Scofield “Bible” (Part 3) – C.I. Scofield: Dispensational Scalawag

mask 4

Grant Swart

This is a short follow-on to Parts 1 & 2 Scofield “Bible” – A Handbook for Genocide AND Scofield “Bible” (Part 2) – Re-defining the darkness of fraud, conspiracy and heresy of a brief series I have posted over the past few weeks, which deals with the Scofield Reference “bible”, its author Cyrus Ingerson Scofield, and the massively popular heretical dispensational beliefs it continues to spawn.

Scholarly Bible believing Christians cannot accept a view of Scripture as put forward by the Scofield Reference “bible” (and a God who would have contrived it), and are those who speak out against the spiritual, geo-political, ethnic and religious consequences of such an astonishingly narrow and mistaken world-view as that of Dispensational Pre-millenialism. They also experience with sadness the realization that such enormous energy and devotion have been poured into such a misguided enterprise. More often than not, these “Bereans” would themselves have been introduced to the heretical conspiracies of dispensational pre-millenialism by the worldly church and would have discovered the truth about the kingdom of God and the second coming of the Saviour Jesus Christ only through conscientious and inspired study of Holy Scripture.

While this article describes C.I.Scofield as the scalawag he chose to be, it can be argued that most of the famous dispensationalists world-over and throughout the historic existence of the dispensational heresy, can be regarded as such to a lesser or greater extent, due to their proclaiming such a gross misrepresentation of Scriptural prophecy.  Among these world famous dispensational teachers have been some otherwise truly remarkable pastors and Christians. However, details pertaining to the lives and of the dispensational protagonists are of less significance to the Christian, than the heretical teachings which constitute dispensationalism.

It is not my intention to discuss in this article, all the specifics which constitute the eschatological heresy of Dispensational Pre-millenialism. Continue reading

Against Dispensationalism

Against Disp

Truth Matters… The truth will make you free (Jn 8:32)

2-9-2012 G.J. Harloff, Ph.D.

North Olmsted, Ohio 44070

Abstract

This pamphlet examines the veracity of Bible teaching based on literal interpretation and spoof-texting. Spoof-texting is a teaching method that employs a word-search- approach to present lots of scriptures without time for thought. It is concluded that man-centric literal interpretation, including spoof-texting, leads directly to the different literal system discussed herein. This literal system is dispensationalism and is in wide spread use today.

MacArthur asks for Biblical proof (in GC 70-16 tape) that the Old Testament Israel is the church. This booklet is partly about illustrating this proof and attempts to show: (1) the Bible teaches that there is a continuation between spiritual (individual believing) Israel and the church, (2) the mystery in the New Testament is not that there is a church, but rather that Gentiles are fellow heirs of the same body and partakers of His promise in Christ, (3) believing Gentiles historically joined Israel in the Old Testament, (4) the “new man” in the New Testament is comprised of believing Jews and Gentiles, (5) those who believe in Christ (that Christ is the Messiah, died for our sins, and was resurrected to eternal life) are children of Abraham and all believers are part of the “olive tree” nourished by Christ, (6) the Old Testament prediction of the New Covenant “But this is the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days,” declares the LORD, “I will put My law within them and on their heart I will write it; and I will be their God, and they shall be My people .” (Jer 31:33) is synonymous with the New Covenant announced by Christ at His last supper, and (7) salvation in Christ is the same in both the Old and New Testaments because no one comes to the Father except through Christ.

Introduction

This pamphlet compares the assumptions of a literalistic system with reformed theology and scriptural references are cited. Of course reformed theology and or the different literal system may both be wrong. The literal system rejects the continuation of the Old Testament believers into the New Testament church and instead assumes that Israel “temporarily” forfeited the privilege of being “the people of God”.

