ANALYZING Scofield
- Thread starter zone
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
E
gotta run to the suppliers EG u can woop on me when i get back 
E
Gen 17 was the part where God made provisions for the ancestors to actually live in the land God has given them. It does not mean the whole covenant is based on those conditions.
Abraham did not walk through the middle. Abraham nore his descendants do not have to fulfill anything to keep the land. It is theirs, Given by God.
Just because they own it as a gift from God. does not mean they will get to use it. The provisions (which also included the law) show this.
But iuf you read lev 26. you will see, even if God destroys the city and sanctuary, and distributes them all over the earth so they they do not. have a nation or land to call their own. God said if they repent. he will return them to this land.
Abraham did not walk through the middle. Abraham nore his descendants do not have to fulfill anything to keep the land. It is theirs, Given by God.
Just because they own it as a gift from God. does not mean they will get to use it. The provisions (which also included the law) show this.
But iuf you read lev 26. you will see, even if God destroys the city and sanctuary, and distributes them all over the earth so they they do not. have a nation or land to call their own. God said if they repent. he will return them to this land.
E
4 And I saw thrones, and they sat on them, and judgment was committed to them. Then I saw the souls of those who had been beheaded for their witness to Jesus and for the word of God, who had not worshiped the beast or his image, and had not received his mark on their foreheads or on their hands. And they lived and reigned with Christ for a[a] thousand years. 5 But the rest of the dead did not live again until the thousand years were finished. This is the first resurrection. 6 Blessed and holy is he who has part in the first resurrection. Over such the second death has no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with Him a thousand years.
I see nothing about animal sacrifice.
I see a 1st ressurection. Those who did not worship the beast. The rest of the dead (evil men who were killed) did not raise again for another 1000 years.
I do not see how this could symbolically be said to be this time period we live in now. Who has ever not taken the mark of the beast and been ressurected??
I see nothing about animal sacrifice.
I see a 1st ressurection. Those who did not worship the beast. The rest of the dead (evil men who were killed) did not raise again for another 1000 years.
I do not see how this could symbolically be said to be this time period we live in now. Who has ever not taken the mark of the beast and been ressurected??
D
John Darby Version Replaced "World" with "Age" (Dispensation)
John Darby Version Replaced "World" with "Age" (Dispensation) <---Go here. I tried to post the whole thing but it didnt work out to well.
Just felt to share.
According to the Scofield 1917 Reference Bible, "A dispensation is a period of time during which man is tested in respect to some specific revelation of the Will of God" [emphasis mine]
J. N. Darby (and Cyrus Scofield, via his marginal notes and footnotes) altered key New Testament prophetic passages by replacing the word, "world" with "age." In most of these instances, the substitution of the word, "age" for "world" communicates the idea of the end of a dispensation (age) rather than the end of the world.
J. N. Darby (and Cyrus Scofield, via his marginal notes and footnotes) altered key New Testament prophetic passages by replacing the word, "world" with "age." In most of these instances, the substitution of the word, "age" for "world" communicates the idea of the end of a dispensation (age) rather than the end of the world.
John Darby Version Replaced "World" with "Age" (Dispensation) <---Go here. I tried to post the whole thing but it didnt work out to well.
Just felt to share.
E
Nice sharing. However, if you study the greek. It was not wrong to put age. It was used that way often. and actually is a better fit
αἰών, ῶνος, ὁ, poët. ἡ: apocop. acc. αἰῶ (properly αἰϜών, aevum, v. αἰεί:—a period of existence:
1. ones lifetime, life, Hom. and Att. Poets.
2. an age, generation, Aesch.; ὁ μέλλων αἰών posterity, Dem.
3. a long space of time, an age, ἀπʼ αἰῶνος of old, for ages, Hes., N.T.; τὸν διʼ αἰῶνος χρόνον for ever, Aesch.; ἅπαντα τὸν αἰ. Lycurg.
4. a definite space of time, an era, epoch, age, period, ὁ αἰὼν οὗτος this present world, opp. to ὁ μέλλων, N.T.:—hence its usage in pl., εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας for ever, Ib.
Liddell, H. (1996). A lexicon : Abridged from Liddell and Scott's Greek-English lexicon (25). Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.
αἰών, -ῶνος, ὁ
1. age (Lat. aevum, which is αἰών with the Aeolic digamma), a human lifetime (in Hom., Hdt., Pind., Tragic poets), life itself (Hom. Il. 5, 685 μὲ καὶ λίποι αἰών etc.).
Thayer, J. H. (1889). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament: Being Grimm's Wilke's Clavis Novi Testamenti (19). New York: Harper & Brothers.
As you can see. Age is actually a more literal interpretation than world. And would fit better from the greek
Yet another reason to test all things to make sure they are true. especially if it is on the web! This is a perfect example of using a false truth to s;lander someone you do not agree with. Not saying you are doing that. the website is.
αἰών, ῶνος, ὁ, poët. ἡ: apocop. acc. αἰῶ (properly αἰϜών, aevum, v. αἰεί
:—a period of existence:1. ones lifetime, life, Hom. and Att. Poets.
2. an age, generation, Aesch.; ὁ μέλλων αἰών posterity, Dem.
3. a long space of time, an age, ἀπʼ αἰῶνος of old, for ages, Hes., N.T.; τὸν διʼ αἰῶνος χρόνον for ever, Aesch.; ἅπαντα τὸν αἰ. Lycurg.
4. a definite space of time, an era, epoch, age, period, ὁ αἰὼν οὗτος this present world, opp. to ὁ μέλλων, N.T.:—hence its usage in pl., εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας for ever, Ib.
Liddell, H. (1996). A lexicon : Abridged from Liddell and Scott's Greek-English lexicon (25). Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.
αἰών, -ῶνος, ὁ
1. age (Lat. aevum, which is αἰών with the Aeolic digamma), a human lifetime (in Hom., Hdt., Pind., Tragic poets), life itself (Hom. Il. 5, 685 μὲ καὶ λίποι αἰών etc.).
Thayer, J. H. (1889). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament: Being Grimm's Wilke's Clavis Novi Testamenti (19). New York: Harper & Brothers.
As you can see. Age is actually a more literal interpretation than world. And would fit better from the greek
Yet another reason to test all things to make sure they are true. especially if it is on the web! This is a perfect example of using a false truth to s;lander someone you do not agree with. Not saying you are doing that. the website is.
Last edited by a moderator:
D
Nice sharing. However, if you study the greek. It was not wrong to put age. It was used that way often. and actually is a better fit
αἰών, ῶνος, ὁ, poët. ἡ: apocop. acc. αἰῶ (properly αἰϜών, aevum, v. αἰεί:—a period of existence:
1. ones lifetime, life, Hom. and Att. Poets.
2. an age, generation, Aesch.; ὁ μέλλων αἰών posterity, Dem.
3. a long space of time, an age, ἀπʼ αἰῶνος of old, for ages, Hes., N.T.; τὸν διʼ αἰῶνος χρόνον for ever, Aesch.; ἅπαντα τὸν αἰ. Lycurg.
4. a definite space of time, an era, epoch, age, period, ὁ αἰὼν οὗτος this present world, opp. to ὁ μέλλων, N.T.:—hence its usage in pl., εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας for ever, Ib.
Liddell, H. (1996). A lexicon : Abridged from Liddell and Scott's Greek-English lexicon (25). Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.
αἰών, -ῶνος, ὁ
1. age (Lat. aevum, which is αἰών with the Aeolic digamma), a human lifetime (in Hom., Hdt., Pind., Tragic poets), life itself (Hom. Il. 5, 685 μὲ καὶ λίποι αἰών etc.).
Thayer, J. H. (1889). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament: Being Grimm's Wilke's Clavis Novi Testamenti (19). New York: Harper & Brothers.
As you can see. Age is actually a more literal interpretation than world. And would fit better from the greek
Yet another reason to test all things to make sure they are true. especially if it is on the web! This is a perfect example of using a false truth to s;lander someone you do not agree with. Not saying you are doing that. the website is.
αἰών, ῶνος, ὁ, poët. ἡ: apocop. acc. αἰῶ (properly αἰϜών, aevum, v. αἰεί
:—a period of existence:1. ones lifetime, life, Hom. and Att. Poets.
2. an age, generation, Aesch.; ὁ μέλλων αἰών posterity, Dem.
3. a long space of time, an age, ἀπʼ αἰῶνος of old, for ages, Hes., N.T.; τὸν διʼ αἰῶνος χρόνον for ever, Aesch.; ἅπαντα τὸν αἰ. Lycurg.
4. a definite space of time, an era, epoch, age, period, ὁ αἰὼν οὗτος this present world, opp. to ὁ μέλλων, N.T.:—hence its usage in pl., εἰς τοὺς αἰῶνας for ever, Ib.
Liddell, H. (1996). A lexicon : Abridged from Liddell and Scott's Greek-English lexicon (25). Oak Harbor, WA: Logos Research Systems, Inc.
αἰών, -ῶνος, ὁ
1. age (Lat. aevum, which is αἰών with the Aeolic digamma), a human lifetime (in Hom., Hdt., Pind., Tragic poets), life itself (Hom. Il. 5, 685 μὲ καὶ λίποι αἰών etc.).
Thayer, J. H. (1889). A Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament: Being Grimm's Wilke's Clavis Novi Testamenti (19). New York: Harper & Brothers.
As you can see. Age is actually a more literal interpretation than world. And would fit better from the greek
Yet another reason to test all things to make sure they are true. especially if it is on the web! This is a perfect example of using a false truth to s;lander someone you do not agree with. Not saying you are doing that. the website is.
E
Yeah but no. See i know what AEON means, and i know what AEON has been twisted to mean by Mystery schools, through theosophy, and such. But i didnt post it to be right. i posted to share. Look into it if you woudl like. Or dont, actually theres allot on that website thats is REALLY good. Take a peak. Jesus bless you.
Anyway, The fact age, lifetime, generation comes alot shows that what darby did was in no means in error in my mind. so again a web sight using this falsity to try to discredit someone. how could I trust anything else the website says? it is definitely shows its bias.
A
Eg i wont kid you Im an expert dispensationalist , which sucks, because I have drifted from it just recently. Like maybe 2 months ago.
In many ways I feel it is not right, and doesnt fit to me. I know it fits like a puzzle part, but it also darkens much other text. I simply
dont see a 1000 yr reign on earth. And i understand that spiritualizing spiritual things bothers some. Never has God lived on earth
with sinful men, other than to redeem us. The 1000 yr reign on earth just makes my head bonkers. Why? For disobedient Israel?
Nah! Why not for disobedient Gentiles? It seems in Zerubbal, Ezra and Nehemiahs time that Israel returned from the nations.
Jesus Was cut off midweek(70) and Steven was stoned 3 1/2 yrs later. Ending Israels timetable. Then the gospel went to the gentiles, starting in Samaria.
They had their last week. Dan 9:27 is the Messiah only. All sacrifices done after the crucifiction were the overspreading of abominations.
What Jesus predicted Titus carried out in 70ad as dan 9:26 talks about. This is the best i can do at the time. All Israel will be saved through Christ now.
Another reason for my change over is that most of the OT prophecies dispys calim other people spiritualize have to be. Not only do I see them all over the New testament in there fulfillment. Have you ever seen a tree clap its hands? There are dozens of those. Abraham it says in Hebrews concerning the land looked for a country who maker was God. Just too many texts that refer to the Kingdom of Heaven. Like Jesus said my Kingdom is not of this world.
So ill debate in fun. But im too new to really do much. I just simply believe the next thing to happen is the eternal state with a new heaven and new earth.
So debating this is just for fun. OK Plus the come back to the land scriptures in OT stipulate repentance and cleansing. I know those naughty boys in Israel have not done that. So even tho i understand God has ordained them or they wouldnt be there. They are not who they say they are, nor who the church thinks they are. And that will become quite evident soon.
In many ways I feel it is not right, and doesnt fit to me. I know it fits like a puzzle part, but it also darkens much other text. I simply
dont see a 1000 yr reign on earth. And i understand that spiritualizing spiritual things bothers some. Never has God lived on earth
with sinful men, other than to redeem us. The 1000 yr reign on earth just makes my head bonkers. Why? For disobedient Israel?
Nah! Why not for disobedient Gentiles? It seems in Zerubbal, Ezra and Nehemiahs time that Israel returned from the nations.
Jesus Was cut off midweek(70) and Steven was stoned 3 1/2 yrs later. Ending Israels timetable. Then the gospel went to the gentiles, starting in Samaria.
They had their last week. Dan 9:27 is the Messiah only. All sacrifices done after the crucifiction were the overspreading of abominations.
What Jesus predicted Titus carried out in 70ad as dan 9:26 talks about. This is the best i can do at the time. All Israel will be saved through Christ now.
Another reason for my change over is that most of the OT prophecies dispys calim other people spiritualize have to be. Not only do I see them all over the New testament in there fulfillment. Have you ever seen a tree clap its hands? There are dozens of those. Abraham it says in Hebrews concerning the land looked for a country who maker was God. Just too many texts that refer to the Kingdom of Heaven. Like Jesus said my Kingdom is not of this world.
So ill debate in fun. But im too new to really do much. I just simply believe the next thing to happen is the eternal state with a new heaven and new earth.
So debating this is just for fun. OK
Plus the come back to the land scriptures in OT stipulate repentance and cleansing. I know those naughty boys in Israel have not done that. So even tho i understand God has ordained them or they wouldnt be there. They are not who they say they are, nor who the church thinks they are. And that will become quite evident soon.
EG i wonder why examining highly controversial topics (i.e.: dispenationalism and its origins) constitues "trying to discredit someone".
this is what i do not get. do we not as a natural course of events in following the Spirit into truth ENCOUNTER THE ERRORS?
and what do we do when we see them> flag them for the next person? or ignore it.
another member here, with whom i have enjoyed warm fellowship when the gospel is shared, and i have in the past mutually agreed for the sake of that fellowship to avoid certain subjects...but this can only continue for a time (until the issu comes up!), and not by any means should warm relations between two christians trump the willingness to at least EXAMINE really serious problems the church is facing today (or historically). WHAT IS TRUTH?
the suggestion that every single person who ever injected something into christianity was a born again believer actually approved by God is one i don't accept (scripture itself tells us there are many who claim Christ's Name and are NOT approved by Him). do i reject this idea because its FUN to "try to discredit someone"? or because its necessary to be grounded in HIS DOCTRINE, sound doctrine because Jesus TOLD US to?
many can easily jump on the 'beware of the doctines of Catholicism' (for example) bandwagon, yet just dogmatically DENY that there's anything wrong in 'evangelicalism'. and how unloving one is to even suggest there's a problem.
why is a love of the truth, and a desire to wave people away from dangers facing the church UNLOVING? this is the one that makes me feel like walking: are we so limited (and limiting) that we are discouraged from discussing/ debating about the things that we face: meritorious, or harmful....serious or marginally important, etc AS WELL AS ABIDING IN JESUS, SEEKING GENUINE FELLOWSHIP, AND HONOURING GOD?
if i had to accept every wind of doctrine flying around today as okay and good for me because somebody named Mr. B. Christian said ITS so, I MIGHT AS WELL GO TO ROME.
this is what i do not get. do we not as a natural course of events in following the Spirit into truth ENCOUNTER THE ERRORS?
and what do we do when we see them> flag them for the next person? or ignore it.
another member here, with whom i have enjoyed warm fellowship when the gospel is shared, and i have in the past mutually agreed for the sake of that fellowship to avoid certain subjects...but this can only continue for a time (until the issu comes up!), and not by any means should warm relations between two christians trump the willingness to at least EXAMINE really serious problems the church is facing today (or historically). WHAT IS TRUTH?
the suggestion that every single person who ever injected something into christianity was a born again believer actually approved by God is one i don't accept (scripture itself tells us there are many who claim Christ's Name and are NOT approved by Him). do i reject this idea because its FUN to "try to discredit someone"? or because its necessary to be grounded in HIS DOCTRINE, sound doctrine because Jesus TOLD US to?
many can easily jump on the 'beware of the doctines of Catholicism' (for example) bandwagon, yet just dogmatically DENY that there's anything wrong in 'evangelicalism'. and how unloving one is to even suggest there's a problem.
why is a love of the truth, and a desire to wave people away from dangers facing the church UNLOVING? this is the one that makes me feel like walking: are we so limited (and limiting) that we are discouraged from discussing/ debating about the things that we face: meritorious, or harmful....serious or marginally important, etc AS WELL AS ABIDING IN JESUS, SEEKING GENUINE FELLOWSHIP, AND HONOURING GOD?
if i had to accept every wind of doctrine flying around today as okay and good for me because somebody named Mr. B. Christian said ITS so, I MIGHT AS WELL GO TO ROME.
Last edited:
E
if you think it was for Israel only I wonder what type of dispy you were. I don't even believe this. Anyway, Even if one thinks it is. Romans 9. Ezek and other prophesies show disobedient Israel will one day repent. And recieve her king. I can't discount them. Jesus is king to all the nations though. Not just Israel.
Steven? How did this end Israels rebellion and disobaying Christ? Thats what Daniel was praying for. And way Gabriel said would happen. this makes no sense to be honest. at least not to me. And again, I have never heard this before.
Time line does not fit. What about the covenant> and the abomination,. and the wars and desolations?
Well I guess we will just have to agree to disagree.
Of course they are not "all Israel" They have not repented yet. God did not put them back. Man did. And they will not have peace either.
I can't discount romans 11. Nor can I spiritualize it.
Sometimes God used human visions to explain spiritual things. But when he said 70 years. he meant it. (he did in jeremiahs prophesie. The 70 years were almost up. That is why Daniel prayed in the first place.
Steven? How did this end Israels rebellion and disobaying Christ? Thats what Daniel was praying for. And way Gabriel said would happen. this makes no sense to be honest. at least not to me. And again, I have never heard this before.
Time line does not fit. What about the covenant> and the abomination,. and the wars and desolations?
Another reason for my change over is that most of the OT prophecies dispys calim other people spiritualize have to be. Not only do I see them all over the New testament in there fulfillment. Have you ever seen a tree clap its hands? There are dozens of those. Abraham it says in Hebrews concerning the land looked for a country who maker was God. Just too many texts that refer to the Kingdom of Heaven. Like Jesus said my Kingdom is not of this world.
So ill debate in fun. But im too new to really do much. I just simply believe the next thing to happen is the eternal state with a new heaven and new earth.
So debating this is just for fun. OK Plus the come back to the land scriptures in OT stipulate repentance and cleansing. I know those naughty boys in Israel have not done that. So even tho i understand God has ordained them or they wouldnt be there. They are not who they say they are, nor who the church thinks they are. And that will become quite evident soon.
So ill debate in fun. But im too new to really do much. I just simply believe the next thing to happen is the eternal state with a new heaven and new earth.
So debating this is just for fun. OK
Plus the come back to the land scriptures in OT stipulate repentance and cleansing. I know those naughty boys in Israel have not done that. So even tho i understand God has ordained them or they wouldnt be there. They are not who they say they are, nor who the church thinks they are. And that will become quite evident soon.
Of course they are not "all Israel" They have not repented yet. God did not put them back. Man did. And they will not have peace either.
I can't discount romans 11. Nor can I spiritualize it.
Sometimes God used human visions to explain spiritual things. But when he said 70 years. he meant it. (he did in jeremiahs prophesie. The 70 years were almost up. That is why Daniel prayed in the first place.
E
The problem is. Like I told a catholic in their thread. You are getting what people said. How do you know they are true and are not some trumped up thing? How do you know the bible does not teach dispensationalism. Or protestantism? Because someone said so?
there is nothing wrong discussing it. I love it. But to say this proves dispensationalsim did not begin until such and such. and this web site proves it. well. I think we are getting into slippery slopes there.
Plus like I said. If one does use the internet. One should test what is being said. Like I did today. One time I got my but handed to me because I did not test. They other I tested. Both websights had errors. Is this what we want to trust to make our doctrines?
As I told him again. Why don;t we discuss scripture. because it is the only thing we can trust.
there is nothing wrong discussing it. I love it. But to say this proves dispensationalsim did not begin until such and such. and this web site proves it. well. I think we are getting into slippery slopes there.
Plus like I said. If one does use the internet. One should test what is being said. Like I did today. One time I got my but handed to me because I did not test. They other I tested. Both websights had errors. Is this what we want to trust to make our doctrines?
As I told him again. Why don;t we discuss scripture. because it is the only thing we can trust.
ok.
do i not use scripture?
Daniel 9 for example. for months i've used only scriptures to show it was fulfilled.
same with Romans 11 - tons of scripture.
Revelation - i continually use the text: but everybody's got ideas based on their hermenutic! > if you don't believe Dan 9 was fulfilled, you don't see the Kingdom underway. if you don't see the kingdom underway, you're looking for it to happen. that requires a DISPENSATION of time that ISN'T IN THE BIBLE! yes i do use scripture. A LOT. i should do far more.
but everybody comes with presuppositions.
i didn't one day decide to be a christian and that i'd learn about it through the internet!
i'm not going into my testimony here, but that's as far from the truth as it gets.
suffice to say i studied the KJV for a year myself before i ever looked for a church - THAT'S WHERE I HEARD ABOUT THE PRETRIB RAPTURE! in a pentecostal church.
do i not use scripture?
Daniel 9 for example. for months i've used only scriptures to show it was fulfilled.
same with Romans 11 - tons of scripture.
Revelation - i continually use the text: but everybody's got ideas based on their hermenutic! > if you don't believe Dan 9 was fulfilled, you don't see the Kingdom underway. if you don't see the kingdom underway, you're looking for it to happen. that requires a DISPENSATION of time that ISN'T IN THE BIBLE! yes i do use scripture. A LOT. i should do far more.
but everybody comes with presuppositions.
i didn't one day decide to be a christian and that i'd learn about it through the internet!
i'm not going into my testimony here, but that's as far from the truth as it gets.
suffice to say i studied the KJV for a year myself before i ever looked for a church - THAT'S WHERE I HEARD ABOUT THE PRETRIB RAPTURE! in a pentecostal church.
Last edited:
A
EG of coarse it would only be for Israel. Isnt that the disp point?
I understand what they believe about the other nations entering in.
But the main reason given is to fulfill prophecy given to Israel
which is fulfilled in Christ. If it was for gentiles just let the church age
run longer or whatever.
I understand what they believe about the other nations entering in.
But the main reason given is to fulfill prophecy given to Israel
which is fulfilled in Christ. If it was for gentiles just let the church age
run longer or whatever.
