be left standing? I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down. Would that not mean that not a single stone would be left to identify the temple buildings by. No foundational walls or such?

29. Immediately after the tribulation of those days shall the sun be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars shall fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken:
30. And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

How also do you reconcile the above scriptures that speak of the Jesus coming in the clouds of heaven? If you believe that all of Matthew 24 was fulfilled in 70AD then you would have to believe that Christ has already returned would you not?

Why also do you date the writings of Revelations after the fall of Jerusalem in 70 AD?

Thanks
Bro. Timothy

[apostle]

The sun was darkened at the cross, and when Jesus raised from the dead there was a great earth quack.


Mat 24:33 So likewise ye, when ye shall see all these things, know that it is near, [even] at the doors.
Mat 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.


Does the words EVEN AT THE DOOR mean over 2000 years?
And what GENERATION does this apply too?

Why do you think the book of Revelation was written after Jerusalem was made wast?

In Jesus name

[apostle]

Luk 21:5 And as some spake of the temple, how it was adorned with goodly stones and gifts, he said,
Luk 21:6 [As for] these things which ye behold, the days will come, in the which there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

This is about the wealth of the temple.
Where is the goody stones and gifts? There is not one upon an other.
Where is the vail, the ark, candle stick, brazen alter, laver, table of show bread that Lazarus begged crumbs from? where are the trumpets?
I know.

Who are the armies that encamped around the temple to make it desolate? I know.

In Jesus name

[witness4jesus]

The temple was made desolate. The temple can never be rebuilt, because the things that made the temple are not the outer things, but the inward. The things that made the temple operational, for worship and sacrifice. Apostle made that point clear.

Hebrews makes it clear that once the Holy Ghost was poured out, the temple was in effect, finished, done for. Heb 9:8 The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:
Heb 9:9 Which [was] a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;
Heb 9:10 [Which stood] only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed [on them] until the time of reformation.
Heb 9:11 But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building;

Interpreting Matthew 24 with a view toward the future would make no sense to the apostles. Interpreting with a view of fleeing a destroyed Jerusalem gives it more sense biblically and topically for that generation. Jesus' focus was on what was coming to pass for Israel, and the making of a new covenant.

As to the supernatural signs of sun, moon and stars, we have to understand that these could be both natural as well as figurative. The sun, the moon and the stars had a biblical meaning: reference Joseph's dream.

But we do know the sun was darkened at Calvary, that there were many supernatural signs in those days:earthquake, the rocks rent, the veils rent, the tomb was opened, the graves were opened....

Peter, also, at Pentecost interpreted those signs as being fulfilled, for he mentioned them along with the sign of the Holy Ghost being poured out. Reading Acts chapter 2, you can see that he saw that as a fulfillment of Joel's prophecy. Why else would he have mentioned those signs at that time?????

sis pam

[BroDane]

I see it as it is: Rev 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ

In Him we Live and Move....

[Jerry Moon]

Being Preterist myself, I believe that it should be tolorated. If they don't want to tolorate it, I feel that they should pick a single stand on futurism also... : )

[apostle]

BroDane
your right. That is what the book says.

Also the picture of your children may carry the message of truth.

[mfblume]

Bro Tim,

Hooboy! There is a lot I already shared on this discussion board covering ALL these issues, before you ever came onboard.

Folks, let Tim and I discuss this, as you all heard this before.

But I will say that partial preterism, in my opinion, is more apostolic than apostolic!

On the day of Pentecost, Peter told the Jews who crucified the Lord to repent. God was offering His best to the worst! These were the very people of the untoward "generation" Jesus addressed when He said "This generation shall not pass until all these things be fulfilled"! He was speaking about the generation standing before Him in Matthew 24.

Jerusalem was the great whore of Revelation, indicated by Christ's words, themselves in Matt 23:35 compared with Revelation 18:24. Compare also Luke 23:28-30 and Revelation 6:16.

And Peter uses the same words as the Jews, themselves, used, and Jesus used, saying "the promise is for you and your children." "You and your Children" was noted many times by Jesus, synonymous with "this generation", as He spoke about their destruction due to rejecting and crucifying Him!

And Peter cites Joel saying the last days were THEN! Someone once said the last days (plural) meant then, 2000 years ago, and now, 2000 years later! No. It was the same last dqays of the age of Jewish system as Jesus noted in Matthew 24. Its the same "end of the age" of Matthew 24:3 as is rephrased for us in Luke 21:7 when the destruction of the temple would occur.

And the pouring out of God's Spirit in Joel's prophecy all the way to the sun turning black and the moon to blood, spans the day of Pentecost to Jerusalem's holocaust in 70 AD. That wicked GENERATION.

Anyway, I propose all of Matthew 24 was fulfilled. The stones of the temple were specifically of the buildings -- IOW, temple proper.

And coming in the clouds is similar to 2 Samuel 22 where David said he cried to God in his distress, as enemies assaulted him, and God came riding on the wings of the wind with thick clouds as His pavilions (tabernacles). It was a coming in wrath. That same God, Jesus, said He'd come in clouds of wrath in Matthew 24, too.

Revelation is all fulfilled except for the latter part of chapter 19 and the latter part of chapter 20. The great white throne judgment and resurrection is not yet fulfilled, of course.

Jesus came only in wrath in a localized manner only, against Judaea. That is the reason He told the Church in Judaea alone to flee to the mountains when they would see the abomination of desolation, or Jeursalem surrounded by armies, for the great tribulation would come, proving that the great trib was only in Judaea.

Check out my studies on this site, where you can find an FAQ section as well.

http://mikeblume.com/prophecy.htm

Revelation was not written after 70 AD. The ONLY source for this idea that it was, is Irenaeus' quotes cited by later writers. And Irenaeus was so ambiguous that he may only have referred to John, himself, and not the writing of Revelation.

Anyway, Revelation's seven churches were only in existence in the 60's. The duration of the temple destruction is reckoned as 3.5 years in Rev 11:2, and John was told to prophesy to many nations and peoples, which would have been impossible if he had written that in 96... he'd have been too old! :)

[mfblume]

BTW, regarding the poll, I have a feeling that some people are not voting fairly.

What I mean is that everyone has a right to their opinions, but I am saying that from the standpoint of the UPC who already tolerates pre, mid and post trib rapture teachings, if they tolerate those, then should they tolerate partial preterism? You might think they should not, but if you think they should not tolerate either pre, mid or post trib, then you are not considering that they do tolerate those, and your vote is not based upon what they DO tolerate. So if they tolerate those others, should then THEN ALSO tolerate partial pret?

See what I mean?

In other words if you think they should not tolerate post trib or pre trib, etc.., then your vote perhaps may not tolerate partial pret, but that is not a good overview of the whole picture, considering what they DO tolerate already.

[Webmaster]

In a previous post, I made it very clear that I feel partial preterism should be tolerated. I would like to extend that beyond UPC, because I do not belong, but into the entire Apostolic ranks. Here is why:

Bro. Blume has already mentioned that many other differing viewpoints on prophecy are tolerated. Let me add communion to the mix: grape juice, wine, no communion at all, or if taken, no feetwashing, etc.....see what I mean?

On all subjects mentioned, or yet to be thrown in the mix: only ONE viewpoint is truly right. When it comes to a communion service, I have always been and continue to be a "wino" :). However, I have never parted fellowship with a "juicer" :). I have fellowship with those who do not take communion at all, but it has never stopped me from desiring to take communion.
Do I think my positions are right? YES! I reserve categorically the right to be WRONG! I respect those who hold different views because I wish for my views to be respected.

I have had people tell me about subjects that I will not name, "DO NOT GO THERE! They believe such and such doctrine.....soon you will be just like them!" Well, I hope some that have told me that eventually see this post. I am sorry to dissapoint you, but I still believe what I always have, and do not plan on changing now! My relationship with God is not based on what others do, it is simply based on WHO HE is, and who I am in HIM! Are we so weak, that we will change our doctrine just because of someones personality? If we are, the most likely case is, we really did not believe what we said we did anyway.

Bro. Flemming

[truemessianic]

Amen, Bro. Flemming!
We are putting salvation into an area salvation does not need to be brought into. I will fellowship with all sorts of prophecy believers. Do I agree with everything they say? Absolutely not! Does it make me despise them? Nope! Can I fellowship with them? Absolutely! Why? It's all about Jesus!
Now, as for this idea that prophecy is salvational. There is not scripture for such nonsense. As for fellowship, I make the choice of who I do and do not fellowship with. Many Apostolic preachers here in Houston will nto fellowship with me, but I hold it not against them. I can just pray for them.

[mfblume]

By the way, I think the poll should reflect, as well, the idea that if you vote NO, then that means I , for example, am not saved. Saying no should imply the issue is salvational and the teaching is damnable to the soul. (Guess I should have thought more about the manner of introducing the topic before I issued forth the poll.)

[witness4jesus]

Brother Blume:

Saying no does not imply that. I say no because I see, particularly on the partial preterism websites, an attempt
to set a new foundation. Preterist churches. Fellowship
with the unsaved. That to me is a problem.

As to the tolerance of any prophecy school, as in pre, mid, post
pan, I think that is an insult to the apostles, suggesting that
they did not know what to expect. John certainly knew that
those things would shortly come to pass and that the time
was at hand.

sis pam

[mfblume]

Sister, the issue is indeed what I proposed. After all, I proposed the poll!! haha.

I suspected you and Apostle said NO.

However, you do not think the UPC should tolerate pre mid or post either, but it is a fact that they do. So I am asking from the standpoint of that kind of tolerance, should they tolerate part pret?

[apostle]

Bro.
To the defence of them that voted NO.

1Co 1:10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and [that] there be no divisions among you; but [that] ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

Never take offence over what other think or believe.
But on the other hand, if everyone say differant things or every thing said is OK. Then that is a snare.

And my feeling is this!
Every word in the bible is salvational. Every word of God is witten in truth.
No man should ever believe that a lie is exceptible or OK! Or not a salvational issue.

When God speaks. He means what he says.
I am sick and tired of these organizations taking the word of God lightly!

Why is there a ministry if it's ok to teach a, lie Like futureism and preterisim?

The ministy is for the perfecting of the saints. I do not believe excepting a lie falls under the definition of perfecting.

Eph 4:11 And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers;
Eph 4:12 For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
Eph 4:13 Till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ:

Peter gave warning concerning fables about the coming of the Lord. Right?

2Pe 1:16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the POWER and COMING of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.
2Pe 1:17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

There is many lies, but only one truth.
Please do not ever take the truth lightly. The futurist and trinity are very close in doctrine. How can any believe like a trinity and still say the trinity is not saved?

I don't judge anyone. I just preach what the book says.

in Jesus name

[mfblume]

Apostle, that is not at all the point. If UPC tolerates pre mid and post then on THAT BASIS I am asking if they should tolerate partial pret.

Another poll can be made in reference to whether they shoudl tolerate pre mid and post as well as partial pret. But THIS poll was not asking that.

In other words, if you voted NO due to thinking they should not tolerate pre mid or pst either, then your vote does not count.

Love you, bro. But you missed my point.

[apostle]

my question is,
Why do you tolerat the UPC teaching on futurism?

I believe they should have fellowship with the trinity, and say as long as they believe a few things that is exceptible to them.

I say to you.
Why don't you take up the truth, and don't worry about what others think of it.

The bible does not support futurism at all. They are blind.
What fellowship have light with darkness?

Love you Bro.
in Jesus name

[mfblume]

Brother, I do not think that is an issue of fellowship or not. I believe we all miss something somewhere in our doctrine. But those who agree with Acts 2:38,. Oneness, and holy living should be able to fellowship regardless of when they think the resurrection occurs.

By the way I do not worry about what others think of the truth I believe and propose and preach.

That is why I will stand whether I am ousted for it or not. :) And by God's help I will nto have a bad attitude about it with those who disagree with me, but get along, anyway.

[jbenjesus]

Not surprising, huh, Mike?

[apostle]

Good Bro.
I must go for awhile.
Remember that every word of matt 24 is fulfilled
And Jesus did come on the day of Pentecost.

Talk to you later

[mfblume]

I agree there, brother Apostle.

[stmatthew]

Apostle,

Do you have all knowledge, or is there things you are growing in to?? You stated, if I am not mistaken, that you once believed different concerning rapture. Were you lost when you believed that??

just a few questions :)

[apforthelord]

Lol round and round we go. Words being lost in the wind. heaven being crushed like a snail on the way side......

[witness4jesus]

Brother Blume:

What you are saying does not make sense to me.
I guess I think that the apostles knew what to
expect with regard to the resurrection. I dont buy
into the fact that we should be able to believe anything
about the "endtime". That is belittling the truth. And
it keeps us from examining the truth. I was told in my
former church that my questions were irrelevant because
it was not salvational. You see? Making it a non-issue
means, we dont search for truth.

If we are going to tolerate anything, then certainly, it
makes no difference whether partial preterism is
tolerated. But I think you are going about it a little
backwards, Brother, in all respect. You have borne
some heat for believing what you do, and you are
saying, why shouldnt they tolerate this, since they
say they tolerate any prophecy school? From that
light, yes, they should. But from the light that we
should seek truth and NOT just tolerate anything,
then my answer stands as no.

And again, I find it intolerable because of the
fellowship that occurs on their sites, crossing the
line of Jesus Name.

sis pam

[apostle]

stmatthew
Thank God for the ministry. Without it I would be lost.
The ministry is for the perfecting of the saint.

Rapture was preached out of my life using the word of God.
So now I just ask questions like:

(1)Where does the bible say there is two first resurrection?

(2) Where does the bible say there is a city beyond the blue?

(3) Where does the bible say any man has assended beyond the clouds?

(4) Where does the bible say the graves were closed after Jesus opened them?

(5) Where does the bible say there is an other covenent other then Acts 2:38?

(6) Where does the bible say Flesh and bone will come down out of Heaven?

(7) where does the bible say streets of Gold?

(8) Why did Jesus pray that we would not be taken out of the world? John 17:15

(9) How can you be in Christ and in the grave if Jesus is not in the grave?

(10) Where does the bible say plans will fall from the sky because the pilot will disappear?

(11) And cars crashing because the drive is missing?

(12) Why are people teaching a dissappearing trick if the bible says every eye shall see him?

(13) If Jesus is with the church, what other Jesus is there?

(14) Where does the bible say gabriel will sound a trumpet?

(15) Where does the bible say the mark of the beast is a computer chip or tattoo?

(16) Where does the bible say there are two differant last days? When Peter preached and then an other 2000 years later?

(17) Where does the bible say there is "one" antichrist?

(18) Where does the bible the Jews get a differant salvation?

(19) Where does the bible say people can be saved without a preacher? (no church, no preacher)

(20) What are the seven bowl judgments?

I'm sure there is much more the rapture teachers have added to the scriptures.

I do not know everything, but I want to know only truth.

I'm glade a preacher took off the blinders from me.
If any are willingly ignorant, There jugdment is not hard to figure out.

In Jesus name

[Adoniyah]

Brother Blume:

Since I have been gone for a few days, I only just now voted. I have not read the responses above, but I suspect how they go.

As you know, I have discussed this issue with you quite a few months ago as I was quite concerned for your own well being since you are so deeply involved with the pP doctrine.