We are instructed by scripture to oppose incorrect teaching (Gal 2:11-14), and to search the scripture daily to test its true interpretation (Acts 17:11). We need to be in the Word daily to discern the truth with the help of the Holy Spirit. Continue reading

Premillennialism Is A Descent Of Ancient Judaism

celestial-garden

William Masselink

The History of Chiliasm

“What is the origin of this strange doctrine?” you ask. The careful study of church history will furnish us with the conclusive answer. Premillennialism is a descent of ancient Judaism. There is a striking resemblance between the off-spring and the parent. The old Jewish conceptions of an external Messianic kingdom have found their perfect embodiment in the Chiliastic theory of the millennium. Premillennialism is a relic of Judaism. Dr. Hodge says of this, “It is a Jewish doctrine. The principles adopted by its advocates in the interpretation of prophecy are the same as have been adopted by the Jews in the time of Christ; and have led substantially to the same conclusions. The Jews expected that when the Messiah came He would establish a glorious earthly kingdom at Jerusalem; that those who had died in the faith should be raised from the dead to share the Messianic reign; that all nations and peoples on the face of the earth should be subject to them; and that any nation that would not serve them should be destroyed. All the riches and honors of the world were to be at their disposal. The event destroyed these expectations; and the principles of prophetic interpretation on which these expectations were founded were proved to be incorrect,” Hodge Systematic Theology – Eschatology.

EXAMINATION OF OLD JEWISH WRITINGS

The Judaistic features of Chiliasm can be readily seen by an examination of the Apocalyptic writings of the Jews. The genesis of this doctrine may be found in these writings which are generally dated in the pre-Christian period. The Jews divided the future into two separate periods. The first era is considered to be of a temporal nature and is designated as the kingdom of the Messiah. The second era is of eternal duration and is called the kingdom of God. The transient Messianic kingdom prepares the way for the final setting up of the eternal kingdom of God. This is exactly the position of the Premillennialists of today. Christ’s Messianic kingdom comes first and after that the kingdom of God. That the Chiliasts have incorporated a part of ancient Jewish eschatology in their scheme of the future is very evident. A general survey of the Jewish writings is all that is necessary to establish this fact. In the book of Enoch (chap. 91, 93) the entire course of the world is divided into ten weeks. At the close of the tenth period the eternal stage begins. In the third book of Sible the Messianic reign is first represented and after it has overcome its enemies, the kingdom of God begins. We find the same distinction in the Psalms of Solomon where the preliminary Messianic kingdom is described as something transitory. In Psalms 17 and 18, and in Psalm 3:12, we read of the resurrection to eternal life.

Coming down to the Christian period we meet this two-fold kingdom idea in the Slavic Enoch and in the Apocalypses of Ezra and Baruch. In these writings the duration of the Messianic period is fixed by a definite number of years. In 4 Ezra 7:28 the reign of Christ lasts four hundred years. After that time Christ with the rest of His earthly creatures, dies. Then the dead awake and the eternal judgment begins. So also in Baruch 40:3 the reign of Christ is represented as lasting till the world comes to an end.

In many of the Jewish writings, the presentation of these two stages has resulted in an orderless confusion. Continue reading

Eschatology by Ethos: Why the “Optimism” vs. “Pessimism” Paradigm Doesn’t Work

Pessimism-or-optimism-small

Why the “Optimism” vs. “Pessimism” Paradigm Doesn’t Work

Kim Riddlebarger

Anyone familiar with the in-house feud between Reformed postmillenarians and Reformed amillenarians knows that the debate between these two positions is often framed in terms of “optimistic” postmillenarians vs. “pessimistic” amillenarians. Despite the widespread use and apparent utility of these labels, I remain unconvinced that one can formulate a proper and biblical eschatology merely by identifying a position’s distinctive ethos and then choosing the most “optimistic” of the various options.

To avoid being labeled an “eschatological pessimist”—a negative label that postmillenarians have successfully pinned on dispensationalists—a number of Reformed amillenarians self-consciously identify themselves as “optimistic” amillenarians. In making this identification, the optimistic amillenarian attempts to co-opt the attractive rhetoric of cultural progress and transformation used by postmillenarians, while at the same time avoiding the serious exegetical problem associated with postmillennialism—a rather embarrassing shortage of biblical passages in the New Testament that teach such a view.

While I am “optimistic” about the kingdom of God and the progress it will make during the interadvental age (and would likely qualify to be an “optimistic” amillenarian), I’m not so sure an unqualified affirmation of “optimism” is the best way for Reformed amillenarians to respond to those who determine the soundness of one’s eschatological position using the optimism/pessimism paradigm. Here’s why.

No Christian who truly believes that the resurrection of Jesus Christ inaugurates the new creation and guarantees the final victory over Satan and his kingdom at the end of the age wants to be identified as a “pessimist.” No doubt, the New Testament is crystal clear about who wins in the end. God will save his elect, usher in the age to come, consummate his kingdom, raise the dead, judge the world, and make all things new. These truths are certainly reason enough to be optimistic about the eventual outcome of the present course of world history, especially when one considers what Jesus Christ did to secure our redemption from sin’s power and consequence. Through his death and resurrection, Jesus Christ removes the curse and defeats our greatest enemy, which is death. No small thing and a very good reason to be optimistic. Continue reading

Getting Past the TULIP

Tulip Nico

Michael S. Horton

“Like Christ’s redeeming work, then, faith is not merely offered but is actually conferred, by sheer grace and without any obligation to grant it.”

Just as Luther’s followers preferred to be called “evangelicals” but were labeled “Lutherans” by Rome, around 1558 Lutherans coined the term “Calvinist” for those who held Calvin’s view of the Supper over against both Zwingli and Luther. Despite self-chosen labels such as “evangelical” and “Reformed” (preferred because the aim was always to reform the catholic church rather than start a new one), “Calvinism” unfortunately stuck as a popular nickname.

No Central Dogma  Continue reading

What stone Temple ? Jesus, is the True Temple !

39707087_files_forum

Jesus, the True Temple

By Kim Riddlebarger 

When Jesus declared of himself, “I tell you, something greater than the temple is here,” (Matthew 12:6) and when he told a Samaritan woman that he can give her “living water” (John 4:10-14), we are given a major clue that the authors of the New Testament have reinterpreted the pre-messianic understanding of God’s temple in the light of the coming of Jesus, Israel’s Messiah.

When we consider the fact that the temple occupies a major role in the witness of Israel’s prophets regarding God’s future eschatological blessing for the nation, and that this imagery points forward to person of Jesus, we are greatly aided in our understanding of the nature and character of the millennial age as a present reality.

We begin with the Old Testament expectation regarding the temple of the Lord.  Both Isaiah 2:2-4 and Micah 4:1-5, speak of God’s future blessing upon Israel in the last days, when God’s people will go up to mountain of the Lord, and to the temple, where God’s people will once again learn the ways of the Lord. Continue reading

The Dangers of Arminianism: Part 2 of 2

All free will, works religion, Arminianism in every form, under any denominational name is false religion. It may call itself Christian. But it is not Christian at all. Such religion is utter paganism! It is a total denial of God’s free and sovereign grace in Jesus Christ (Gal. 5:2, 4). Any mixture of works with grace is a total denial of grace (Rom. 11:6). To assert that salvation is by the will of man is to deny that “Salvation is of the Lord” (Jon. 2:9; Rom. 9:16). – Don Fortner

I do not serve the god of the Arminians at all; I have nothing to do with him, and I do not bow down before the Baal they have set up; he is not my God, nor shall he ever be; I fear him not, nor tremble at his presence…The God that saith today and denieth tomorrow, that justifieth today and condemns the next…is no relation to my God in the least degree. He may be a relation of Ashtaroth or Baal, but Jehovah never was or can be his name.” – C.H. Spurgeon

 

The Dangers of Arminianism (Part 2 of 2)

by Jim Van Winkle
re-posted by Grant Swart

 

II. ARMINIANISM IS SUBJECTIVE AND EXPERIENTIAL RATHER THAN OBJECTIVE AND DOCTRINAL

A. ARMINIANISM IS ANTI-INTELLECTUAL
B. ARMINIANISM IS PRAGMATIC
C. ARMINIANISM IS PERFECTIONISTIC
D. ARMINIANISM APPEALS TO THE WORLDLY CHURCH
E. ARMINIANISM EMPHASIZES MAN’S ACTIVITY
F. ARMINIANISM DESTROYS FIRST-LOVE CHRISTIANITY

CONCLUSION

II. ARMINIANISM IS SUBJECTIVE AND EXPERIENTIAL RATHER THAN OBJECTIVE AND DOCTRINAL

Pietism, a reaction against Reformation orthodoxy, represented a turn inward, from God to self. Instead of focusing on God and his saving work in Christ, it shifted the focus to me and my personal relationship with Jesus. While no cardinal evangelical truth was rejected the objective focus on Christ’s justification of the sinner was subverted by the subjective focus on the experience Continue reading