Translate

Monday, April 24, 2017

CAN MEN TODAY BE SAVED BY USING PRE-COVENANT TERMS FOR PARDON  by steve finnell


Jesus gave us the terms for pardon after His death and resurrection. The new covenant was not in force until the death and resurrection of Jesus.

Hebrews 9:11-22 But Christ came as High Priest........15 And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death........16 For where there is a testament, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator 17 For a testament is in force after men are dead, since it has no power at all while the testator lives..........(NKJV)

Jesus gave mankind the terms for pardon under the new covenant after His death and resurrection.  Mark 16:16 "He who believes and is baptized will be saved...(NKJV)

Many in the denominational world teach that Jesus gave multiple terms for pardon before the new covenant terms were proclaimed. They believe these terms are applicable after the new covenant was in force.

Millions in denominational churches teach the water baptism is not essential for salvation because the thief on the cross was not baptized. The thief was saved before the new covenant was in force. (Luke 23:39-43)

1. The thief believed Jesus was the Christ.
2. The thief was not baptized in water.
3. The thief did not believe that God raised Jesus from the dead.

Was the thief saved? Yes. Can men be saved like the thief, today? No, they cannot.

Luke 10:25-28 And behold, a certain lawyer stood up and tested Him, saying, "Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" 26 He said to him, "What is written in the law? What is your reading of it?" 27 So he answered and said, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind,' 28 And He said to him, "You have answered rightly; do this and you will live."(NKJV)


If the lawyer followed the instruction of Jesus, he would have inherited eternal life. Yes. Can men today be saved like the lawyer? Of course not. The lawyer was saved before the new covenant was in force.

1. There was not any indication that the lawyer even believed, that Jesus was the Christ.

2. The lawyer was not immersed in water.

3. The lawyer did not believe that God raised Jesus from the grave.

Luke 18:18-23 Now a certain ruler asked Him, saying, "Good teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" ........20 "You know the commandments: Do not commit adultery,' Do not murder,' Do not steal,' 'Do not bear false witness,' 'Honor your father and your mother.' " 21 And he said, "All these I have kept from my youth." 22 So when Jesus heard these things, He said to him, "You still lack one thing. "Sell all that you have and distribute to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; come, follow Me.".........

Would the ruler have inherited eternal life had he obeyed Jesus? Yes. Can men today be saved like the ruler? No, they cannot. The ruler would have been saved before the new covenant was in force.

1. The ruler was not baptized in water.

2. The ruler did not believe that God raised Jesus from the dead.

3. The ruler believed Jesus was a "Good Teacher." There is no indication that he believed that Jesus was the Son of God.

Mark 2:1-5.....3 Then they came to Him, bringing  a paralytic who was carried by four men.......... 5 When Jesus saw their faith, He said to the paralytic, "Son, your sins are forgiven."(NKJV)

Were the paralytics sins forgiven? Yes. Can men today have their sin forgiven like the paralytic? No, they cannot. This was before the new covenant was in force.

1. The paralytics sin were forgiven because of the faith of friends.

2. The paralytic was not baptized in water.

3. The paralytic did not believe that God raised Jesus from the grave.

There is only one way to be saved today. Terms of pardon under the new covenant. FAITH John 3:16---REPENTANCE Acts 3:19---CONFESSION Romans 10:9 and  IMMERSION IN WATER---Mark 16:16.
     

          
Watchtower's Claim Regarding Events in 1914
by David Vaughn Elliott

The Watchtower Society over a century ago predicted that Jesus would return in 1914: right? Wrong. Don't be upset, that's what I used to think, too. Yes, they now say Jesus came in 1914 -- invisibly -- but they did not predict it. What did the Watchtower predict for 1914?

I have in my library one of the earliest publications of the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society, written decades before the organization began using the name "Jehovah's Witnesses." The Time Is at Hand was written in 1888, and my copy was printed in 1910. The author is none other than Charles Taze Russell, the founder and first president of the Watchtower.

The Time Is at Hand is loaded with predictions about 1914, but not what you might think. Russell says that Jesus had already come the second time -- invisibly: "Not that the Lord will come soon, but rather that he has come and is now present" (pg. 149). "The date of our Lord's second advent, and the dawn of the Times of Restitution, we have already shown to be A.D. 1874" (pg. 211). 