You also know that I unequivocally believe that it is false doctrine, but I have also expressed tolerance for it and so expressed it in my "yes" vote. It is not a salvation issue in a direct sense, but neither is dispensationalism, which is more false than any that come from Prophetic scripture. If dispensationalism can be tolerated, certaily there should be no problem with pPism.

But, in our dialog some months ago on this forum, I explained, with concern, the concern that I felt seeing the storm cloud forming away off in the great distance. Few could see it. I could see it because of the great amount of experience that I have had in watching these things over the many years, along with intimate acquaintance with the thinking here. I know very well the "third mind" prevailing.

When I use the term "third mind," I am expressing the prevailing mind in a group that is above all. First, there is a speaker, then there are the listeners. If there are one hundred listeners, there are one hundred two minds. The mind of the speaker, the minds of the hundred and then the overall prevailing mind. It is the group mind that always prevail.

Being very intimately acquainted with the group mind for so many years, I have illustrated to you months ago the rapidly evolving attitude. It was the same attitude that ejected the Oneness believers from the Assemblies of God in 1916. That mind has been growing in the UPC for many months toward Partial Preterism.

Two of the top officials of the AG told me at dinner in my discussions with them at lunch in the "Green Vatican" at Springfield that they nor the earlier officials of the AG had any problem with the "New Issue" until it became an issue.

Since the "New Issue" became a new issue being pressed to such a degree, it became intolerable to the "third mind." Therefore the expulsion of those enthusiastic proponents were forced out by the adoption of unacceptable resolutions.

Those Oneness believers that were forced out did not make the Oneness doctrine a salvation issue until they were forced out. Only then did it become a salvation issue to the Oneness enthusiast.

I was told by them, to my shock, that there are still Oneness preachers among them that never left. They still baptize in Jesus name, but it is not an issue to them therefore, they are "tolerated." Imagine my surprise.

Brother Smith has made the pP doctrine an issue with his unrelenting enthusiasm for his doctrine which he has pressed unrelentingly upon his peers. It has become a "new issue" of sorts which has cut across the grain of the "third mind" which hold an equally false doctrine. I have seen all kind of strange doctrines in the UPC that have been tolerated that I consider diabolical. They do not become an issue until they are made an issue by its enthusiasts.

Exactly how all of this will play out, I cannot tell. I only know that it will and I also know the end result. It is the thing that I have discussed with you in months past.

I hate to see it develop the way that it is. Too few understand that Charity should be primary, subordianted to nothing. Others think that Truth should be primary, subordinated to nothing. When Truth is primary, Truth becomes a tyrant, even a evil task master.

Ambitious men, moved by the pride of a "new revelation" create "new issues" for which perceived truth, absence of Charity rules the day as it does all religous movements in course of time. Hence, the great falling away. In it all, God preserves a remnant which becomes the seed bed of the furtherance of God's program in the earth.

Men should not seek leadership roles by pressing a new issue upon thier fellowship regardless how illuminating their new found light may appear to them. Rather that leadership should develop in a spiritual realm as their gifts and callings become pronounced in a divine or supernatural manner. When a fellowship looks upon heavens approbation of a man, they will recognize the leadership.

[Adoniyah]

Apostle,

Haven't you heard it said to avoid ignorant and unlearned questions? Every one of your questions from one to twenty are ignorant and unlearned.

They are as unlearned as your understanding of prophetic scriptures being unable to rightly dividing the Word of God which have caused you to err and misapprehend God's eventual or eternal plan for the church. Hence your full preterism doctrine.

By the way, Have you quit beating your wife?

Witness, you said:

"You see? Making it a non-issue
means, we dont search for truth."

My response:

Your statement, once again, is error. I can certainly see how that your mind set would cause you to be a victim of such teachings as that of your Pastor.

In not making an issue of a thing in no wise mean that one has fainted in the pursuit of truth. For one to make an issue of his perception makes one to become isolated from the main body. When charity does not prevail, no amount of new revelation will unify or gird up a fellowship. That suppose "new light" carries with it the pride of supposed superior knowledge which becomes divisive and ultimately destructive. The devil greatly rejoices.

[Joan]

Boy, you people sure do spend a lot of time on your computer arguing over and over again about this issue. I bet that makes the devil happy. You don't want division in the body but yet you bring up divisive subjects on purpose. What was the point? What could possibly be the conclusion of this argument? Unity? Yeah right. These vain babblings are NOT discussions and only bring about more confusion and division and strife. You all slice and dice eachother then insert a little smiley face and say "oh, I dont mean any offence brother/sister."

Proverbs 10:19 says:

"In the multitude of words sin is not lacking, But he who restrains his lips is wise."

v. 20: "The tongue of the righteous is choice silver; The heart of the wicked is worth little."

v. 21: "The lips of the righteous feed many, But fools die for lack of wisdom.

Where's the restraining of the lips in these arguments?

Where's the choice silver?

How many are being fed with the words of this thread or the countless other threads that are identical to this one?

These type of threads are more like the children of Israel's demand for meat in Numbers 11, for when the quail came they devoured it, but in the midst of it the Lord's wrath was kindled against them and they died. The craving for arguments, the grappling for it, the seeking after it, the complaining for it will destroy you.

Like the children of Israel, their minds were on what their own desire was and on getting what they desired.

Show me one of these threads where glory was brought to Jesus.

[Bro.Steingass]

OUCH!

Sister, you dug down around my roots, thanks. And I'm not even in on the debate.

But you preach the truth Sister. let's not major on minors.

Rom 15:6 That ye may with one mind and one mouth glorify God, even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

[nightwatchman]

Sister Joan,***********AMEN ************

[stmatthew]

Apostle,

You did not answer my question as usual. I simply ask if you were lost when you only saw rapture doctrine because you are saying others that do not see your doctrine are lost.

Sis Joan,

This discussion board is here for us to enjoy it. I have found friends and fellowship here. I have learned many things here. And I have also realized that not everything that sounds Apostolic is Apostolic.

This discussion will go on forever, simply because there are as many ideas as there are folks posting on this board. As long as there is a discussion board, there will be a discussion.

JMHO

[mfblume]

I am UPCI.

[apostle]

stmatthew
Thank God for the ministry. Without it I would be lost.
The ministry is for the perfecting of the saint.

Rapture was preached out of my life using the word of God.
So now I just ask questions like:

Adoniyah
If the questions are foolish, Why do most UPC teach them out of the serch for truth bible study chart.

Why would you ask me a question like this?

Have you quit beating your wife?

[searching]

Stmatt, I agree with you. I have learned much since coming here, and I seek to learn more.

Me...

[stmatthew]

I give up!

[nightwatchman]

Dear Sister Joan, You cut right to the heart of the matter. If we Pentecostals spent as much time in prayer and fasting and trying to reach the lost with the True message of salvation from a burden born on our knees and quit trying to outdo each other on our supposedly intelligence then we would see the effects of the Gospel around the world. Jesus cast devils out of the temple and went into the streets to do His miracles and finding souls in need to feed His Spirit. He desires to feast upon our Worship and our Praise and our Desire for Him to move and bless and to save.

In James it tells us to pray for the one we thought was in error and never told us to debate with each other. James 5:19-20.

Besides, when God decides to show Light on any subject as any man of God can tell you, it takes on a completely different concept. For His ways are not our ways and His thoughts far above ours.

I often wonder why God puts up with any of us? Why does He love us so much as wretched and blind as we can be especially to His wants and needs.

God seeks a people of unity, in one mind and one accord. His.

When we get to that place to come together in complete unity we will see an earth-shaking, mind-boggling Revival of The Holy Ghost

Am I dreaming? No! for He said that the last would be greater than the first and we are talking about the Church in His Glory.

The whole world lies in debate and strife and issues that are no where near God's Heart. James 3:8-18 But the tongue can know man tame, it is an unruly evil , full of deadly poison. 9:Therewith bless we God , even the Father, and therewith curse we men, which are made after the similtude of God. 10: Out of the same mouth proceedeth blessing and cursing My Brethren, these things ought not to be. 11: Doth a fountain send forth at the same place sweet water and bitter? 12: Can the fig tree, my brethren, bear olive berries? either a vine, figs? so can no fountain both yield salt water and fresh. 13: Who is a wise man and endued with knowledge among you? let him show out of a good conversation his works with meekness and wisdom.
14: But if you have bitter envying and strife in your hearts, glory not, and lie not against the Truth. 15: This wisdom descendeth not from above , but is earthly, sensual, devilish.
16: For where envying and strife is, there is confusion and every evil work. 17: But the wisdom that is from above is first pure, then peacable, gentle, and easy to be entreated, full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality, and without hypocrisy. 18: And the fruit of rightousness is sown in peace of them that make peace.

And another thing, God's pattern is the same. God is the same. How He did it yesterday still works today. Who changed His Word anyway? His methods are the same. We still ALL have to come in the same way. One Door. One Faith. One Baptism. So many folks are wondering,"Why don't we see things anymore? Well, Why don't we stick to God's methods that have stood the test of time? Where are the intercessors? Where are the all night prayer meetings? It use to be that Gunsmoke called and stopped the prayer meeting now it's MSN, or AOL, or Earthlink.

We like to blame someone else for the failures but each of us are GUILTY of forgetting God on days without number. We cry until we snot and feel a little soothing to our soul but we have not prayed until the devil trembled.
We love to shout and go home saying we had a great service but we haven't prayed til the darkness was pulled off the devil and wicked deeds came to Light.

I have been looking behind me lately and I don't see the signs following. Why? Because I haven't let God consume me with His burden lately.

The Word that Paul used will still set men free. The scripture Jesus quoted were fulfilled that day and not done away with nor changed.

Guess I do sound a little or maybe a lot harsh but I really believe God is sick and tired of us using His Word to wound and cut down when He sent it to save and to heal and deliver.

Even the devil used the Word of God, twisted it just a little bit to get what he wanted us to believe out of it.

Anyway, I do love you my Brothers and Sisters and I know that we must get back to our Father's real business. Getting the Truth to the lost. The Truth will set us all free. Love hides a multitude of sins. Love Ya' in Jesus!!! Cherokee.

[witness4jesus]

Joan: God does divide and separate. He divided the One God believers from those who believe in a false god.

Adoniyah: You made some very interesting statements. From your statements, I gather that you believe the belief in One God to be a "new issue". How can it be, when 5000 plus years ago, Moses declared, HEAR O ISRAEL THE LORD OUR GOD IS ONE?

The use of the words, NEW ISSUE are absurd and derogatory.

If you read the Revelation of Jesus Christ by Frank Ewart you would see how he felt about those who clung to trinity in face of the truth. If some stayed with the AOG, much to their shame, because evidently they did not see the belief in One God as a test of fellowship. Do you?

Your statements lead me to believe you do not see One God believers and the AOG as being on different sides of the dividing line. Interesting. I wouldnt sit with the AOG for all the money of Bill Gates!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I want to sit with those champions of Oneness who saw it an issue.

I dont believe you should make opinion an issue. I do believe that the apostles knew what the last days were all about, and
that they did see it as important. I dont believe they would have
brushed it under the rug with a statement like "pre, mid, post, pan, whatever pans out." I believe that is an insult to the truth
and it shows ignorance upon the part of men who are afraid to
study it out. WHEN DID THE LAST DAY BECOME A NON-ISSUE?????

People who compromise are afraid of issues. Those who stand for truth are not.

sis pam

[apostle]

stmatthew
I do not believe if I would have died believing, and defending the rapture doctrine I would end up with Jesus.

But because Jesus is the auther and finnisher of my faith, and of his foreknowlage of his understanding, he know I would not remain in that catholic teaching of the rapture.

When the truth was preached to me, I believed it.

Anyway, Were does the bible say the Romans arrested Jesus when Judas kisses him?

[apostle]

Rapture was preached out of my life using the word of God.
So now I just ask questions like: And why do the UPC teach them?

(1)Where does the bible say there is two first resurrection?

(2) Where does the bible say there is a city beyond the blue?

(3) Where does the bible say any man has assended beyond the clouds?

(4) Where does the bible say the graves were closed after Jesus opened them?

(5) Where does the bible say there is an other covenent other then Acts 2:38?

(6) Where does the bible say Flesh and bone will come down out of Heaven?

(7) where does the bible say streets of Gold?

(8) Why did Jesus pray that we would not be taken out of the world? John 17:15

(9) How can you be in Christ and in the grave if Jesus is not in the grave?

(10) Where does the bible say plans will fall from the sky because the pilot will disappear?

(11) And cars crashing because the drive is missing?

(12) Why are people teaching a dissappearing trick if the bible says every eye shall see him?

(13) If Jesus is with the church, what other Jesus is there?

(14) Where does the bible say gabriel will sound a trumpet?

(15) Where does the bible say the mark of the beast is a computer chip or tattoo?

(16) Where does the bible say there are two differant last days? When Peter preached and then an other 2000 years later?

(17) Where does the bible say there is "one" antichrist?

(18) Where does the bible the Jews get a differant salvation?

(19) Where does the bible say people can be saved without a preacher? (no church, no preacher)

(20) What are the seven bowl judgments?

How many here will try to tell me UPC does not teach the above?

I just want to know where in the bible is it?

[mfblume]

Why does the question of a rapture by Apostle always show up on any thread about prophecy? :)

[nightwatchman]

I am in the UPCI. I am a child of God. I would still be a child of God if UPCI locked hands with the world. UPCI didn't save me but Jesus did and His Word has kept me for it lays a firm foundation to build on.

Man can fail, organizations can fall, powers that be can crumble, but God will never let His Word return void.

When God does the work nothing on this earth can change it. I believe there is to much emphasis put on what church or organization we belong to and forget when Jesus came He thought the religious world stank because of their man made ideas and rules and regulations that they themselves didn't even follow.

Go back to the beginning of the building of any organization and you will find subtle changes along the way that have been added or subtracted because of the times and the people and the necessity of what we think we need to work for God.

Prayer and Fasting and Unity built the First Church (and this organization) and if it is to survive it will still have to maintain Prayer,Fasting and Unity in God. Love Ya' in Jesus!! Cherokee

[Xerf]

Apostle must be part porcupine -- he wants us to get all the points!!


:rolleyes:

[apostle]

Bro Blume
Thats what I'm trying to figure out.
If we look back, it's not always me that brings it up
But in this case, rapture is a large part of the futurists doctrine.
So how then can futurism be discussed without having rapture a part of it?

I think they that believe will do anything to justify it, just like the trinitarians will do anything to justify themselves.

[Adoniyah]

Witness:

You obviously have no idea what I am talking about.

The "new issue" was the doctrine of Oneness that was inside the Assemblies of God in 1914.

No it is not a new issue today.

It is hard to converse with you since you have no inkling of neither the Pentecostal history or what I am talking about.

Ask brother Blume, he may have the time and patience to explain it all to you. I don't.

Jesus sat with the Pharasees, sinners and Publicans. Though you are too holy to sit with the AG people to discuss Pentecostal history with them, Jesus was not too holy or righteous to eat with them, neither am I. I do not know how it is that you consider yourself such.

[Faithchild]

Witness4Jesus, you are one of the posters on the GNC that I always read. You put a lot of thought and time into what you post. Generally reading you is time well spent. With that said I want to offer a little unsolicited criticism about a few things. One, you are too quick to condemn others. The "new issue" posting is an example of that. You must spend a lot of time in the Word, which is good, but it appears that your worldview is too influenced by Apostle. Take time to ask a few questions before you drop the hammer. Two, you have an allergic reaction to spending anytime with people who don't agree with you 100%. In my short tenure on the GNC (under various aliases) you and I have clashed a few times on this. How do you win souls? How do you dispel darkness hiding your light under a bushel? Do you only "witness" to people that are already saved? The distinctives we have as Apostolics that separate us unto the Lord make us even MORE powerful when we venture out to win the lost. Our time in His presense gives the words we speak greater effectiveness. Jesus commanded, "Let your light shine before the world that they may see your good works and glorify the Father." The separation demanded of Him is one of a spiritual nature not physical. What if Jesus had the same attitude of withdrawing from everyone that disagrees with Him? He wouldn't have come to earth in the first place! How can they hear without a preacher?

Please understand I'm speaking as a peer. Whether you agree with my judgments or not, please accept this in the spirit it is given. God bless. Your friend, Jim H. Yohe

[John Atkinson]

Wow. If the P2 doctrine causes so much division here, I cannot wait until it is debated at General Conference.

[Sandy]

Adoniyah, you stated the real problem in a nut shell. The lack of the love of God. Not that everyone that has the Spirit does not have love for one another, but we are to grow in that love, to the point that we begin to walk in it as He, Christ walked. And if you do not, there will be no tolerance in what you believe, your ending up going by the letter more than love for others. And the letter kills without the deep abiding love of God proceeding it in all ways, thus producing only rebellion in the end by others.

Joan, the reason that people cannot sit down and discuss issues with one another is also because of a lack of love for one another as well, thus some walking away from those discussions either growing in His love, or becoming bitter, not being able to put it down later, and allow the Lord to reveal truth to each of us in His time. But there is nothing wrong with discussing issues at all, as long as they are discussed with respect and love toward one another. And this can only be done thru those walking in the love of God doing the discussing.

We should also, at the same time consider we ourselves may be the one that is wrong. Everyone believes what they believe to be right of course, which is why they contend for that belief to begin with. But the truth is, none of us are probably totally right about everything we believe. Only Christ could make this claim.
And realizing this helps to have the right perspective in discussions as well.

So while I am UPCI, I still voted, because I do not believe these type of issues should not be permitted. But then you all probably already figured out what I would vote anyway I am sure, knowing just how tolerant I am to begin with. Not that I don't have specific beliefs either, as I most certainly do unbekowest to some on here I am sure that have accused me otherwise. But I also am tolerant and patient with others too, so that I might save some in the process, knowing that if some had not been this same way with me, I might still be where I came from long ago. But just the same, that does not mean we should quit talking to others, sharing what we believe as well.



Thus some of my thoughts anyway

[apostle]

John.
Now the debates will be pre, mid, post, pret. tribulation.

Kind of like old Jerusalem.

[mfblume]

..all I wanted to know is whether people think the upc should tolerate pp or not, since they tolerate pre mid and post.

BTW, Apostle. I already told you there are some in the UPC who do not believe in a future rapture either. Remember?

[apostle]

Yes bro.
I remember. I just do not know them.
I do know that the UPC totaly called me of the devil because I do not believe it.

And some on this board has said the same thing.
And I can name, names

[Sandy]

Well join the crowd of those that are assumed to be devils by others brother. :bow:

Just kidding.

[stmatthew]

Brother Yohe,


Was that really you that posted that to Sis Witness??? I must say that that was a very good post with an excellent spirit behind it. I am not joking in the least in saying that. I felt it Bro, and i hope Sis witness takes it to heart. I believe it to be wise councel for us all.

[bill]

Bro Blume,

You must have answered a no to this poll, since partial preterists teach that their view is "THE" apostolic view, not just "another prophetic view", as the poll indicates. :D

[mfblume]

Haha. No, brother. I believe its tolerable for the pre mid and post brethren. So they should tolerate me.

Bill, don't all Apostolics think what they believe is TRUE Apostolic belief?

[witness4jesus]

Jim, I appreciate your words.
I am afraid I am misunderstood in that I speak here
in a way I would not speak to sinners.

I do not totally separate myself from the world. Brother
Paul indeed said, how would we win the lost if we did
that? I love people, and I do love souls, and if you knew
what I have endured just to have mercy...

But when it comes to people who have heard the truth, who
know what we believe, and yet reject it, not as heathens, but
as those who should know the word, then I would not desire
fellowship with those.

I am not anxious about winning the AOG. I am anxious to find souls that are hungry for the truth, and will not walk away from it. If one comes to me who is of that persuasion and wants to
come out, that is different.

My own pastor that many have such
harsh words for, will not boast of his own works, but there is a man in India right now baptizing in the name of Jesus along with
his churches because he happened to be his translator. In the midst of a crowd that was awed by other things, some found truth because of a man that wont compromise the message.

In Jesus Name

sis pam

[bill]

Bro Blume,

HA! Yes of course! You know, unless you agree with me, hell's going to be real HOT for you partial preterists! :)

Really, full perterism is where I would personally draw the line in heresy. Partial preterism may not be a salvational issue (just like pre, mid or post wouldn't be), but I do feel that not all of us can be right. So, why can't it be ME? :D

[Webmaster]

Maybe it is you, Bill....but as all of us, I think it is me!!! LOL

Or as XERF is fond of saying in the word association thread.......

MINE!

[Hnovilla]

His Name is Jesus!

Preterist...partial-preterist...futirist...partial (?) futurist...

I do not understand those terms; they are cute, but confusing. Let's speak English (preferably theKingJamesversion)!

Brother Villa

[truemessianic]

I am right, and if I am wrong, I am still rightfully wrong!
Just A Thought!

[apostle]

For you all that say you are wrong but may be right.

The Holy Ghost leads us only into truth.
That is why we must have the Holly Ghost.
That is why we must be born again.
That is why Jesus said he would be in us and with us.

1Pe 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

In Jesus name

[seguidordejesus]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by apostle

I do not believe if I would have died believing, and defending the rapture doctrine I would end up with Jesus.

Bro Apostle,

Pardon me for being a little late with this, as it was a few posts ago, but I got the impression by some of your other posts that you did not believe in a "new Jerusalem" or "heaven". I could have been wrong, but if there were no "city of gold" etc, where are you referring to in this post? Where then would we end up with Jesus?

Thanks for your reply, I really am seeking to understand this whole topic.

[apostle]

seguidordejesus
I believe in heaven and the New Jerusalem

[Faithchild]

Sis. Pam, I don't doubt that God uses your pastor. As far as those that hear the truth and reject it, I still want to make sure they have an understanding of truth. Sometimes people don't react instantly. Sometimes the revelation of truth comes in an incremental fashion. What if I divested myself of their fellowship right before they would acknowledge truth and receive it in their lives? Contempt for backsliders is also a dangerous attitude. Because of that attitude, I was a backslider for eleven years when I could have been restored in two weeks. My pastor told the church people to stay away from me. He said I was a repropate. The truth was I was hurt by something going on in the church that I didn't understand. Because communication was cut off, I spent eleven years out-of-church believing something that wasn't true. Regardless of our repugnance of sin, we have to remain accessible to the sinner. The true blasphemer is a rare creature in my experience.

[bill]

Bro Yohe,

Although I have little doubt that you were hurt, you can't blame your backsliding on other people. You backslide because you're heart was not right before God. My family was hurt too. To make a really long story short, some gossip in the church drove by our house and saw my dad's car parked in our driveway (mom and dad were divorced and dad has never been in church) and told the pastor that my mom was sleeping around. Know what that hirling did? He sent a group of ladies (all of them gossips) to our house the next week and disfellowshipped us from the church, asking us to never come back. He didn't even talk to mom or pay her a visit!

Know what mom did? She packed up and went to the next church in town that preached the Truth (which happened to be upc) and said they may have hurt us, but Truth doesn't change and never uttered a negative word about that pastor.

Bottom line is, if you're going to live for God nothing will ever stop you! :)

[witness4jesus]

Jim, with regard to backsliders, I dont write
them off. God is merciful. I love people yet
that have walked away from God.

With regard to denominations, Christ was hard
on those who should have known truth and
yet rejected it. There is a couple I won to the
Lord from trinity Pentecost. I did not condemn
them or say my church is better. I just invited
them to revival, and they saw the difference.
But I am not going to go sit in their high places
either, and fellowship with those who ought
certainly to know "the new issue", and yet
cling to trinity. Frank Ewart dealt with that
firsthand, and he was one of those who said,
that is not our fellowship.

I dont really believe that our revival is going
to come from trinity pentecostals. Our revival
is going to come from a revival of TRUTH, of the
word of God. That is what revival is in the Bible--it
is when people remember the word of the Lord
that was given them. When the truth of the word
and the power of His spirit are present, the people
will come.

sis pam

[bill]

Dale,

I don't think most people in the upc even know what partial preterism is, much less know enough to make an informed and prayerful decision.

[seguidordejesus]

I agree with Bill on this one. I certainly had never even heard of Partial Preterism, at least in apostolic ranks. I knew the catholics believed something similar, but not apostolics. And that previous statement probably sounds ignorant, b/c I'm sure that there are a lot of differences. Just goes to show you that I don't understand the whole concept. However since Bro Blume started this thread, I have been trying to read all of these posts in order to understand the whole PP concept. Gotta admit, I still really don't know what it's saying and the main differences. These long posts sometimes run together with the small print lol, hard to concentrate. Anyway, you guys pray that if PP is the truth, that I will understand it. Otherwise, it's probably better that I don't. But I do like Faithchild's signature, it is how I think. Traditions of men will not save us, we must look for the truth in His Word.

Que Dios bendiga a todos

Ben

[seguidordejesus]

Bro Blume,

In case there is a post where you have outlined the basic tenets of PP concisely, maybe you can post the link here so that I could go to that, b/c I probably just missed it. Thanks

Ben

[mfblume]

seguidore...

Check the basic tenets of the teaching at this address:

http://mikeblume.com/prophecy.htm

Check out the FAQ section there as well as
http://mikeblume.com/partpret1.htm

[Faithchild]

Bill, if you'd simply take off your prejudicial lenses where I'm concerned and actually read what I wrote, you'd discover I do not blame my backsliding on anyone. I merely stated that if I had been reached out to instead of shunned, there's a great chance I would have returned to the church a whole lot sooner.

And for another of your look-before-you-leap statements, UPCI ministers who read THE FORWARD (i.e. the same ministers that would vote on the issue) have read a "rebuttal" written by David Bernard against preterism. It came out roughly around the time that Bro. Larry Smith circulated his booklet. So quit speaking for the UPCI until you get your facts straight.

(Btw, THE FORWARD is the UPCI Minister's Magazine that is circulated exclusively to UPCI licensees. I'm surprised Bill doesn't read and laminate every copy!)

[seguidordejesus]

Thank you very much, Bro Blume, that's exactly what I was looking for.

[Adoniyah]

Brother John, you said:

"Wow. If the P2 doctrine causes so much division here, I cannot wait until it is debated at General Conference."

My response:

I seriously doubt that the subject would ever be debated at GC, but only a resolution introduced by the resolution committee in regards to preaching it by constituent ministers. I believe that is about as far as it would ever go.

Its enthusiasts will never abide by that resolution if it were passed. They know it. Thus the separation of brethern. I see it as something that will eventually be irreconcilable.

[mfblume]

Personally I think the UPCI will tolerate pp. I think they're only concern will be an attitude of a proponent wanting to cause division over it, which I, for one, will have nothing to do with.

[Adoniyah]

Brother Blume:

I hope you are right. I suppose it will all depent on how ardent the proponents will be in making it a "new issue" of sorts. Once the genie is out of the bottle...

[bill]

FC,

Well now...thanks for setting me straight! I look forward to one day sitting at your feet and gleaning from your self proclaimed great mind and wisdom. I hardly consider myself worthy! :bow:

[jbenjesus]

Oh great! Bill and Jim are at it again.

You guys should have a radio talk show together.

I'm sure many of us would listen in. :D

[Adoniyah]

Brother J, you said:

"Oh great! Bill and Jim are at it again."

My response:

Don't pay any attention to it. It's only sibling rivalry. You know, brothers will be brothers. They love each other far more than it appears. We all have our moments...some of us more than others.

[bill]

Bro Yohe,

All joking aside, informed people like you, avid readers and such, will of course know what preterism is. But these are mostly ministers. Mention preterism to the average saint and they look at you like, "huh"? Again, this is a generalization and there are people who do know, but not very many. For that, I would say not very many ministers really understand it, as far as what it teaches and such. I didn't even before I met Bro Blume and read Smith's book (although I admit I haven't yet found the time to thouroughly read it, but I intend to).

[bill]

I think Bro Yohe would want it to be a TV show rather than a radio show. :D

[Xerf]

Is "terism" permissiable or do I have to do a "pre" ? Is "mid-terism" and "post-terism" permissable?

BTW.......WHAT the sam hill is a "terism" anyhow? Or to be more specific -- a "ter" that became an "ism"?

HELP?

[bill]

Partial preterism is the belief that Jesus came in 70 AD and all prophesy except for the rapture of the church and the end of the world is fulfilled.

[Faithchild]

Bill, I know what face stares back at me in the mirror every morning, believe me, I have a face made for radio. I agree that the UPCI congregational members probably don't know what preterism is. But unless Adoniyah's revolutionary resolution gets passed, they don't have a vote anyway. Btw, if you want to sit at my feet for awhile, it's fine with me. But please make yourself useful and polish my shoes (Though I do hate to take you away from your favorite pasttime of being a pretentious know-it-all!).;)

[bill]

Hey man, I learned it from you! :)

[witness4jesus]

I dont see the problem.
The truth stands on its own.
The idea that we should not divide over
issues is absurd. If something is true, then
let us stand with it. If it is not, then let it fall.

I personally want to stand with that which is true.
Even if it were a "new issue", what difference
does that make if it is right??????? My point
exactly, that some would rather throw everything
except acts 2:38 and One God into a basket
that says "opinions" and not search out whether
something is right or wrong.


The problem is, there are always going to be
those that resist a "new issue". The Pharisees
did. :cry:

sis pam

[bill]

Bro Blume,

These types of issues always divide. Even at the preterist conference they are claiming that this "revelation" is coming to the rest of the apostolic community. Although I do understand that you wouldn't disfellowship someone for not believe Jesus came in 70 AD.

Think about it, we're even divided over pre, mid or post trib. The preterist view takes it division to a whole new level though. Personally, I'm a little confused myself over the whole thing!! :)

[mfblume]

While we truly would like to see all brethren preach this message, we understand that the wrenches that are thrown into fellowship due to disagreement will always be present due to some for or against any issue.

While all of this goes on, one thing I strive to stress in my preaching about partial preterism is the need to see us as kings and priests right now, and to live to the full potential that Christ has provided for us. We are seated with Him! We are presently kings and priests and the reigning over cities we should be experiencing is the REVIVAL of God's power out from within our lives throughout the various cities in which we presently live.

THAT challenges me more than anything.

[witness4jesus]

I do agree with you there, Brother Blume.
Today is the day of Jesus Christ and we
do reign with Him now.

sis pam

[Faithchild]

Bill, at least your FINALLY getting a teachable spirit!:laugh:

[John Atkinson]

While all of this goes on, one thing I strive to stress in my preaching about partial preterism is the need to see us as kings and priests right now, and to live to the full potential that Christ has provided for us. We are seated with Him! We are presently kings and priests and the reigning over cities we should be experiencing is the REVIVAL of God's power out from within our lives throughout the various cities in which we presently live.

Dead certain. while I am not P2 I see this as absolutely true and absolutely now.

We are dwelling in the New Jerusalem. Now, today. There is a whole lot that the P2 doctrine teaches that I do agree with, thus far about the only thing I don't agree with is the significance of 70 A.D. in prophecy. But in no way to I even remotely perceive this as a barrier that blocks fellowship.

I am very suprised and not a little disturbed at the results of the poll and the number of people here who would exclude from fellowship people like Bro Blume for their stand in this.

From the cafe administration: Bro Blume we love you and you are a valued and valuable member of this discussion board. We do appreciate you and hope to have fellowship with you for years to come.

[apostle]

John Atkinson
A-men

The great and notable day is the day of pentecost, not AD70.
It was Jesus that came on that day with all resurrection power.

No place in the bible does it teach us to focus on AD70.
But acts chapter two gives us the promise that is even for our children, and those that are a far off.

I'm not even sure 70 AD was the end of Jerusalem.
I think it may have been around AD 70, But I don't know.

I can surly tell you the nations that made Jerusalem desolate.
It is more then one nation. And it is in the bible.

the same cross that saves me killed many.
the same flood that saved Noea killed many.
the same water the saved the hebrews from Egypt, killed the Egyption?
the save grave that is death in the world, is life to me.

Only one judgment. and AD 70 is not it.
Around AD 70 is the result of the judgment.

This is the verse in the bible that tells us what judges the world, look at it.

Joh 12:31 Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the prince of this world be cast out.
Joh 12:32 And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all [men] unto me.
Joh 12:33 This he said, signifying what death he should die.

Jesus said preach the gospel.

In Jesus name

[mfblume]

Thanks Bro Atkinson,

Actually 70 AD means nothing more than the date that happened to the be time Jerusalem was gone. Other than that there is no significance to it. Just thought to note that.

[Faithchild]

What? You don't believe Jesus came in 70 A.D.? You mean Bill blew it again? The last time he sat at my feet I tried to tell him to get his facts straight! (Apparently whoever does his thinking for him didn't get it right.) It really isn't fair to hold a parrot accountable for what he's screeching. After all he's just repeating what he was told. :D

[Adoniyah]

Preterism looses its wind if you discount 70AD. Otherwise the carnal words of Jesus concerning natural Jerusalem in Matt. 24 have no significance unless you are able to explain those carnal events as related to 70AD.

No significance? 70AD is central to the understanding of Matt 24, portions of Rev. 6 and portions of Rev 11 and other places. Unless you can tie carnal Jerusalem to the natural dates surrounding a supposed 3.5 years before 70AD, 70AD itself and good ol' Nero, you would then have to find another premis for the explanation of all of those scriptures.

I have another premis. That premis is founded in the spiritual understanding of the Word. Jesus always spoke spiritually even though he may have stretched out his arms when he said, "...except you eat my flesh and drink my blood..." Jesus may have been pointing right at the stones of the temple when he said, "See these stones, there shall not be one stone left upon another..." The premis is spiritual...not carnal.

70AD proponents grabbed a hold to the carnal and natural and have not accentuated the spiritual.

I probably should not write any more about this as I see a general rejection of these truths that I have tried, in my own feeble way, to present here.

If the 70Ad doctrine is truth, the spirit of the Lord will vindicate it. If it is error, it will blow up like a big cloud for a while as fads often do, but it will blow over leaving no rain and no watered nourshiment for a thirsty, parched earth desiring spiritual drink for a harvest yet to come. I expect the latter of it.

[bill]

Bro Yohe,

I've decided I can no longer sit at your feet to learn the values of prIde and sarcasm. Besides, your liberalism 101 class was getting a bit boring.

[mfblume]

Jesus did indeed come in 70 AD in wrath. Who else was behind the destruction, if not Christ? But what I meant, bro Yohe, is that 70 AD in and of itself is not a date that is mystical and necessary. It could have been 57 AD. And it does not affect my salvation in and of itself. But it is involved in God's overall work. And it places much prophecy in its proper context.

It may not be a big thing to us to see God's former bride removed, but it certainly was to God. Jerusalem was highlighted throughout the Old Testament. But she was a foreshadow of the true Bride, the church, anyway.

But Christ did come in wrath against her. However that is not so near an issue from our perspectives as the future coming in resurrection for the church.

Isaiah 10 said Assyria was the instrument of God's anger. And when Assyria hit Israel, God said, after it was all said and done, that it was his work that caused it all. Same with 70 AD. Jesus is the God of the Old Testament.

Yes, He came in Spirit on the day of Pentecost. But He came in wrath in 67-70 AD.

And this "70 AD" doctrine that Adoniyah labels it, is simply true without refutation. God indeed smashed Jerusalem, for Jerusalem was a natural city and was cursed by Christ for that doom. Its history. Of course the spiritual aspect was more important. But simply because I am proposing the target of understanding of certain prophecy has been missapplied to our future, is not to say this issue is more important than others. We know Christ died on a cross, and not a stake. But yet we might argue for days to a JW who refuses to accept that, while at the same time we know its the actual death that was the real issue.

The one who curses is the one responsible for the destruction. But I think some are making it more than what I actually propose about it. Its the ending of the relationship of God with the foreshadowing entity formerly known as His bride in Ezekiel 16, who became a whore.

What I am stressing behind all of this, is the position we now hold in Christ. And many people's fears are without foundation as they worry over a great tribulation to come, that has already occured, although we'll always have tribulation so long as we are in the world.

Anyway, anyone at my conferences on prophecy knows that my focal point is the state of the church today in God's eyes, that has been pushed ahead by futurism into the "millennium", rather than where it truly is now. The people I preach to have already accepted the issue of proper placement of scripture. So we just move on to the practical issues of where we are presently, and what is at our disposal right now. Once you get these scriptures of wrath and judgment of doom laid out properly, you can go on to the greater issue of who we are and what we can do now. Its just a necessary point in getting to that plac eof practicality for today, when we speak about 70 AD and what was occurred in that date. the date, itself, means nothing.

[bill]

Bro Blume,

Can you address the issue of the prophet Hosea marrying Gomer and the typology of how Gomer was received back after she had committed her adultery? I've always lined this with the parable of the prodical son and how he came back. I believe God has a plan to bring backslidden Israel back to Him. I don't think God cuts off forever those whom He gave the promises to.

Also, we know that Israel is blind and as such, cut off from spiritual promises (holy ghost and salvation), but there are land promises that the Church cannot fulfill, are there not?

[mfblume]

God willed to do that, Bill, and even indicated it in Matthew 23 where Jesus said they would not, though. He would have covered them with His wings. Marriage relationship of the covering of His protection is implied. But she crossed the line of tolerance. There was a limit. She was guilty of all blood shed on earth in crucifying Him. As Daniel 9:24 put it, she "finished the transgression".

[bill]

Yes they were guilty, but so were the Romans and Gentiles.

Genesis 13:14-17
And the Lord said unto Abram, after that Lot was separated from him, Lift up now thine eyes, and look from the place where thou art northward, and southward, and eastward, and westward:

For all the land which thou seest, to thee will I give it, and to thy seed for ever.

(17) Arise, walk through the land in the length of it and in the breadth of it; for I will give it unto thee.

When was this promise nullified and if so, why is Israel in their promised land right now if it is?

[apostle]

Mat 12:40 For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.
Mat 12:41 The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas [is] here.
Mat 12:42 The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: for she came from the uttermost parts of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon; and, behold, a greater than Solomon [is] here.

Jesus said it is finnished at the cross, not AD 70.

First the rain, then the flood. No flood without rain.
The water came from above and then covered the earth.
Same with the fire that came from heaven on the day of pentecost.
The fire came out of heaven and then covered all jerusalem and cover all the earth. The flood came and took them all away.

Jesus came first born of a woman and then born again of the grave.

The resurrection power came on the day of pentecost.
The preterist believe it happened in AD 70.

Jesus said he would be with his desciples unto the end of the world.

Mat 28:20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I AM WITH YOU ALWAYS, [even] unto the end of the world. Amen.

Jesus was with them until the end.

The focus is Acts chapter two. and the rest of the bible.

In Jesus name

[Faithchild]

Bill, your lame rejoinders reveal you're dropping out far too soon!
From time to time I enjoy chatting with you. It gives my mind a rest.:bore:

[bill]

Your sarcasm and your insisting on being called "brother" or some other title reveal your insecurity. For now, I'm just going to see you as just another liberal on the good old gnc. Talk to the hand, as they say 'cause you're going on my ignore list. :) bye bye!

[Faithchild]

Bro. Bill, again you haven't got your facts straight. Like the old saw goes, "You can call me Ray. You can call me Jay. You can call me RJ. But just don't call me Johnson." As I've explained before, in the culture that I was raised in calling someone by just their last name was a sign of disrespect. You can disrespect my opinions all you want. You can call me Jim. You can call me Bro. Jim. or Bro. Yohe. You can call me Faithchild. But just don't call me Yohe! I always address you by your proper name. In deference to your wounded feelings, now I'll always begin each post to you as Bro. Bill.

Now have Mommy put the thick blankey over the cage. Swing back and forth slowly. That's it. Now repeat slowly as you drift off to Happy Parrotland. "Polly-parrots have the right to be heard, too! Right, admin?" There, there . . . Mommy will have some fresh water, seed, gravel, and a new tape from Bro. Billy Bob for you to memorize for your next polly-parrot posts on the GNC when you wake up.

If that's possible.

[mfblume]

Hi Brother,

These issues you raise have been of some import to me in my studies, for they are commonly raised by so many. And I do not have all the answers, but I believe I do have some for these points. May the Lord correct any error on my part.

All the world is guilty of the cross, but Jerusalem was His bride during OT times.

And Jesus did say that she crossed the line. How else can you interpret Matthew 23's reference to her holding all guilt of all innocent blood shed on earth, when in times past no generation of Israel was ever held up for that guilt?

Brother, we cannot nullify words in part of the bible with words in another part. They must flow together, or else there is an error in our interpretation, I am sure you will agree.

All God's promises were conditional. Even the "forever" ones.

For example, regarding the presence of Israel "in the land" today, Deut 30 said that God would not gather anybody anywhere until they first obeyed a commmandment. And then God said it was not far from them that they had to ascend or traverse the deep. It is in their mouths. And Paul turns around and interprets that in Romans 10, saying that commandment they were to obey is the word of faith in Christ that Paul preached.

So please allow me to defer you to Deut 30 and Romans 10, for an explanation of how God can gather Israel when they refused the word of faith in Christ, let alone have not obeyed the Law of Moses.

Despite all appearances, what saith the scriptures?

Lying wonders occur all the time. Nevertheless, what saith the scriptures? God's word cannot contradict itself.

[bill]

Bro Blume,

Amen that the scriptures cannot contradict itself.

But if obeying Duet 30 and Romans 10 means they will come into their promised land, would that mean we would have to spiritualize the land promises to make then figurative of salvation and Christ so as to avoid saying that it's the Church who will inhabit these o.t. lands? Are you following me? Do we have N.T. scripture for that?

Enjoying the discussion! :)

[bill]

Bro Atkinson,

You said this in one of your posts, "We are dwelling in the New Jerusalem.

Heb 13:14

For here we have no continuing city but we seek one to come.

The church "is come" to the New Jerusalem only symbolically. We are "members" of that city, so long as we stay in Christ. But there IS a literal city which has foundations whose builder and maker is God Almighty. The church is always likened unto a temple, we are the "temple" of God. The Church is made up of "stones", lively stones, whereras the NJ has no "stones". We are the temple, the habitation of God "through the Spirit", but the NJ is literal and it is not symbolic. There is a city and you and I will be there one day! :)

Be blessed

[mfblume]

Bill,

All I am saying is that Deut 30 and Romans 10 says what it says. Regardless of the ramifications, we must go one step at a time, and learn what the facts are. Are the facts set forth in Deut 30 and Romans 10, or are they not? And if so, what are they? Then we can go on to the ramifications.

See what I mean?

[apforthelord]

Pastor Blume i have seem to misunderstode where u are going with this if you could would you give me the link to your page? i need to do some homework!

[mfblume]

Hi ap,

My link is http://mikeblume.com/prophecy.htm

[Adoniyah]

Brother Bill:

I looked back over this thread and do find where you called Brother Yohe just plain "Yohe." Possibly you did elsewhere.

But, if you did, you certainly owe Brother Yohe an humble, sincere apology. If you have already done so, you must have on another thread of the several that I do not read.

The culture that Brother Yohe was raised in is almost the same if not exactly the same that I was raised in. I understand his deep resentment.

In that culture, it is unthinkable for anyone to call someone by their last name without a handle to it. If you use a first name like, "Jim" it would also be proper to put the handle of Brother Jim, even though just "Jim" among peers is not nearly as offensive.

I would not in the least acknowledge a fellow minister that would call me just by my last name. If a man, especially a minister of the Gospel does not command respect, he will usually get little of it.

I've been out where you live and I know that the culture out there is a bit different allowing anyone to get away with a bit more than they can down here, but respect should be respect, universal.

I grew up with well known preachers of the Gospel. We played together as kids, shot marbles, played hide-and-go-seek. We played baseball, wrestled and even put on gloves and boxed. But, I would consider it almost blasphemy to say, "Hey Cupit," "Hey Oggs," Ewing or Phillips. I hold ministers of the gospel in great esteem regardless of our past boyhood relationships.

I am only saying these things in a manner as to be helpful to you by way of instructions while meaning no offense to you at all and that you may know our mind set and attitudes. I also say these things for anyone else that read these words that may be unaware of our (brother Yohe and mine) culture.

BTW, it wouln't hurt to humble yourself and apologize. It may be a bitter dose to swallow, but its good for what ails you. Goodness knows I've had to do it many times in my life.

With love and sincerity.

[bill]

Bro Strange,

First of all, me and FC have apologized before in another thread. Secondly, since then, I have tried to always remember to address him as "brother" when speaking to him. Thirdly, constant use of sarcasm is always a cover up for insecurity, it's a defense mechanism. Fourthly, if you demand respect, contrary to what you said, you will usually get little of it, especially in dealing with this "net" generation. And lastly, if Bro Yohe would begin acting like the mature minister that he could be, and not like a spoiled insecure proud brat, it would easier to look up to him in respect. Until there is some spiritual maturity in him, he will remain on my "ignore" list. It has become evident that he is unable to discuss things in a civil and kind manner, and I'm not the only one who feels that way.

I do appreciate your concern.

[Faithchild]

Bill, since I'm on your "ignore" list I know you won't see this. Sarcasm is an effective debate ploy. I am a trained debater. Look how you fly off the handle and respond to it. I don't dislike you, I think you're fun. It's like watching my wife's cat bat a mouse back and forth between her front paws before she kills it. She's amusing herself. Quit flaring up at me. I'll get bored and move on.

Since you've sat in the proverbial armchair, let me borrow it for a moment. Just about everything you judged me as, really applies to yourself. The truth is you want my respect and resent not having it. You then respond by screaming to the high heavens the injustice of my personal judgment of you. Bill, I do respect your desire and love for God. My bone of contention with you is I feel you're a mini-recorder with an actice play-button that polly-parrots other people's opinions. There's no way for you to change my mind on that other than for me to read something original from you. No sarcasm here, just a frank, open moment.

It's too bad you won't be able to read it.

[In His Service]

Using Sarcasm to with another and doing it to provoke them to anger seems like a very christain attitude to have Jim, :~(

Maybe Bro. Strange will speak of this to you, if he writes to Bill he should write to Jim.

Bro. Timothy

[Faithchild]

IHS, can you be any more pompous?

[stmatthew]

Bro Yohe Writes....

Bill, since I'm on your "ignore" list I know you won't see this. Sarcasm is an effective debate ploy. I am a trained debater. Look how you fly off the handle and respond to it. I don't dislike you, I think you're fun. It's like watching my wife's cat bat a mouse back and forth between her front paws before she kills it. She's amusing herself. Quit flaring up at me. I'll get bored and move on.

Since you've sat in the proverbial armchair, let me borrow it for a moment. Just about everything you judged me as, really applies to yourself. The truth is you want my respect and resent not having it. You then respond by screaming to the high heavens the injustice of my personal judgment of you. Bill, I do respect your desire and love for God. My bone of contention with you is I feel you're a mini-recorder with an actice play-button that polly-parrots other people's opinions. There's no way for you to change my mind on that other than for me to read something original from you. No sarcasm here, just a frank, open moment.

It's too bad you won't be able to read it.


Even though I find Bro Yohe very sarcastic at times, I also realize that within all that sarcasm is a heart that does love God. I can look beyond the Cyclops and see that there is a tenderness that often doesn't come out. Not taking up for the sarcasm, just saying what I see.

Bro Bill, I can understand your desire to shut out the sarcasm. I did want to be somewhat of a mediator if possible, to quote above what resembles an apology. You must, however, do what you must do.

I love both of you brothers, and know that division and bitterness are not profitable. I also know that Paul and Barnabas had to seperate because of such. Maybe you 2 brothers should just shy away from responding to each other.

Oh well, Maybe I'm stepping out of place into the Moderators Job. But I realize contention ultimately destroys if not dealt with, and I have fought the fight and gained some victory in it. I have a few battle wounds. Maybe I can help???

[stmatthew]

stmatthew
I do not believe if I would have died believing, and defending the rapture doctrine I would end up with Jesus.


I almost missed this. So you really believe all that hold to the rapture doctrine are going to hell??

:eek: I really cannot believe this!!

Apostle,

That means if you are off just a hair in any of your beliefs that you too are lost, right??

I am so glad for grace. Repentance, remission of sins, and receiption of the Spirit of Almighty God. So glad God knows my frame, that I am but dust and that the treasure is in an earthen vessel. So glad I have an advocate with the Father.

[Faithchild]

Bro. Burdette, I appreciate your motives. I can't be anymore revealing to Bill than what I just posted. I have a problem with people that make flat statements or constantly pontificate the obvious. IHS, Nawbee, Oldpreach, Preacherotheword, Katwoman, Apostolic Man, a.k.a. Bill. People that assume the status quo is right and immediately shift into condemnation of whoever questions it. They bring "it" out of me. I don't question their salvation or their destination (though mine often is), I just question how limiting their mindset is and how many people will not be won because of it. The printed posted word is limited. I am the same way in person but it comes off in a more kidding manner. In LaHaye's temperaments I'm a melan/choleric (sp?). Undoubtedly the choleric side comes out in my writing. I'm more melancholy (reflective) in my preaching. Thanks for the encouraging words.

[bill]

Regarding what ST MATT posted, written by FC...

Getting your approval is hardly on my "to do" list these days. :) I see you as a liberal who is in the upci for no other reason than to try to steer it toward the dark pit of liberalism. You sneer at holiness men who continue to preach seperation, even to the point of name calling and character assasination. Many of the things you write here or on your website, is about some change that you'd like in the upci. While I agree that every organization needs change, and change is good, you are wanting to change our doctrine regarding holiness and seperation. If this is true, and I could be wrong, then you are working under the influence of another spirit that is not of God. The Holy Ghost always draws us toward holiness and seperation, not away from it. And as I've said before, the critics are always the experts, coming here and telling us all how to win souls when most of these people haven't won a soul in their entire life (or very few). This shows their true motivation is not souls, but their own selfish agenda, namely a change away from true holiness. True Holiness begins in the heart, but sanctification is seperation from the world and the things therein. We are not talking about the people or souls that we are to be seperated from, just "that which is in the world, namely the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh and the pride of life." I have spoken about this, although nobody's name was ever mentioned, to Bro Rutledge and he has said that he is also troubled by what he has seen and heard over the years and here on the GNC. Sis Alvear also noted it, and that publically here on the GNC, not to mention Bro Groce and many others. So I am not the only one, just one of the few who is bringing it out in the open. I know that we are living in perilious times, as the scripture prophesied, so may God give us all wisdom and grace.

This is my last post here about this topic. I have a church to start and Bible Studies I need to be working on and I don't have the time to sit around all day here and argue and fight. It does not set well with my spirit and it doesn't edify either.

[Faithchild]

May God bless your efforts.

[Oldpreach]

FC writes : "I have a problem with people that make flat statements or constantly pontificate the obvious. IHS, Nawbee, Oldpreach, ...

Well , at least you included Nawbee with me !!! Ok , im over the part where i get a bit upset at you doing things on purpose toget under our skin , but , i will say that if you really knew the prayers ive prayed and the time alone studying and asking God for the truth of his words principals , you would never include me in the "parrot" list as you call it. I do know what you are talking about tho ...because believe me , the liberals have there fair share of non-thinking , dry repeaters ! I do not say that you are one of them...at least you admit that there are sincere people on the holiness minded side of things that are truly interested in folks well being....which we can all agree is what really all counts in the end.

[Faithchild]

Oldpreach, I really don't think you're one of the polly-parrot people. As far as being holiness-minded, I consider myself that, but I'm not "dress-code-as-holiness-minded." I really should apoligize for posting that list because wounds can't heal if you keep picking the scab. So, I'm sorry. :shrug:

[bishop1]

ARE YOU CALLING ME A SCAB ?

[Webmaster]

Bishop, I do not consider you a scab...I do not believe Bro. Yohe does either. I hope..........

:)

[bishop1]

Bro Yohe probally just found out that I am NOT in the Union.

[Webmaster]

Well, if not in the Union, you don't have dues taken out of your check.....

[Jerry Moon]

And if he works for a Union and doesn't pay due to be in the Union, but still receives the benifets of a Union, he's not a Scab, simply a freeloader. A Scab is somone who crosses the picket line.

[John Atkinson]

It just goes to show you how far off-topic a thread can drift :sb:

[John Atkinson]

PS, just about the only thing I have seen Bro Yohe advocate is the doing away with the rule on TV ministry.

I agree. That rule isn't seperation. It is stupidity. If there is a vehicle to preach we need to use it.

The UPCI shoots themselves in the foot because they don't grok the difference between "holiness" and "standards". And given the way things are, even the suggestion to do away from the useless kludge harvestime will never happen.

I have never read anything Bro Yohe has written that advocates abandoning holiness and seperation. But some of the standards are just plain stupid and lack any foundation at all from a scriptural standpoint.

And everyone here knows that I am as liberal as the next guy, provided the next guy is a redneck.

My bottom line is everyone play nice: Bro Jim, Bro Bill, if you can't say something nice about each other, don't say anything. (I learned that from my mommy:D)


You will never get everyone to agree on everything.

According to this shocking poll 42% of the people on this board don't even believe that P2 believers even qualify as brethren.

That is what is being said when someone says a doctrine is intolorable. Back to the topic!

[Adoniyah]

I am bothered.

As of this writing the nay and the yea are almost in a dead heat. If those that post here are an accurate cross section of the thoughts and feelings of the UPCI, I am bothered.

[BroDane]

I think the first post here was on target, I might get smart myself and do something like pull someone(s) posting priviledges.

*BTW, it wouln't hurt to humble yourself and apologize. It may be a bitter dose to swallow, but its good for what ails you. Goodness knows I've had to do it many times in my life.

*Sarcasm is an effective debate ploy. I am a trained debater. Look how you fly off the handle and respond to it.

Ask anyone who knows me, I am a lighthearted yet straight-forward guy, I mean what I say...If you dont like what I am saying about RESPECT then I recommend that you leave now Or show some respect..and stay.

No need to reply to this, I am directing this to all whom the shoe fits.

[searching]

Uhoh, Bro. Dane's got the keys, and he knows how to use them......LOL!

Me...

[BroDane]

I am not even trying to look like a bully or dictator. I am trying to be what I am, a levelheaded guy who is putting on the breaks...

If I get accused otherwise thats ok..There is only ONE accuser and I think he is a bug...

[apforthelord]

Well everyone stoped talking.

[searching]

Bro. Dane, I hope you know I was kiddin ya.

Me...

[mfblume]

43% of the voters seem to think I am not a brother they can fellowship with.

Hmmmm....

[John Atkinson]

Incredible isn't it? We still love you!

[mfblume]

Thanks bro! Some love me, anyway. :)

[Faithchild]

Whenever I go to Canada I'll fellowship with you as long as you buy me something to eat! Yes, I can be bought (as long as the Rapture doesn't take place until I get to finish that free meal)!

[mfblume]

HAHAHAHAHA

[Adoniyah]

I would be honored to fellowship with you brother Blume anytime. Why, I believe a little personal one on one, I believe that you would see the light. :)

Indeed, we do love you. In fact, a free meal might help the love situation a little more. :)

[Xerf]

I'll fellowship with Bro. Blume -- for as long as the dinner lasts (make it a 9 course -- with fiddleheads and corn fritters)!



:jk:

[Webmaster]

Do I hear all you can eat Prime Rib Buffet...Canadian style????? hehehehe.....Really, Bro. Blume, you can ask Revelationist....I don't eat that much...hehehehehehe....really......

Bro. Flemming

[apforthelord]

Pastor Blume,

ALl i can say is Jesus fellowship with sinners in the new Testment remember.

Not saying u are a sinner!

But we are to be like Jesus, right?

You are my Brother and i love you. You have help me many times and i wish that this mix up will NOT de-rail you Ministry!

Also i know that i may sound like a idiot when i say this, but i am going to anyway......

Be careful the devil is watching and he is waiting for a time to attack!! I know u are a Pastor, Brother but i am telling you to not to get down!!! I will pray for you!!!!

[BroDane]

I knew you wher kiddin Searching...lol

[apforthelord]

Oh yhea, i have not voted because well......

I dont know why, i am not one to say.

[apostle]

Bro. Blume
I think you and Adoniyah with Jim Yohe would have very good fellowship together.

As for me. I do not know if I would want to fellowship with you at this point.

maybe you belong in Athens? I'm a One God believer and So are my brother and sisters. And nothing but one God believers.

So don't be offended or feel like a victim.
I just believe birds of a feather flock together.
I'm sure I know where your nest is.

[mfblume]

Leave it to Apostle to accuse us of not being One God.

Brother, may the Lord forgive you.

Thanks, all others. ;)

[apforthelord]

Pastor Blume:

I have not been getting any of the E mail sermons that i have been getting from you in the past.....

Whats up with that.


Apostle why dont you back off...... This is a hard time for Blume and he don't need you to debate with him over his future....................... U write:

So don't be offended or feel like a victim.
I just believe birds of a feather flock together.
I'm sure I know where your nest is.

Bro if Birds of a feather flock together why don't u come together in unity with YOUR APOSTOLIC BROTHER AND MAYBE GET ON YOUR KNEES AND PRAY FOR BLUME!!!

U say: I'm sure I know where your nest is.

I think you have been in your nest for a little to long.

Wheres the helping hand Apostle???

IM sorry Bro. Dane.

[truemessianic]

Bro. Blume,
We know who we serve. I believe Apostle shows the same spirit that another brother has in this point. I am just gonna pray for him!
I am One God, Jesus Name, Acts 2:38! I know what I believe!
May the Lord forgive you, apostle.

[apostle]

I'm not going to argue with people about what the bible says.
I leave the debates at this point with you all. It's the same old story over and over again.

I dont believe rapture or that the second coming is at the end of time.

I do not believe like a trinity at all. And That includes all their teachings. But most here do.

I will let them birds fly away, and I will be left behind.
the UPC says as long as you believe in acts 238 and rapture your one of them.

good day

[apforthelord]

Let me ask you a Question:

Do u believe that the 10 commaments were real???

And let me tell you what you say sometimes dont seem to Be UPC.

[apforthelord]

This is not a Trinity Board so dont talk like we are.....u know I always said.....If everyone around you is Wrong, Its not them. It's You.

I am a One God, Apostolic, Tounge talkin, holly rollin , Born Again Believer...........In Jesus name.

[Adoniyah]

Apostle said:

I will let them birds fly away, and I will be left behind

My response:

Of course you will. Cocatrice eggs do not hatch and fly away. They just slither away. :redcool:

No disrespect meant. I respect all creatures both great and small. OK admin, let me have it. I probably deserve it. Some temptations are hard to resist...yaknowwhaimeenvern? :D

[apforthelord]

There was venom in that bite Adoniyah...lol

[apforthelord]

I am insulted that my questions where not answered i feel not good enough for Apostle...you know since accourding to him i am going to hell because i Trust in a Pre trib end......i guess i am not intitled to my own opinion to doctrine!!!!!!

[Faithchild]

Mike Blume has no problerms being allowed to stay in the UPCI. He has many friends and supporters who love and respect him. Being a friend and a supporter of Larry Smith who has tweaked the nose of the establishment has brought Bro. Blume's name up in the lower 48. There are many things that should be excised from the Articles of Faith and a insistence on pre-trib shouldn't be there.

Apostle, I'd be happy to fellowship with Bro. Blume, Bro. Strange and even you as long as you don't slobber or dribble when you eat. If you chew with your mouth shut, let's get together! In fact, you can start practicing keeping your mouth shut right now!:yeah:

[Webmaster]

Well, that let's me out...I slobber, eat with my mouth open....I guess no one will fellowship me....:rolleyes:

hehehehehehehe:D

[Faithchild]

Bro. Flemming, if you buy, I'll sit next to you on the same side of the table, so I don't have to look at you! :laugh:

[mfblume]

Hi all,

Well, the Symposium is over that was held May 1 and 2, where Larry Smith presented partial preterism. Was anybody there?

I heard reports from one person who was there who said Bro Norris, who opposed Bro Smith, was more personal in his attacks against Smith, rather than using scripture to refute partial preterism, itself, with much sarcasm.

[Faithchild]

I heard the same thing. But since I'm a practioner of the same "art", I chose not to comment on it! :o

[mfblume]

Haha...

I spoke with Bro Smith about it and he felt confident that he did his best at the meeting.

I think many had preconceived notions that he was wrong, but others who came to truly weigh out the differences honestly are reported to have said that they are now checking over all that they formerly believed once again!

[stmatthew]

Bro Blume,

As I have not really looked into this much i wanted to ask you, Does Bro Smith lean at all toward "full preterist". This was the impression I got a while back, but to be honest don't remember who it was that gave it to me. i just wondered:).

btw- I voted yes, because of your witness upon this board. I have no doubt that you are a true minister of the gospel, so I see it as a side issue that we continue to study and redefine our thoughts on. Not everyone has all the answers like our beloved Apostle. Some of us are just still vomit (sorry, I had to say it.....forgive me father for I have sinned....hehehe)

[Faithchild]

Bro. Blumer, Bro. Smith and you are having a tremendous impact across the country. As much as I love Bro. Baxter, everytime one of his "predictions" doesn't come to pass, the more attractive your position is looking. I really think pre-trib is hanging itself.

[Xerf]

Well paint my heifer red and call her endtime!

[searching]

Bro. Blumer, Bro. Smith and you are having a tremendous impact across the country. As much as I love Bro. Baxter, everytime one of his "predictions" doesn't come to pass, the more attractive your position is looking. I really think pre-trib is hanging itself.


Bro. Yohe, that man is the main reason I am turned off by prophecy preachers. I am so turned off by them that if I hear one will visit my church, I won't go. Bro. Baxter is a great man, I'm sure, but prophecy isn't his game, IMHO.

Me...

[Adoniyah]

Brother Yohe, you said:

"As much as I love Bro. Baxter, everytime one of his "predictions" doesn't come to pass, the more attractive your position is looking."

My question:

Have you considered Spiritual intrepretation of the same scriptures that the Dispensationalist and the Preterist use to prove their natural precepts?

It is not really that hard, but I have noticed that it takes a different set of rules to come to that kind of understanding. I am not trying to push my interpretations as I am not a Zealot. God does his own work, I just try to follow, but I believe that you would be far richer in a spiritual sense if you were to take hold of the Spiritual interpretation of the Word. Every natural concept of the Word becomes stale after a while, leading people to consider something new. Unfortunately that "something new" seems to always be a carnal interpretation which swings as a pendulum, back and forth from pre to post to pan to occasionally preterist and every variation in between.

If we would learn to interpret the scriptures spiritually there would be more fresh bread there than we could ever digest. There would be more fodder for preaching, more light and fire to keep you awake nights on end with the eternal flame.

With love and imho.

[BroDane]

Well, I am not UPC but I am one with this in mind

That Yall might count it nessarry even Bible to know all this deep stuff, and thats ok too.. I tend to stick with what I see as essential and this topic aint one of them.

But you can go on..Just stop with the childish name calling....( I wont pull any names out, I could, and show what I call name calling but I wont..Just get along and fight..I mean.. errr.. discuss like gentlenmen..or women..LOL)

I dont care when or how Jesus left or came-comes back..all I care about is how is he gonna find me NOW...

(Bro Adoniyah, I was ingrafted with 6 months of AG pentecostalism Before I was a member there years ago. I did read Azuza street too!..I would sit with and listen to anyone except those who wont listen to me..in order to tell em Acts 2:38, The only thing I remember from all that stuff is how bible translation came about and by whom..LOL)

[Faithchild]

Adoniyah, I'll give it a shot. I'm not a prophecy buff, though I've leaned toward pre-wrath (between the sixth and seventh seal).

Bro. Dane, I'm doing my best, I'm aware of that itchy trigger-finger. I'm leaving in the morning for Evansville, so I'll be safely out of harm's way.:bow:

[apostle]

BroDane
yep.
poeple will fight to keep there childhood belief rather then stick to what the bible says.

The JWs came over and spent the better part of the evening with me trying to tell me that revelation has not happend yet.

One of them told me that there must be two great tribulations because I was able to show that in old Jerusalem was the great tribulation.

I was so amazed! (not really) They believe and tried to prove pre trib. Just like UPC.

I did ask them for a responce to what Jesus said. All these things will come to pass in this generation.
They said it really did not mean everything. HE HE.

They tried to tell me that Rome is the legs of iron, and it was Rome that made Jerusalem desolate.

I showed them with the bible two nations Jesus said would condemn it, and they said I did not understanding about Nineveh
HE HE.
But anyway. Saying all that to say this.
Maybe the church will some day condemn the future trib doctrine, and the cathing away doctrine.

I pray I will see it in my life time.

In Jesus name

[apforthelord]

Who was Matt talking about in Matt 24???
Isreal Or the Church??

[apostle]

the discussion between Jesus and the disciples cuncerning the the temple in Jerusalem.

all of matt was fulfilled.

in Jesus name

[Adoniyah]

PTL Bro. Dane:

You addressed this comment to me:

(Bro Adoniyah, I was ingrafted with 6 months of AG pentecostalism Before I was a member there years ago. I did read Azuza street too!..I would sit with and listen to anyone except those who wont listen to me..in order to tell em Acts 2:38, The only thing I remember from all that stuff is how bible translation came about and by whom..LOL)

My question:

While I am gratified that at least you received some information about bibile translations and by whom, I am curious as to why you directed that remark toward me. You do not think that I am AofG or have been at one time do you? I am curious as to what was in the back of your mind. There may be something that I might need to clarify. I do not want you to labor under an erroneous impression.

I would be loosing ground after being an Apostolic for over 62 years and someone thinks that I am sympathetic to AG teachings.

With love,
Adoniyah

[BroDane]

Brother Adoniyah, when I address people like when I did to you in a p.s. I mean it in a relational way that is what I meant by bringing it up, I believe that if I can relate to someone in any way then perhaps I can discuss matters with that person, thats all

I am as you see here, I do not have hidden meanings behind my words, It was a relational comment that I can relate to sitting with a AGer as I was one, I know how, and what they think as I was indoctrinated in their teachings for years.

[BroDane]

Bro Xerf,

If yer gonna be a Rum-sucking-food-inhaling-slobby Pirate then at least put some meaning into your words in yer picture!

Try AaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaRRRRRRRRRRggggggggguhhhh!
(then dont forget to cough and hack as alot of pirates were fat slobs who ate and drank and smoked alot)

NOT Arrrrr..you sound like a pathetic car on its last cylinder..I know..I had one!

[mfblume]

Bro Yohe,

I am not sure what may become of all this issue being raised in the UPC now, but one thing I do know is that if we can focus all of our studies and ensure they result in one thing.... glorifying Christ more, and urging us to live to our full potentials in what Christ did to us when He saved us, and what we do in alloiwing Him to work through us -- NOW -- not in some 1000 year period ahead, then we're on the right track.

Full-orbed ministry is getting souls saved and then bringing them into a spiritual maturity -- yea, into the deep things of God (1 Cor 2:10), Bro Dane -- and seeing them learn to allow Christ to live through them. That is what was linked with partial preterism. I came into this understanding through revelation of personal study of God's word. The work of the cross was so paramount in my studies, and it naturally led me to this aspect. But, to me, partial preterism is a means to an end. The means is seeing that God has remove the Old Covenant through the cross, and confirmed and stressed that in 70 AD with the removal of the entire system that occurred before and carried on for a time after the cross. The Judaic system was finished at Calvary. Christ gave them time to repent, although they crucified Him. And when that time arrived, He removed the entire shot, that which can be shaken, so that which cannot be shaken may remain.

And the Church is the ultimate and final thing on planet earth. The goal is the life of living in the true promised land right now, spiritually. He removed the natural covenant on the cross, and confirmed that in 70 AD -- note I said "confirmed" -- and set the church loose free from the oppression of the fleshly older entity, natural persecuting Israel and Jerusalem (like Ishamel removed to see Isaac loosed), to do His work until the end. No turning to natural Israel anymore. Its they who must turn to Him.

And the church, throughout all ages, will glorify Christ. THAT is the end that we must see NOW. POWER NOW.

Bro Adoniyah thinks its completely carnal to interpret prophecy as I do, although I clearly noted to him and many others that BOTH aspects are involved, not just one. Its spiritual and physically fulfilled. Jerusalem was cursed and physical Jerusalem was destroyed. That is plain fact. But spiritual aspects are ever around in that issue as well.

[Adoniyah]

Brother Dane:

O I C

Thanks for the explanation. :)

[BroDane]

Bro Blume,

Good post...

Bro Adoniyah..YW

[apforthelord]

Ok Apostle:

You say:

the discussion between Jesus and the disciples cuncerning the the temple in Jerusalem.


So u are saying that he was talking about the church whne he told this forth coming?

[BroDane]

Apostle asked some Questions and numbered them.

I wouldnt mind seeing Bible answers from both sides addressing each one in order that they are posted, This is the kind of debate I prefer..Not arguments

I think, it would be beneficial for all to decide what is true and what is not..

My desire is to learn by seeing and reading scriptures for myself rather than one telling me this the way it is..Show bible answers and I will listen..

How about if I ask em...and whomever responds, with answers?
I believe that almost all bible-based questions are important, what I mean is, there are things like... Hmmm then again..if its not a gray area then????

I think I have the Holy Ghost and he leads me..

Any takers on a Q&A???

[mfblume]

Annie,

Just a note to you this way, since I could not respond any other.

You sent a private note to me and I was unable to respond since your indicated email did not function. Anyway, yes, I am related to the Bustards.

[Adoniyah]

Brother Blume, I enjoy engaging you in friendly discussion and do appreciate so much your indulgence. I noted with some curiosity a few comments you made above:

You said:

"But, to me, partial preterism is a means to an end. The means is seeing that God has remove the Old Covenant through the cross, and confirmed and stressed that in 70 AD with the removal of the entire system that occurred before and carried on for a time after the cross."

My question: Are you saying that without the 70AD teaching, you would not have been able to see the removal of the entire (Judaic) system of worship and services to God as acceptable to God?

Are you saying that those that do not see preterism in any form cannot see that the cross is the end of all things including Judaic, carnal worship? Are you saying that Dispensationalist (which I am not) cannot also see that the cross is the end?

Would you not agree that the doctrine of the cross does not need the 70AD doctrine derived from an extrabiblical source to prop it up? Would you not agree that it stands alone in all of its radiant heavenly lustre without historical confirmation? I am certain that you would agree.

Further, you said:

"Christ gave them time to repent, although they crucified Him."

My question: Did God's mercy run out? Would you not agree that His mercy endureth forever? Would he not allow them to repent even today...two thousands years later?

I am sure that you would agree that even today that if they would nationally repent, through faith in Jesus Christ, from PM Shaaron right on down to the lowest beggar, God would graciously accept them, forgiving them, adding to his church a whole nation. I am certain that you would agree that the mercies of God are not subject to the whims of ignorant man.

You said:

"He removed the natural covenant on the cross, and confirmed that in 70 AD -- note I said "confirmed" -- and set the church loose free from the oppression of the fleshly older entity, natural persecuting Israel and Jerusalem (like Ishamel removed to see Isaac loosed), to do His work until the end."

I think all, including the Dispensationalit would agree that he removed the natural covenant on the cross. However, you might would like to cite some scripture illustrating the point that the events surrounding 70 AD set the church loose from an Ishamelic bondange?

I believe that all bondanges were loosed from the church in the events surrounding the cross, i.e., D/B/R. If you are dependent on the the historical understanding of the events surrounding 70 AD, I would then say that there are some Dispensationalist that have a deeper understanding of the cross and of the events surrounding the Cross, in as much as some see that the cross is the end of all things without the historical understanding of the events involving Titus and Nero in the year 70 AD. Would you not agree?

You also said:

"And the church, throughout all ages, will glorify Christ. THAT is the end that we must see NOW. POWER NOW."

My response:

This is a wonderful statement. I would give a hearty "amen" to it. However, do we not all agree with that. I do...and I am neither a Dispensationalist nor a Pp.

Brother Blume, the more that I converse with you, the deeper my love and respect grows for you. My! How greatly I yearn to sit and have an all day or possibly an all night discussion with you in the spirit of meekness and love!

[ddc101]

Well I want to be the little birdie that listens in Bro.Strange.
I love the written word of God and the depth of discussion
that can come about when flesh moves over.A humble spirit
will bring about a great work.I pray that all whom God is
pouring out revelation upon would take up bowels of mercy
and much much grace and share in humility truth with those
who lack understanding of the word.Unfortuately those are the ones who war with the word loudly and most ignorantly.
I give an applause to Bro.Blume for his last post.I agree with
most of it.The only qualm I have with our apostolic brethren
who are holding to parital preterism is that I feel they should
have never take on the label as it limits the sharing of the word.
In fact a greater work could be done in sharing if they would just teach the bible correctly and not hold to any view but the biblical
view.Wouldn't a conference be neat that proclaimed it studied
biblical prophecy and its fullfillment without any escatalogical
stance proclaimed? Do you all thing its possible in apostolic
circles?lv sis.c

[Adoniyah]

Brother Dane:

Ask away, brother. :)

Aside from the Gospels, it is my firm belief that the spiritual understanding of the Revelation of Jesus Christ is of prime importance for out day, in which it is God's intent, in the fullness of (this time) to reveal his Son in us.

[Adoniyah]

Sis:

Don't build your expectations so high. There are too many areas in which I am woefully defecient. If bro. Dane decides to ask his questions, I will do my best.

[Webmaster]

Bro. Blume,

As I am not an expert on prophecy, this may come out as dis-jointed rambling, but I will do my best. I have always been and continue to be pre-trib. However, let me address one of your posts:

I understand from talking with other ministers about their beliefs, that some believe after the rapture that the Jews can be saved by the restoration of the ritual sacrifice system observed in temple worship of years gone by. It is apparently this type of teaching that makes you refer to partial preterism as the means by wich you saw the end of that covenant.

The pastor I grew up under is most definitely pre-trib, but I was never taught that anyone could be saved by an animal sacrifice. Hebrews 10:4-14,"For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should takeaway sins. Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me: In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God. Above when he said, Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law; Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins: But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God; From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool. For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified." KJV I believe this indicates to us that sacrifices are done away with! Jesus Christ made the ultimate sacrifice on Calvary! If anyone, Jew or Gentile alike, is going to be saved since the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, they are going to have to be saved the same way I was...through the great salvation plan of Acts 2:38! God is no respecter of person, there is only one door: JESUS CHRIST! That old covenant marriage is dissolved and now the church is the BRIDE. Any other belief makes the church a concubine. JMHO


Bro. Flemming

[mfblume]

Brother Adoniyah,

I am glad you are asking me about these issues, because I am able to clarify my position on prophecy. I thought all took for granted certain things in partial preterism. But I will clarify.

You said, "Are you saying that without the 70AD teaching, you would not have been able to see the removal of the entire (Judaic) system of worship and services to God as acceptable to God?"

Not at all. I already knew long ago that God removed the entire Judaic system. But partial preterism put a stress on that and showed me how much more God's concern, confirming that to the entire world, really was, through realizing the stress put upon harlot Jerusalem in prophecies of judgment and destruction.

God has no problem letting us know that truth of the end of Judaism. But He made it unequivocally clear to the blindest of sinners, in 70 AD. To think that God put that much stress upon a visible sign of the end of all that was old, is to put more emphasis than I previously understood, upon the weight of concern God had for the issue.

You asked, " Are you saying that those that do not see preterism in any form cannot see that the cross is the end of all things including Judaic, carnal worship? Are you saying that Dispensationalist (which I am not) cannot also see that the cross is the end?"

I already noted that it CONFIRMED the end of Judaic syustem. I always knew that Christ finished or fulfilled all the law. And I simply took it for granted everyone knew I knew that. Haha. Everyone can see the cvross is the end. But the true dispensationalist is at a disadvantage because they think the law will reconvene after the rapture.

Of course the cross needs no 70 AD confirmation. But because God DID deal with Jerusalem in 70 AD (I cannot see how anyone could deny that) then it shows more stress and concern of God upon that issue.

Concerning my proposal that Christ gave Jerusalem and Israel time to repent for crucifying Him, you asked, "Did God's mercy run out?"

UNTIL 70 TIMES 7. Yes. There is a point where His mercy ceases. Note that Israel broke 70 Sabbath years which awarded them bondage in babylon for the same period. Upon release, God gave them another seventy sabbath years (70 weeks). And in Matthew 18, where Peter was told that he must forgive until 70 x 7, we also read where the master revoked his mercy on the servant for the servant's lack of forgiveness towards his brother, and bound him UNTIL he should pay all that he owed. Jesus practiced what he preached. He bound Israel in Babylon at the point where they violated 70 sabbaths... he had mercy UNTIL 70 x 7. At that point, Israel was bound and had to pay every single year back. And He gave them another set in the 70 weeks.

"Would you not agree that His mercy endureth forever?"

Sure, in the context in which that is written. That does not mean eternity, though. Do you not agree there is a line of tolerance man can cross?

"Would he not allow them to repent even today...two thousands years later?"

Only if he forgives dead people for sins they committed 2000 years ago. Brother, it seems you agree with the dispensationalists that the entire race was judged for one hgeneration's error. I disagree strongly. The only people Who directly were guilty were the people of the generation in Jesus' day. And they were dealt with at 70 AD. They reaped the whirlwind. Many did repent and came out and into the church. The rest were removed.

"I am sure that you would agree that even today that if they would nationally repent, through faith in Jesus Christ, from PM Shaaron right on down to the lowest beggar, God would graciously accept them, forgiving them, adding to his church a whole nation."

Yes, indeed! But that has nothing to do with the direct generation who crucified the Lord. Of course all humanity crucified Him in the sense that our sins drove Him to die for us. But not all humanity purposed to do so as Israel did.

" I am certain that you would agree that the mercies of God are not subject to the whims of ignorant man." Amen!

You said, "cite some scripture illustrating the point that the events surrounding 70 AD set the church loose from an Ishamelic bondange?"

Galatians 4.

I will get back with more thoughts on Gal 4. Gotta run!

[mfblume]

Bro flemming, you were brought up beneath watered down dispensationalism. Raw dispensationalism does indeed preach that GHod wil save the Jews by animal sacrifice again for the years after the rapture.

[witness4jesus]

The confirmation of the New Covenant was the day of Pentecost.

Israel was already spiritually dead, and desolate. Its physical destruction was only a matter of time, and I think, the conclusion of that generation. It was 40 years from the Cross to the consummation.

I do see the destruction of Israel as important, but I believe it was a foregone conclusion. I believe when Jesus said, your house is left to you desolate, that it was. I believe that the covenant began at Pentecost. I believe that Jesus put an end to sin at the Cross.

The problem with partial preterism is, it becomes just another school of theology, and it takes the focus off where it needs to be, the Cross, and Pentecost. That is the new beginning.

sis pam

[Webmaster]

Bro. Blume,

I do not see how anyone can possibly believe that a return to animal sacrifice will save anyone. It would make the blood that Jesus shed on Calvary of none effect. To believe that God would return to the natural Israel, would put the church into a subordinate position. I do not find this in the Word.

As to "watered down dispensationalism", I am amazed we have had to relegate to labels. I do not know that I would be able to convince other ministers to hold my view on the subject...though many have tried to persuade me of (here is a label) full dispensationalism. I wish we could just go back to being APOSTOLIC!

I posted on another board that I did not feel it was my right to tell a sovereign pastor what to teach behind his own pulpit. Whatever happened to local church sovereignty? The facts is I have never seen and do not expect to see all of us agree on prophecy. I do expect us to agree on slavation doctrine...and although others would probably blast me for this, I do believe in old fashioned standards. But, prophecy? I do not expect it will ever happen.

Bro. Flemming

[Thelordisone]

mlflemming,

Nice post & Amen!!

Also, dont worry about men blasting you just so long the Master does not.

God Bless!!

[Adoniyah]

Brother Blume, I had asked:

You said, "cite some scripture illustrating the point that the events surrounding 70 AD set the church loose from an Ishamelic bondange?"

Your response was: Galatians 4.

Brother Blume, if your answer to the question is Gal 4, I hope that you will bear witness that Gal. 4 was written before 70AD. Gal 4:26 testifies that spiritual Jerusalem, mother of us all (both Jew and gentile) was already free, not subject to the events surrounding Titus and Nero nor of 70 AD.

Concerning my comment about "mercy enduring forever," you said:

"Sure, in the context in which that is written. That does not mean eternity, though. Do you not agree there is a line of tolerance man can cross?"

You correctly noted that the mercies of God are subject to certain things, but incorrectly noted that it is subject to time. I correctly noted that the mercies of God endureth forever. Psa. 136 bears this out citing each verse, concluding with: "...his mercies endureth forever." This confirms that mercies are not subject to time. However, his mercies are subject to state. Here is one of dozens of scriptures that bear out this point:

d 20:6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Deu 5:10 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me and keep my commandments.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Deu 7:9 Know therefore that the LORD thy God, he [is] God, the faithful God, which keepeth covenant and mercy with them that love him and keep his commandments to a thousand generations;

Notice the use of thousand generations...being plural of "thousand." That is FOREVER. His mercies are not subject to 70 generations nor of 70 X 7, imho.

His mercies are subject to those that keep his commandments and walk in his love.

In my wildest imagination, I cannot see how that God would limit his mercy to a line of demarcation as related to time. God does not dwell in time nor does his mercy. It dwells only in state.

Concerning your arrival at the understanding of the cross being the end of all things by the doctrine of Pp, you said:

"Not at all. I already knew long ago that God removed the entire Judaic system. But partial preterism put a stress..."

I see that "stress" as a prop to the glory of the cross. The events of 70 AD, Titus and Nero could not add one single thing to that glory.

However, Matt 24, Mark 13 and Luke 21 doe not address natural issues neither does 70 AD address spiriitual issues. But, the events surrounding the cross does address natural and carnal issues, only to the extent that those events signify the death of it all, as to be the end of it all, as opposed to the idea that 70 AD would be.

In some of your responses concerning the generation of Jews that crucified Jesus, it appears that you see the church as natural and generational rather than an eternal entity that came into existence from the call of Abraham, ever progressing from one state to the next, coming forth progressively, world without end.

The seed of Abraham was spiritual then as it is now, and will always be; that being the seed of faith. It is that seed that is eternal which gives birth to an ever progressive church that is not yet born the fruit of maturity as God has designed in the seed.

The statue of that seed is still growing, though it has suffered many winters and many droughts, but it is predestined to bring forth its fruit in the earth. The design is in the seed itself.

More later.

[mfblume]

Sis Pam, you put words in my mouth that I do not propose.

Adoniyah,

The Seed of Abraham is Christ only. There was no other seed of Abraham. There was no spiritual seed of Abraham before the cross. And since we are baptized into Christ, we are the seed of Abraham.

Concerning generations, the church is the only generation that is spiritual. And it did not exist before the cross, except by promise.

And 70 AD did indeed glorify Christ. Everything Christ said that was fulfilled, natural and spiritual, glorifies the Lord in my eyes. As I said Jerusalem was a physical reality and was destroyed in 70 AD as a physical destruction. Christ said it, and I think its more than coincidence. It happened in a generation's period.

The generation spoken of in Matthew 24 was not the church generation, but the wicked and adulterous generation of the people in the time period of those years.

The church never came into existence until Pentecost.

70 times 7 is indeed a cut off point of God. Jesus said so. UNTIL 70 times 7. "God will nto always strive with man." Mercy cannot be given to those dead and gone.

mlflemming,

What concerns me is that apostolics have derived their conclusions of dispensationalism from Scofield and Larkin and Darby, and changed it to suit apostolic feelings. Had they left Scofield's notes alone, there would never have been a wtaered down version.

I agree that raw dispensationalism nullifies the blood of Jesus. That is one of my major points of stress concerning futurism's error. But to take an established doctrine and remove some of its tenets to suit apostolic flavour is watering things down in my mind.

If you research the issue of true dispensationalism, and read its tenets, you will find that you will cringe at it as much as I have. Its awful! Scofield's notes need to be burned!

By the way, did anyone know that Scofield was quite the sinner? He was married twice. He had two daughters with his first wife, and was divorced by her due to the manner in which he treated her and the daughters. He courted his next wife before the divorce was finalized. He was married three months after the divorce came through. He willfully abandoned his first wife and refused to suport the children.

Check out the whole sordid history here: http://poweredbychrist.homestead.com/files/cyrus/scofield.htm

This, sadly, is the father of dispensationalism.

[stmatthew]

Bro Adoniyah,

Would not Gods mercy to the Nation of Israel still be extended to them thru the Gospel. Blindness happened in part until the fulness of the dispensation of the gentiles had come. It came, IMHO, in Acts 10, at Conrneleus' house, when the door was opened wide to the gentiles. This, IMHO, was the provoking of the jews spoken of by the prophets.

Gal 4 has been on my mind for the last few days. It is my reasoning as to why i do not believe God will turn again to the natural nation of Israel. Hagar was a type of natural Jerusalem which is below. Abraham cast her our and never did return to her.

JMHO

[Webmaster]

Yes, I have heard about some of Scofields rather dubious antics outside of his "religious pursuits." Although I would agree with you that following his teachings alone would be dubious at best, there are those that claim to have evidence (I have not seen it, but would like to if it does exist) that predates Larkin, Scofield, et. al, in fact it supposedly goes back to the time of the Apostles. Most futurists would deny they are gleaning from Scofield. I never liked his Bible or notes anyway for any subject. Like Dake, he is a "little" predjudiced.

The Bible interpets the Bible...some of these other commentaries are (as others have said) for the birds anyway.

Bro. Flemming

[mfblume]

Wow. Someone mentions that partial preterism is having an impact on the UPC, and more criticism than ever come out from the woodworks in reaction! :)

Galatians 4 notes that Israel under law was the ISHMAEL element that persecuted the early church severely. Hagar is the Jerusalem on the earth at that time. And Paul said they were entirely under bondage.

The true seed of Abraham was the church, the Isaac element, with spiritual Jerusalem from above being the mother. Paul, therefore, believed the church was New Jerusalem.

The natural middle eastern land of Israel was not what caught Abraham's heart. Hebrews 11 says that Abraham was IN the land of promise in Canaan, but sought for a better country -- a heavenly country.

Partial pretetrism focuses on the cross in every way that any other interpretation of prophecy does, plus MORE! It sees relevance in the destruction of Jerusalem, more than any other viewpoint, by noting that Jesus' words in Matthew 23 about NATURAL Jerusalem in Israel having filled the cup and made guilty of all blood shed on the earth due to the cross she perpetrated. All other views nullify that stress Jesus had. In fact Jesus had it so strongly, that when the disciples commented on the buildings of the temple, he took them once again right back into the thought of its destruction. To say there is no relevance to the destruction of Jerusalem and her temple is to say that Jesus' entire dicsussions from Matthew 21 through 25 were irrelevant. And to say that these issues were purely spiritual and nothing to do with natural Jerusalem and her destruction is to LIMIT His words. They were BOTH naturally and spiritually fulfilled. BOTH. And anything fulfilled by Christ, glorifies Him! ANYTHING! None other could predict the future as He did.

But the issue of Ishmael and Isaac is absolutely notable!

Law was contrasted with GRACE AND TRUTH. Think of it. TRUTH contrasts with LAW. That does not mean LAW is not true. But TRUTH here refers to REALITY contrasted from SHADOW. Law and everything in it was a shadow of the spiritual realm and covenant of New Testament. The world that Abraham was heir to, was not the physical world, but the
new heaven and earth of the entire New Testament world.

Sarah is the heavenly Jerusalem. New Jerusalem. God will never establish HAGAR and ISHMAEL. Hagar, keep in mind, represents Jerusalem on earth and the entire Old Testament system. Ishmael are the adherents to Law.

Prophecy using earthly elements is going to be ultimately fulfilled spiritually!

Abraham was told to inherit the land, and God pointed the physical land to him. But Hebrews 11 PROVES that this was fulfilled in the SPIRITUAL COUNTRY, and not earthy at all. For in Hebrews 11, Abraham looked for a HEAVENLY COUNTRY. Now, where did he get the inclination to do that, unless the promises using the earthly land were revealed to him to actually be the heavenly land?

If earthly elements in prophecy are not to be understood to be fulfilled spiritually, then where did God tell Abraham of a heavenly country??????

Galatians 4 has MAJOR issues to be gleaned about Hagar and Sarah!

[mfblume]

Stmatt,

I propose that blindness is not upon the entire race of Jews. It was only the generation who crucified the Lord. Jesus distinguished that generation from the entire race in Matthew 23 by saying those people's fathers persecuted, but they, themselves, would fill the cup. That distinguishes the race from the generation.

And since the church is BOTH jew and gentile, and since the entire mystery hidden from all the ages until now was that God would make one body of the two separate gentiles and jews, then why is the church a gentile dispensation?

Everything Paul taught about that is against dispensationalism's thought that the church is mainly gentile.

Eph 2:13-19 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ. (14) For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition [between us]; (15) Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, [even] the law of commandments [contained] in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, [so] making peace; (16) And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: (17) And came and preached peace to you which were afar off, and to them that were nigh. (18) For through him we both have access by one Spirit unto the Father. (19) Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;

Eph 3:3-9 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words, (4) Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ) (5) Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit; (6) That the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel: (7) Whereof I was made a minister, according to the gift of the grace of God given unto me by the effectual working of his power. (8) Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ; (9) And to make all [men] see what [is] the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ:

I propose dispensationalism's tenet of the church being GENTILE, having God turn back to ISRAEL after the church is gone, flies int he face of the entire mystery hidden from the ages!

[Webmaster]

Bro. Blume,

As I have stated before, I do not believe God will turn back to Israel through the old covenant. Period. Zip- Zilch-Nada - None. If a Jew is to be saved, they will have to come in the same way I did - through the door: Acts 2:38.

I want you to know, I am digesting your posts here, and the studies on your site, as well as Bro. Smith's material. I spent from 6:00 P.M. to approx. 3:00 A.M. over a year ago in Bro. Smith's office going over some of this with him. It took you both years of research to come to the conclusions that you have. As I see it, you took no mans word for it, but looked into it for yourself. Give me the same opportunity.

James Chap. 1 lets us know that if we are tossed about by every wind of doctrine, we will become unstable in all our ways, and we should not expect to receive anything from the Lord. If indeed I am to change my mind on this subject, it will be because I took great care and invested effort and study into this matter for myself, not because I took someones word for it.

There is an attitude prevelant (sorry dispensationalists, but it is true) that if you do not accept what I say, you are disfellowshipped. Bro. Blume, I hope it does not come down to that on the preterist side at some future point. If the "past" group begins to carry the same "shoulder chip", it will be a dark day in Pentecost. We should never adopt doctrine because of what a man says, but rather what God says!

Bro. Flemming

[mfblume]

Amen and amen Bro Flemming.

I commend you for, and encourage you to continue to, make sure you understand the issue for yourself.

I will say that since the poll showing lack of tolerance on about half the folks here, then I may cease posting around these parts. I am not blatting, when I say that. Haha. But lack of tolerance for views that are not salvational, in my mind, simply turns me off -- plain and simple.

I have a pet peave in such lack of tolerance, and unwillingness to search into an issue before speaking about it. Be Berean! It's a folly and shame to answer a matter before one hears it. And then to not tolerate it, even if heard, simply is a principle difference I have in my entire concept of being Apostolic, when the issue is not salvational.

I understand this does not reflect the administrators of the discussion board, but it does reflect on Apostolics in general, right or worng. That truly saddens me.

You're in my fellowship book, bro Flemming!

God bless!

[Webmaster]

Bro. Blume,

Even if the majority votes against you, it would be wrong on your part to quit posting here. Consider the following:

If you quit posting, your voice will not be heard.

If you quit posting, will our minds be scripturally and intellectually challenged concerning this issue?

If you quit posting, intolerance wins.

Winners never quit.

Bro. Flemming

[Sandy]

Bro. Blume,

I for one do hope you do not leave here. Although I do understand how you feel too. Have thought about it myself at times as well. But pray about it anyway as I know you will. Because sometimes it is just us that wants to go. And then sometimes, it is time to leave too, having been there as well.

But there will always be those that will not tolerate disagreement of any kind no matter what. Whether right or wrong. Been in that seat a whole lot on here especially. It hurts sometimes to think that brothers and sisters accuse or see you as a reprobate too. I know. But we have to forgive them too, as you well know also. "Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life." (2nd Cor. 3:6)

I have not studied out this issue yet, so I don't know if I agree with you or not, as I have said. I just trust the Lord that if He wants me to see this, then He will show me in due time, leading me to study it, because of putting that desire in my heart to do so. But I do need to go back and copy what you and others have written on this issue for later anyway.

[jbenjesus]

Bro. Mike,

Remember your poll did not ask if we should disfellowship with those that believe in pP.

You asked, "Should Partial Preterism be tolerated by Apostolics as another prophetic view?"

People are voting based on that question, not whether one should disfellowship with those that believe in pP. That's not what was asked.

If you wanted to find that out post another poll, but I would advise against it.

It would not edify any anyway.

[Xerf]

Bro. Blume don't quit! Because if you do then Apostle will drive the rest of us crazy! Your the only one that can keep him occupied!

:jk:

Besides, everyone is against me (not just half), so I count it a challenge -- so many to convert to xerfism!

So hang in there pal and give em the p2!


:rolleyes:

[jbenjesus]

Originally posted by Xerf
Bro. Blume don't quit! Because if you do then Apostle will drive the rest of us crazy! Your the only one that can keep him occupied! Boy ain't that the truth.

You bring an edifying word whenever you share and speak with us Bro.

Don't stop now. Your too far ahead to stop now.

[stmatthew]

Bro Blume,

I propose that blindness is not upon the entire race of Jews. It was only the generation who crucified the Lord. Jesus distinguished that generation from the entire race in Matthew 23 by saying those people's fathers persecuted, but they, themselves, would fill the cup. That distinguishes the race from the generation.

I agree. Blindness in part came upon Israel until the door was opened to the gentiles. I believe the door was fully open (the fulness of the gentiles) and that the church became a mixture of Jew/Gentile saints. I look at Connelius' conversion as the pivoting point of this. It is where the door fully opened to the gentiles to provoke the Jews to jealousy, and I believe the blinders that were in part were taken off of Israel at that time. From that point on I believe they willfully rejected Messiah. I used the word dispensation, but it is not really what i was meaning.


Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.


As I stated above, God will not return to a natural Israel no more than Abraham returned to Hagar.

[BroDane]

I find that, when I doing a work that is stressful to take a break rather than quit is more beneficial.

Also If I stop doing what I believe to be right because others dont see it then I might give up on salvation..which I will not do.

Bro Blume..what bro John said stands.... many here might not agree with me..or you or anyone..thats ok with us..

We are here for Jesus even if no one stays here, but, I hope youll stay.

Remember, the only NON-Debatable issue here is Acts 2:38 & related Salvation issues that we have posted in the guidelines.

Pastor Rutledge feels people here can Hash out some things and hopes everyone will stay as we can learn from each other..even a slow wit like me can learn! :goof:

[light]

Originally posted by stmatthew
Bro Blume,



I agree. Blindness in part came upon Israel until the door was opened to the gentiles. I believe the door was fully open (the fulness of the gentiles) and that the church became a mixture of Jew/Gentile saints. I look at Connelius' conversion as the pivoting point of this. It is where the door fully opened to the gentiles to provoke the Jews to jealousy, and I believe the blinders that were in part were taken off of Israel at that time. From that point on I believe they willfully rejected Messiah. I used the word dispensation, but it is not really what i was meaning.


Rom 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.


As I stated above, God will not return to a natural Israel no more than Abraham returned to Hagar.


Romans 11:25 was written"after"Peter preached to the Gentiles.Paul is not saying the fulness has come,But until the fulness be come in."Further"
You then leave out the next verse. Paul is telling the Gentiles something that that will happen in the Further. ALL ISRAEL Shall BE SAVED. Not one or two, or maby a thousand but ALL

Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

[apforthelord]

Like that post, Light!!

Anything else?

[In His Service]

And I thought all of the Word of God was salvational!
Bro. Timothy

[Hnovilla]

His Name is Jesus!

pre-terism, partial preterism, futurist...anyboidy heah sprechenzie ingles?

Brother Villa

[Webmaster]

Paz De Cristo Hermano!...yes, I know, it is Spanish not German!

This is what I meant earlier Hnovilla about labels. They are confusing the issue badly.

Bro. Flemming

[Adoniyah]

Brother Blume:

I think I will make one last post also. It seems that everyone here is either a preterist or a Dispensationalist and I have been very ineffective in illustrating anything to anyone that can be assimilated spiritually. It seems that I have made little spiritual sense to anyone. It is discouraging. So, I am going to quit.

I do not want you to think that I have ignored your post earlier today. I will make my response and then I will remain silent.

It seems that the general consensus of most all here on the cafe in the understanding of prophetic scripture is of no importance inspite of the fact it is the Word of God. It appears that anything beyond Acts 2:38 is of no consequence. Many may not even consider prophetic scripture as the Word. I scarcely know what to think. I constantly remain perplexed at the attitude I see in this regard.

I will answer your post tomorrow AM.

With love,
Adoniyah

[apforthelord]

Adoniyah


Your Post are really helping me to understand the Diffrence between Dispens' and partals'......Honestly!!

[apforthelord]

Originally posted by mfblume

The generation spoken of in Matthew 24 was not the church generation, but the wicked and adulterous generation of the people in the time period of those years.

The church never came into existence until Pentecost.




I agree with you that Jesus was not speaking about the church because as u see at that Time there was no such thing as a church.....

But u say........ the wicked and adulterous generation of the people in the time period of those years.

I have never really questioned you Pastor Blume But....why would he be talking to them???

This seems to be a cover up about who he really was Speaking to.....Isreal! If you remeber Pastor Blume as you may Recall that at that time Isreal was the Wicked and Adaultrous Generation that he was talking about.

[stmatthew]

Bro Light,

Romans 11:25 was written"after"Peter preached to the Gentiles.Paul is not saying the fulness has come,But until the fulness be come in."Further"
You then leave out the next verse. Paul is telling the Gentiles something that that will happen in the Further. ALL ISRAEL Shall BE SAVED. Not one or two, or maby a thousand but ALL

Rom 11:26 And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob:

Who is Israel??


Rom 2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither {is that} circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:

Rom 2:29 But he {is} a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision {is that} of the heart, in the spirit, {and} not in the letter; whose praise {is} not of men, but of God.

[Adoniyah]

Brother Blume, you said:

"The Seed of Abraham is Christ only. There was no other seed of Abraham. There was no spiritual seed of Abraham before the cross. And since we are baptized into Christ, we are the seed of Abraham."

My response:

You are entirely correct to say that the seed of Abraham is Christ only.

What is the seed but the Word of God? The seed of faith is the seed being the Word of God. It is what Abraham put his faith into, thus the seed of faith. Jesus spoke of the seed of faith as did Paul in various places:

Mat 17:20 And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have FAITH as a grain of mustard SEED, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you.

Luk 17:6 And the Lord said, If ye had faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye might say unto this sycamine tree, Be thou plucked up by the root, and be thou planted in the sea; and it should obey you.

Rom 4:13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, [was] not to Abraham, or to his SEED, through the law, but through the righteousness of FAITH.

Paul is clearly illustrating the truth that the seed of Faith is not natural Jews through the law, but of FAITH in the WORD of God.

Jesus illustrated that only a little faith in the WORD of God will accomplish great things.

How is it that you can say, as you did above: "THERE WAS NO SPIRITUAL SEED OF ABRAHAM BEFORE THE CROSS?"

When Abraham put his faith in the Word of God, he put his faith in CHRIST. CHRIST is the Word of God. Moses also placed his faith in the Word of God who only is CHRIST.

Hbr 11:25 Choosing rather to suffer affliction with the people of God, than to enjoy the pleasures of sin for a season;

Hbr 11:26 Esteeming the reproach of CHRIST greater riches than the treasures in Egypt: for he had respect unto the recompence of the reward.

Abraham, as did also Moses placed his faith in CHRIST, the Word of God. In fact the very NAME of the WORD OF GOD IS CHRIST.

Rev 19:12 His eyes [were] as a flame of fire, and on his head [were] many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.

Rev 19:13 And he [was] clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and HIS NAME IS CALLED THE WORD OF GOD.

Seed is now, as it always has been SPIRITUAL. It was spiritual in the day of Abraham who heard the Word, received it by faith, never staggered at the promise (the Word) by which he considered not his own dead body nor the deadness of Sarah's womb, counting him faithful to raise his only son from the dead after his obedience to the command of God.

This is not Spiritual??? The seed is CHRIST. It is the only seed. It is the seed of FAITH in whom both Abraham and Moses placed their faith. It was spiritual as it is now and forever will be. CHRIST the Word of God in whom they placed their faith is eternally spiritual. Your statement to the contrary is perplexing.

If you are refering to the natural seed of Abraham, you are only half right. There was no spiritual natural seed of Abraham before the cross neither is there now, nor shall there ever be a spiritual natural seed of Abraham. That term or thought would be an oxymoron.

Here I see a taint of Dispensationalism in your understanding of the Church.

The word "church" by definition is "the called out." It is separated from the world order of things and is further separated unto God for his purpose for the time.

Since the call of Abraham, who was churched, or "called out" of Ur of the Chaldeans, the church has been SPIRITUAL having received by FAITH, the Word of God, hence, the SPIRITUAL SEED of Abraham from the very beginning.

Having received CHRIST, (the Word of God) Abraham obeyed the call. He sojourned with Sarah, having received a promise (the Word) that he would be given a country, a city which he sought after though he never inherited it in this carnal world. He sought for a spiritual city which hath foundations who builder and maker is God. The SPIRITUAL children of Abraham yet seek for that city.

Rom 4:12 And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which [he had] being [yet] uncircumcised.

Rom 4:13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, [was] not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.

Faith is spiritual as is the church from the call of Abraham.

Preterism is based in a large part on the perception of the CHURCH. You and I see it very much differently. The church, from the call of CHRIST, the Word of God, to Abraham continued on down through Moses. The church, by the Apostle in Acts was called "the Church in the wilderness" during the time of Moses. The church continues onward today being moved from glory to glory by the ever unfolding REVELATION OF THE CHRIST, the Word of God.

Since I am the child of Abraham through faith in the same CHRIST that he and moses placed their faith, I am a child of Abraham BEING THE FATHER OF FAITH. All of the faithful performers of the law under Moses are my brothers and sisters in Christ, the Church. Even the law itself is spiritual when received by FAITH.

Rom 7:14 For we know that the law is SPIRITUAL: but I am carnal, sold under sin.

And then you said:

"Concerning generations, the church is the only generation that is spiritual. And it did not exist before the cross, except by promise."

Here again, you demonstrate that you see the church as beginning at Calvary.

I see Calvary as a surety of the promise made to Abraham who received the promise and for all those that follow the same faith of Abraham. It is the place where CHRIST, the Word of God purchased his church, paying the price of redemption to buy back the original Church in the garden lost through disobedience. I do not see the church existing only as a promise any more than it does today. We still must not stagger at the promise in as much as we yet have not received the "recompense of reward" as was promised to Abraham. We STILL seek for a city that is to come. It is the city of God that has not yet descended from heaven. We have only received, through faith, the same faith that Abraham and Moses received, an EARNESTNESS OF OUR EXPECTATION.

You also said:

"And 70 AD did indeed glorify Christ."

My response:

You may see it that way. I do not. I have never seen where death, destruction, rebellion, sedition, and the obliteration of little innocent children, women and the heel of a tyrant such as Nero and Titus would in the least glorify Christ.

Finally you said:

"The church never came into existence until Pentecost."

My response:

Brother, you may deny it, but really this is just some more dispensationalism, which I doctrine I do not hold to.

God bless you brother Blume. I love and appreciate you. But after today, I do not expect to post any further on this subject as I do not believe anyone here is ready or capable of receiving those things that I have spoken of. I've received no response from anyone saying that they can see anything of value in what I have spoken here. So, what is the use. I had truly hoped to help not only you but others to lift their eyes a bit higher as to see Spiritually the Revelation of CHRIST, the Word of God.

[light]

Originally posted by stmatthew
Bro Light,



Who is Israel??


Rom 2:28 For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither {is that} circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:

Rom 2:29 But he {is} a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision {is that} of the heart, in the spirit, {and} not in the letter; whose praise {is} not of men, but of God.
Israel is not the church.We are not the Israel of God. Some try to use the verse in Gal 6:16 and those above to say we are but they do not understand what Paul is saying. If you read all of Romans 2 you will see Paul clearly sees a seperation between Jew and Gentile believers.One must read the whole 6th chapter of Gal. Then you will see Paul is talking about the Jews that are following Christ, seperating those in the truth from natural Israel.
Paul is telling the"GENTILES" that the would have peace and mercy if the followed what he told them, and the same applies to the Israel of God, the Jews following Christ.

Gal 6:16 And as many as walk according to this rule, peace be on them,(GENTILE) and mercy, and upon the Israel of God.(JEW)

Here are some verses you seem to have forgot about in Romans chapter 2 that seperate Jew from Gentile.


Rom 2:9 Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;

Rom 2:10 But glory, honour, and peace, to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile: