Some of the reasons I pulled away from Dispensationalism.

@TheDivineWatermark

Do dispensationalist ever read anything other then other dispensationalist?

Says nothing about restoring the Kingdom to Israel the nation

...and Isaiah 5:7 says, "... the vineyard of the LORD of hosts is the house of Israel..."

So I would point out that the parables about "the vineyard" in the Gospels are about "Israel"... but one would have to acknowledge that ALL 73 occurrences of the word "Israel" in the NT always mean "Israel" (which many do not acknowledge). = )

I can't speak for all others (though I know of many who DO, INCLUDING the writer of that article I just posted in my Post #138--Paul Martin Henebury, who does read [abundantly] outside of his own perspective [and then also provides reviews of them, btw])...

...but speaking for myself, I own a personal library of thousands of books (from every stripe and viewpoint), as well as reading widely via other means. So I would say, yes... ones I know DO. lol








[I think we all know there are those who are less well read in whatever viewpoint they themselves hold (across the whole spectrum of viewpoints), and thus do not present their side's viewpoint well... like the fluffy rumor thing...]

I cling to the Millenium-Day theory, that 7 day creation foreshadows God's plan of 7000 years for mankind.

This is such a ludicrous statement that it does not even deserve any response. So either you have no clue about Scofield, or you would rather spout anti-Scofield propaganda than the truth.

In defense of Cyrus Scofield, it must must said that the original Scofield Reference Bible (KJV 1910) has been a tremendous help and blessing to hundreds of thousands of Christians (and I have used it personally). While one can disagree with him on certain positions he held (e.g. the Gap Theory), 99.9% of his notes and headings are sound and totally biblical. So I will challenge Beckie to show us exactly how Scofield has "attacked" the Body of Christ. Fake News is a terrible thing since it drives people to believe lies.

As to John Nelson Darby, there are many pluses and quite a few minuses. But there is no question that the writings of Darby have been very influential for many Christians. It is really regrettable that Darby did not have the discernment to see that Westcott & Hort had perpetrated a major hoax on Christendom. Therefore Darby's bible is based upon their corrupt Critical Text and even omits that critical verse in Acts 8:37 (as do most modern translations).

King James Bible
And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

If this verse is omitted, the passage makes absolutely no sense. But if it is regarded as genuine Scripture then it teaches us that water baptism by immersion is to be only administered AFTER someone becomes a believer.

What i have posted are Scofield's notes it is his writings his propaganda

Here is what you said earlier: "I see Scofield's works , the ones I have read, as an attack on the Body of Christ."

Since this is completely false, show us exactly where Scofield has attacked the Body of Christ. Chapter and verse. Otherwise retract this ludicrous statement.

Here is what you said earlier: "I see Scofield's works , the ones I have read, as an attack on the Body of Christ."

Since this is completely false, show us exactly where Scofield has attacked the Body of Christ. Chapter and verse. Otherwise retract this ludicrous statement.

What are Sofields notes on the Resurrections and what are the Words of Jesus on the Resurrection?

I cling to the Millenium-Day theory, that 7 day creation foreshadows God's plan of 7000 years for mankind. This is a very ancient rabbonical ideology even before the whole bible was compiled. In that system there're only three "dispensations" if that's what you still wanna call it, 4000 years from Adam to Christ, 2000 years from Christ's ministry to His return, and 1000 years millennial kingdom as the final "sabbath". Since Jesus himself used the terms "end of the age" "time of the Gentiles" "DAT of the Lord", I think this is definitely legit. I'll write another thread sometime to lay out a timeline of this system.

Reasons for Not Reinterpreting the OT by the NT

Here are Scofield's notes on the Resurrection shown below (as found on Bible Hub):

Resurrection, Summary:
(1) The resurrection of the dead was believed by the patriarchs Gen 22:5 Heb 11:19 Job 19:25-27 and revealed through the prophets Isa 26:19 Dan 12:2,13 Hos 13:14 and miracles of the dead restored to life are recorded in the O.T. 2Ki 4:32-35 13:21.

(2) Jesus Christ restored life to the dead Mt 9:25 Lk 7:12-15 Jn 11:43,44 and predicted His own resurrection Jn 10:18 Lk 24:1-8.

(3) A resurrection of bodies followed the resurrection of Christ Mt 27:52,53 and the apostles raised the dead Acts 9:36-41 20:9,10.

(4) Two resurrections are yet future, which are inclusive of "all that are in the graves" Jn 5:28. These are distinguished as "of life" 1Cor 15:22,23 1Th 4:14-17 Rev 20:4 and "of judgment" Jn 5:28,29 Rev 20:11-13. They are separated by a period of one thousand years Rev 20:5. The "first resurrection," that "unto life," will occur at the second coming of Christ 1Cor 15:23 the saints of the O.T. and church ages meeting Him in the air 1Th 4:16,17 while the martyrs of the tribulation, who also have part in the resurrection Rev 20:4 are raised at the end of the great tribulation.

(5) The mortal body will be related to the resurrection body as grain sown is related to the harvest 1Cor 15:37,38 that body will be incorruptible, glorious, powerful, and spiritual 1Cor 15:42-44,49.

(6) The bodies of living believers will, at the same time, be instantaneously changed 1Cor 15:50-53 Phil 3:20,21. This "change" of the living, and resurrection of the dead in Christ, is called the "redemption of the body" Rom 8:23 Eph 1:13,14.

(7) After the thousand years the "resurrection unto judgment" Jn 5:29 occurs. The resurrection-body of the wicked dead is not described. They are judged according to their works, and cast into the lake of fire. Rev 20:7-15.

It appears that Scofield did not separate the Pre-Tribulation Rapture from the Second Coming. Which is not according to Dispensationalism, but according to Post-Tribulationism.

What did Jesus say about the resurrection ? How do they compare ?

It appears that Scofield did not separate the Pre-Tribulation Rapture from the Second Coming. Which is not according to Dispensationalism, but according to Post-Tribulationism.

That is all included in his notes. There is no contradiction. And you seem to be forgetting that Jesus gave us the overview while the apostles have provided additional details. So once again it is up to you to connect the dots. Scofield has connected the dots, but he should have separated the Rapture from the Second Coming in his notes. But many others have also made this mistake.

Either you are stating that multiple interpretations can be correct at the same time or that Beckie was correct in her criticism of Scofield. Which is it?

Beckie was presenting a WHOLESALE condemnation of Scofield and Dispensationalism.

But I had already stated that while he is generally correct, there are some of his views with which I (and others) would disagree (e.g. the Gap Theory). This would be true for any commentator. So in general Scofield is biblical.

Background:
Dad was in Bible School when i was born. Glad Tidings was a Assemblies of God school. The blessings of being born into a Christian family I will ever be thankful for. The family lived and breathed Dispensational thinking. Some of my earliest memories are making sure i was right with Jesus because the nation of Israel had formed and it was now about 7 years beyond 1948. So scared i had sinned and would be left, mind you i was 9 -10 . The secret rapture ... if Mom was not home for some reason when school got out the fear of being left behind would hit again time after time... Didn't expect Dad to be home he was a tree faller along with pastoring a small Pentecostal church. The point here is i grew up with a heavy dose of Dispensationalism. Thinking a Scofield Bible was THEE Word of God.

I am not a good writer, struggle with making myself clear. Because of this reply from a fellow poster i will attempt this thread.
Rhomphaeam


I could list a mess of urls, that is not my plan although i will use others notes.

Please lets not go to the yes no yes no postings

So in general Scofield is biblical.