For Russell, the period between 1874 and 1914 was a period of... well, let him explain: "We are now in this period called the 'harvest,' in which the Gospel age and the Millennial age lap -- the one closing and the other opening... The harvest work will occupy forty years for its full accomplishment, ending with A.D. 1914" (pg. 150).  

What else in or by 1914? "In this chapter we present the Bible evidence proving that the full end of the times of the Gentiles, i.e., the full end of their lease of dominion, will be reached in A.D. 1914; and that that date will be the farthest limit of the rule of imperfect men" (pg. 76-77). "True, it is expecting great things to claim, as we do, that within the coming twenty-six years all present governments will be overthrown and dissolved" (pg. 98-9). "We consider it an established truth that the final end of the kingdoms of this world, and the full establishment of the Kingdom of God, will be accomplished at the end of A.D. 1914" (pg. 99).

In short, Russell taught that Jesus had already come in 1874. He predicted that 1914 would see the end of terrible times and the beginning of the triumph of God's millennial kingdom. He said 1914 would "be the farthest limit of the rule of imperfect men... all present governments will be overthrown and dissolved." To simply uncover and quote these predictions is enough to convict Russell of being a false prophet. 

The apostle John said: "Believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God: because many false prophets are gone out into the world" (1 John 4:1). Centuries before John, Moses told us how to identify false prophets: "When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken, but the prophet has spoken it presumptuously" (Deut. 18:22). 

Russell claimed Jesus returned invisibly in 1874. He predicted 1914 would be the end of terrible times with the full end of human governments. Today's Watchtower, rather than denounce Russell as a false prophet, retains his failed 1914 date and whitewashes his false predictions: "Not all that was expected to happen in 1914 did happen" (1). "Not all that was expected"? Let them name one prediction of Russell's that was visibly fulfilled in 1914. The Watchtower is built on a foundation of false prophecies by a false prophet. Jesus said, "Beware of false prophets." John said, "Believe not every spirit, but try the spirits."
--------------------
Note (1): The quote is from Watchtower's official web site:
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

IF THE DOCTRINE OF ORIGINAL SIN IS A FACT......?  by steve finnell


The doctrine of original sin is that all men are guilty of sin because of the fall of Adam and Eve. That all inherit sin and a sin nature because of Adam.

If all men inherit a sin nature, and the guilt of Adam, then they cannot be held responsible for their sins. 

Logically, if you were born a sinner, then it would not your fault if you became a murderer. It would not be your fault if you became a homosexual, seeing you were born with a sin nature. You could not be held responsible for being a liar, a drunkard, a sodomite, a thief, an extortioner, an adulterer, an idolater, nor greedy, nor dishonest. If you were guilty of sin at birth and born with a sin nature, what you are or what you do is not in your control.

Of course the doctrine of original sin is a false doctrine.

Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,(NKJV) 

All men do sin, however, it is by choice. God does not cause men to sin, nor does He take away our ability to resist sin.

1 John 3:4 Whoever commits sin also commits lawlessness, and sin is lawlessness.(NKJV)

Unborn babies are not lawless, they do not commit sin. Infants are not sinners.

Adam and Eve are responsible for their own sin. No one is guilty of sin because Adam sinned.

James 1:13-14 Let no one say when he is tempted, "I am tempted By God";  for God cannot be tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone. 14  But each one is tempted when he is drawn away by his own desires and enticed.(NKJV)

If an inherited sin nature causes men to sin, who gives man that sin nature? It cannot be God He does not tempt men to sin. Does anyone believe Satan has the power to give men a sinful nature at birth?

James 1:15 Then, when desire has conceived, it give birth to sin, and sin, when it is full-grown, brings forth death.(NKJV)

Men are drawn away by their own desire and then sin. Adam and Eve sinned for the same reason all men sin, they gave way to their desire to disobey God. Adam and Eve were not born guilty of sin nor were they born with a sin nature.

Ezekiel 18:19 "Yet you say, 'Why should the son not bear the guilt  of the father?" Because the son has done what is lawful and right, and has kept all My statutes and done them, he shall surely live. (NKJV)

It the son was born with a sin nature and totally depraved, then how could do what is lawful?

Ezekiel 18:20 "The soul who sins shall die, The son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself.(NKJV)

How could it be possible for there to be righteous acts of men if all men are born with a sin nature and totally depraved?

Ezekiel 18:21 "But if a wicked man turns from his sins which he has committed, keeps all My statutes, and does what is lawful and right, he shall surely live; he shall not die.(NKJV)

How was it possible for a wicked man who was born with a sin nature and totally depraved to turn from his sins. There was no grace through Jesus Christ during this period of time.

The truth is men are not born with the guilt of Adam's sin, they are not born with a sin nature, they are not born totally depraved. Men sin because of their desire. Men sin because of choice. God does not cause men to sin. Satan tempts men to sin, but men have a choice.


Satan was not created with a sin nature nor was he created totally depraved, yet he sinned. Satan was in fact the Original Sinner!      

  





      

Sunday, April 23, 2017

ACTS 2:38 FICTIONALIZED BY STEVE FINNELL

Why do men fictionalize Scriptures rather than reading them and believing them? I will let you reach your own conclusion as to the answer. What is is purpose of water baptism according to Acts 2:38?

FOUR TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE ACTS 2:38
1. Acts 2:38 Peter said to them, "Repent and each of you bebaptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. (New American Standard Bible)

2. Acts 2:38 Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, everyone of you, in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins may be forgiven. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. (The Thompson Chain-Reference Bible New International Version 1983)

3. Acts 2:38 The Peter said unto them,Let each of of you repent and be immersed, in the name of Jesus Christ, in order to the remission of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. ) The Better Version of the New Testament by Chester Estes)

4. Acts 2:38 Peter told them, "You must repent and every one of you must be baptised in the name of Jesus Christ, so that you may have your sins forgiven and receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. (The New Testament in Modern English by J.B. Phillips)

THE FOLLOWING ARE FICTIONALIZED VERSIONS OF ACTS 2:38

1. Acts 2:38 Peter said to them, "Repent and be baptized because your sins have already been forgiven. (Fictional Account)

2. Acts 2:38 Peter said to them, "Repent and be baptized as a testimony of your faith. (Invented Version)

3. Acts 2:38 Peter said to them, Repent and be baptized as an act of obedience. (Fantasy Translation)

4. Acts 2:38 Peter said to them, "Repent and be baptized because you were forgiven the minute you believed. (The Version of Unfounded Truth)

5. Acts 2:38 Peter said to them, "Repent and be baptized with Holy Spirit baptism; because water baptism is not a New Covenant requirement. (The Version of Spurious and Erroneous Quotes)

6. Acts 2:38 Peter said to them, "Repent, for the forgiveness of sins; but water baptism is optional, because the thief on the cross was not baptized in water. (The Counterfeit Version of Truth)

7. Acts 2:38 Peter said to them, "Rent and be baptized in order to join denomination of your choice. (The Creed Bible By Men)

8. Acts 2:38 Peter said to them, "Repent and be baptized as a symbolic jester, pointing to the fact that your sins were forgiven when you said "The Sinner's Prayer." ( The Book of Stuff Men made-up)

9. Acts 2:38 Peter said to them, "Repent and be baptized to indicate the outward sign of the forgiveness you received the very minute you believed. ( The Fabricated Book of Fantasy Verses)

10. Acts 2:38 Peter said to them, "Repent and have your committed sins forgiven by faith only. And then be baptized to be forgiven of the sin Adam committed. (The Denominational Revision of Fictional Truth)   

.   

THE QUESTION IS WHY DO CERTAIN DENOMINATIONAL CHURCHES FICTIONALIZE BIBLICAL TRUTH? THE BIGGER QUESTION IS WHY DO PEOPLE BELIEVE FICTIONALIZED DOCTRINE RATHER THAN BIBLICAL TRUTH?        
    

Saturday, April 22, 2017

JESUS AND THE GOSPEL by steve finnell


Jesus speaking about the gospel after He was resurrected from the grave. What was the gospel plan of salvation?

Jesus said, after He was resurrected: Mark 16:15-16 And He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 "He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.(NKJV)

Jesus said preach the gospel. What was the good news? The good news was and is "He who believes and is baptized will be saved."

Jesus said, after He was resurrected: Matthew 28:19 "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. (NKJV)

There were no unbaptized disciples. Jesus did not tell the eleven to teach that immersion in water was not essential in order to be saved.

Jesus said, after He was resurrected: Luke 24:47 "and that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name to all nations, beginning  at Jerusalem. (NKJV)

The apostles preached repentance and remission of sins at Jerusalem on the Day of Pentecost. They preached Jesus as Lord and Christ.(Acts 2:36-37) and they preached repentance and remission of sins. Acts 2:38 Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. (NKJV)


What was not preached by Peter and the apostles? They never said that men could be saved like the thief on the cross. The apostles never preached that men could be saved without water baptism, because the thief on the cross was saved without being baptized, or because the thief was saved without believing God raised Jesus from the dead.

What was not preached by Peter and the rest of the apostles? They never preached you could be saved, simply by saying a "Sinner's Prayer."

What was not preached by Peter and the apostles? They never preached that all men were born guilty of Adam's sin. They never preached that unbelieving infants were guilty of original sin and needed to be baptized.

What was not preached by Peter and the apostles? They never said that men could be baptized for the dead. They did not teach baptism by proxy.

What was not preached by Peter and the apostles? They did not preach that men are saved by grace alone. They did not say God will impute faith to those He has selected for salvation, so they can believe and be baptized.

What was not preached on the Day of Pentecost? Peter did not preach that baptism was simply an act of obedience. Peter did not say after you believe, you should be baptized into the denominational church of your choice.

What Peter did not preach? He did not preach you could have your sins forgiven like the paralytic, who had his sins forgive because of the faith of his friends.      
     




Fabrication Built upon Failure
by David Vaughn Elliott

Countless times in the past two thousand years, false prophets have set dates for the Second Coming. Most often, the dates come and go and are forgotten. However, some prophets and their followers are so blinded, as well as creative, that they fabricate new doctrines around their failed dates. Such is the case with the Seventh Day Adventists regarding 1844. 

William Miller, following his failed prophecy regarding 1843, predicted the Lord's Second Coming would be on October 22, 1844. After this second failure, those who did not abandon the Adventists soon convinced themselves that they were right regarding the date but only wrong regarding the place. 

The main text for the calculation of this date and for the "coming" is Dan. 8:14: "Unto two thousand and three hundred days; then shall the sanctuary be cleansed." At least three basic errors are involved as Adventists wrench Dan. 8:14 out of context.

Error One:   Miller taught that the "sanctuary" in Dan. 8:14 is the earth, which Jesus was to cleanse with fire at His coming. When Jesus failed to return and many left the movement, the remaining Adventists latched onto the idea that in 1844 Jesus "came" to the heavenly sanctuary and cleansed it. 

Reply:   Actually, fabrication existed before failure. Failure just changed the nature of the fabrication. Dan. 8:14 gives no hint that the sanctuary is either earth or heaven, nor does it say anything about a coming of Jesus. Rather, Dan. 8 is a prediction of a little horn (8:8-9) arising from a goat. Verse 21 says the goat is Greece. The sanctuary to be cleansed is the sanctuary that had its daily sacrifices taken away by that little horn of Greece (8:11). This sanctuary during the Grecian Empire can be nothing else but the temple of God that existed in Jerusalem. 

Error Two:   Miller assumed that 2,300 days must be interpreted using the day-for-a-year rule. 

Reply:   While it is true some prophecies are unlocked using the day-for-a-year key (Ezek. 4:6), it is not true that this key applies to all time prophecies. For example, Jesus predicted He would rise from the dead in three days (John 2:19-21). Nobody applies the day-for-a-year key to that prophecy. Neither can a day-for-a-year, and thus 2,300 years, be applied to Dan. 8, because the sanctuary it speaks of was totally destroyed in A.D. 70, centuries before 1844. You cannot cleanse what does not exist.

Error Three:   Miller claimed that Dan. 8 gives no clue as to when the 2,300 days were to start, but rather that Dan. 9 gives the clue. He claimed that both time prophecies begin their count from the command of Artaxerxes, in 457 B.C., "to restore and to build Jerusalem" (9:25). Subtracting 457 from 2,300 results in A.D. 1843, which Miller later adjusted to 1844.

Reply:   While it is true that the seventy weeks of Dan. 9 begin in 457 B.C. [see Insight #44], this bears no relationship to the times predicted in Dan. 8. A simple reading of Dan. 8 shows that the 2,300 begin when the little horn takes away the daily sacrifices and casts down the sanctuary (8:11-14). The Grecian Empire, that defiled the sanctuary, did not come into power until 331 B.C., more than a century after the 457 date. The little horn (Antiochus Epiphanes) [Insight #145] did not begin desecrating the sanctuary until about 170 B.C., nearly three centuries after the 457 date. There is no relationship between the times predicted in the two prophecies. 

A lot of disappointment and false doctrine would have been avoided if William Miller and his followers had studied the context of Dan. 8:14, had then studied history for its fulfillment, and had taken seriously the word of the Lord: "Watch therefore, for you know neither the day nor the hour wherein the Son of man comes" (Matt. 25:13).
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

Friday, April 21, 2017

W H Y THE FIRE? --By Steve Finnell

 There once was a man whose children played with matches. First the children, then the house - all were ashes. Why the fire? To what can we attribute the acceptance of the denominational doctrines that are creeping into many of the congregations of the Restoration Movement? The permissive attitudes and actions expressed by various church leaders certainly warrant our consideration.

 THE LOCAL CHURCH: (A) We fill our bulletin boards with advertisements promoting denominational and inter-denominational events. (B) We extend invitations to various denominational singing groups to lead us in worship, in song or entertainment. (C) The pulpit is used as a platform to praise denominational personalities and encourage participation in denominational workshops and seminars. (D) The errors of denominational doctrine are not exposed or exposed in weak "mopping up" exercises after the fact. (E) Denominational literature abounds in our churches. (F) We involve ourselves with denominationally influenced ministerial associations, interfaith prayer groups, and denominational evangelistic crusades. Then we cry, "Why the fire?"

 RESTORATIONAL PERIODICALS: (A) We allow articles advocating denominational doctrines and philosophies to be printed. (All in the name of liberty of opinion, of course). (B) Refuse to publish articles that openly oppose particular denominations, even if their teachings are contrary to the Word of God. (C) Publish articles written by denominational writers. (If they are credible enough to publish, they are credible enough to follow, many suppose.) Then we cry, "Why the fire?"

 CHRISTIAN EDUCATION CENTERS: (A) Teach limited basic Bible doctrine. (B) Support denominational lecturers on campus. (C) Tolerate instructors who openly advocate denominational doctrines. Then we cry, "Why the fire"? Why? Because God’s children are playing with matches!!

WOULD JESUS BE HIRED AS "PREACHER" IN YOUR CHURCH? by steve finnell


   Would the preaching of Jesus be accepted in  contemporary churches? Would Jesus be hired at your church? If Jesus were to be hired would He then be fired?


Jesus said: John 8:24 'Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for unless you believe that I am He, you will die in your sins."(NASB)

Would John 8:24 be deem too negative and unloving to be preached in your church?


Jesus said: John 8:44 You are of your father the devil, and you want to do the desires of your father. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in truth because there is no truth in him. Whenever he speaks from his own nature, for he is a liar and the father of lies. (NASB)


If Jesus were to preach that those who pervert the gospel terms for pardon are liars, just like the devil, would He be fired by your church leaders?


Jesus said: Matthew 23:9 Do not call anyone on earth your father; for One is your Father, He who is in heaven. (NASB)

If Jesus said to your congregation do not call anyone your spiritual father, would He be banished from preaching?

Jesus said: Matthew 15:3-9 And He answered and said to them, "Why do you transgress the commandments of God for the sake of your traditions?......9 ' But in vain do they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the precepts of men!" (NASB)

If Jesus were to tell your denomination to stop teaching from man-made creed books and other doctrines invented my men, would He be fired on the spot?

Jesus said: Matthew 24:10 At that time many will fall away....(NASB)
Revelation 3:1-5 .....5 He who overcomes will thus be clothed in white garments; and I will not erase his name from the book of life....(NASB)

If Jesus said, "Those Christians who do not repent will have their names erased from the book of life?" Would He retain His preaching position at your church?

 John 3:3-5 Jesus answered and said to him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot see the kingdom of God."........ (NASB)

If Jesus were to say, "Being born of the waters of childbirth is being born the first time. Being born of the waters of baptism is being born again." Would Jesus be allowed to continue preaching at your church?


Could Jesus be hired to preach in your denomination?

Would Jesus be fired if He preached His truth at your church?

     

 


    

EARLY CHRISTIAN WRITINGS? by steve finnell


Do the historical writings of early Christians validate Biblical truths? No, they do not. The Bible proves that early Christian writers were accurate in their views as long as they did not contradict Scripture.

The Bible validates Christian beliefs. Christian beliefs do not prove the Bible to be true.

Christian Quote: Justin Martyr 110-165 AD There, the one who refuses to be baptized is to be condemned as an unbeliever, partially on the basis of what Jesus told Nicodemus... "that, out of contempt, will not be baptized, shall be condemned as an unbeliever, and shall be reproached as ungrateful and foolish. For the Lord says: 'Except a man be baptized of water and of the Spirit, he shall by no means enter into the kingdom of heaven.' And again: He that believes and is baptized shall be saved but he that believeth not shall be damned." (Justin Martyr "Constitutions of the Holy Apostles," Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol.7, pg. 456-457.)

The words of Jesus do not need to be validated by Justin Martyr. Jesus words were validated by God the Father. Justin Martyr words are true because he repeated the words of Jesus.

John 3:5 Jesus answered, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.(NKJV)
Mark 16:16 "He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.(NKJV)

Water baptism is essential to salvation because the Scriptures proclaim as fact.

Baptism by immersion is the only valid baptism because of Scripture, not because Christian writers say it is so.

Romans 6:4 Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.(NKJV)

You cannot be buried under a sprinkle nor by having water poured on you.

God does not need early Christian writers to validate His word. It is just the opposite, Christians need Scriptures to confirm their views. 




Thursday, April 20, 2017

What Happened on May 21, 2011?
by David Vaughn Elliott

Nothing happened on May 21, 2011 -- except that followers of Harold Camping were frustrated while he was "flabbergasted" and "looking for answers." With mounting pressure, he gave his "answers" publicly Monday evening, the 23rd. He said his mistake was in viewing it all from a physical viewpoint. He continued to claim his whole dating system is correct, but that  May 21 was fulfilled in a spiritual sense. "We didn't see any difference, but God brought Judgment Day to bear on the whole world." 

Sound familiar? "Spiritual fulfillment" is the way Seventh-Day Adventists explain Miller's failed predictions in 1844. It's the way so-called Jehovah's Witnesses explain Russell's false predictions of 1914. (See Insights 148 and 159 for details). 

Many of us believe in spiritual fulfillments of various OT prophecies. So, are Camping's claims any different from ours? Yes! Contrary to Camping's "we didn't see any difference," the spiritual fulfillments we believe in were clearly evident. 

Take for example the prediction in Malachi of the coming of Elijah. Jesus said John the Baptizer fulfilled the prediction. (See Insights 29 and 79.) It was a spiritual fulfillment in the sense that Elijah himself did not come. Nevertheless, John was seen and heard by "all Judea" (Matt. 3:5), making a great impact in preparation for the Messiah, Jesus. Another example is the OT prediction of a coming kingdom. Many of us believe Jesus' church is the fulfillment. A spiritual fulfillment, yes, in the sense that the kingdom is a spiritual one. Nonetheless, on Pentecost, A.D. 30, Jerusalem heard and saw a tremendous supernatural display (Acts 2). That day, a great movement began which, within years, "turned the world upside down" (Acts 17:6). 

In contrast, Adventists, Witnesses, and Campingites claim fulfillments that are imperceptible, undetectable. As Camping put it, "we didn't see any difference." Let truth be told: we didn't see any difference because there was no difference. All three groups claim something happened when nothing happened. They refuse to admit the obvious -- their predictions failed. 

The only "spiritual" fulfillment Camping has even mentioned, to my knowledge, is of "Judgment Day." He claims everyone is now judged and salvation is no longer possible. That's a daring statement, which calls for God's response: "When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken, but the prophet has spoken it presumptuously: you shalt not be afraid of him" (Deut. 18:22). Camping dared to speak in the name of the Lord when the Lord said nothing of the kind. Now, his claim that salvation is no longer available is nothing short of satanic.

Camping also predicted that on May 21 there would be world-wide earthquakes, throwing open graves, ushering in the Rapture. The best I can gather, Camping now says that these failed predictions will take place together with the end of the world. He continues to claim that the end will take place on Oct. 21, 2011. So, unless I have missed it, Camping claims neither a physical nor a spiritual earthquake or rapture on May 21 -- he simply ignores this non-fulfillment. Contrary to his claim, his dating system is false.

As various brethren have pointed out, predicting dates for Jesus' return and the end of the world is not only contrary to Scripture and futile; it also misguides the gullible and provides fodder for the mockers of Christianity. Rather than set dates, God's message for us every day continues to be "Watch and pray: for you know not when the time is" (Mark 13:33).
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _