History Of The War Over Dispensationalism

Status
Not open for further replies.

eph3Nine

Mid Acts, Pauline, Dispy to the max!
Nov 7, 2005
4,999
6
77
In the hills of Tennessee
✟5,251.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The war over dispensationalism comes from folks NOT acknowledging the difference between PROPHECY and MYSTERY, law and GRACE, and Israel and the Body of Christ.

It is imperative that one sees that Peter had the gospel of the Circumcision/Israel/Earthly program/Prophecy, while Paul was given a NEW revelation called the gospel of the UNcircumcision/Body of Christ/heavenly program/Mystery REVEALED.

IM not the one who warns people about being IGNORANT of the mystery truths...Paul warns us over and over. Dont blame the messenger!
 
Upvote 0

mcfly1960

Active Member
Feb 23, 2002
159
2
Visit site
✟377.00
Faith
Protestant
The first link included:

1909: The Scofield Bible

Just a few years before World War I, C. I. Scofield approached Oxford Press with an idea for a comprehensive Bible that would be filled with study notes that would help the average layman to better understand the Scriptures. He felt a dispensational study Bible was needed so that the average student of the Word of God could see for himself how the Plan of History actually worked. Oxford Press was in financial straights but they caught the vision of this project because of the popularity of dispensational teaching. Later, they admitted that the publication of this Bible saved their company!

Do you believe that Oxford Press was in "financial straights" (sic)?

What was Oxford Press's (the Rothschilds) interest in this Bible?
 
Upvote 0

mcfly1960

Active Member
Feb 23, 2002
159
2
Visit site
✟377.00
Faith
Protestant
Couch continues:

...His [Darby] legacy of premillennialism and dispensationalism would make America a great supportive friend of the Jewish people, prior to and even after the founding of the nation of Israel in 1948....


The First Zionist Congress that met in Basle in 1897 also played a key role in this return to the Land. The first president was Theodor Herzl who had a driving compassion for his own people going home! Unfortunately, only a few of the returnees saw in these events any relation at all to Bible prophecy. But the Christians in England and America, who were enthralled with dispensationalism and all the yet-to-be-fulfilled prophecies of the Old Testament and the book of Revelation, immediately saw the biblical significance.

So Couch says that dispensationalism and the Zionist movement were allied. Is this is why Oxford Press funded the Scofield Bible?

 
Upvote 0

Tychicum

Well-Known Member
May 4, 2006
931
2
✟8,592.00
Faith
Protestant
mcfly1960 said:
Is this is why Oxford Press funded the Scofield Bible?
Oxford Press is the highly-respected publishing house and a department of the University of Oxford in England.

It transfers 30% of its annual surplus to the rest of the University, with a commitment to a minimum transfer of £12 million per annum. OUP is the largest university press in the world by the number of publications, publishing more than 4500 new books every year and employing some 4000 people.

Established the first printing press in England in 1476, following the invention of the printing press by Johann Gutenberg in 1450 and the subsequent spread of the technology across Europe. Two years later, in 1478, the first book was printed in the city of Oxford. For the next hundred years, books used by or produced for the University of Oxford would be printed by a succession of local independent printers. In 1586, however, the University applied for and obtained a decree from the Star Chamber granting the privilege to print books in its own right. King Charles I increased the independence and latitude of the University Press when he entitled the University to print "all manner of books" by granting a Great Charter to the University in 1636. The content of the charter was negotiated by Archbishop Laud, at the time Chancellor of the University, as part of his drive to establish a set of statutes (the Laudian Code) that were to govern the running of the University for the next two centuries.

It was chartered as one of the two privileged presses in 1634. OUP grew into the world's largest press after it received the rights to publish the King James Version of the Bible and it expanded beyond academic and learned printing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oxford_University_Press

How is it that you feel that the American Rothschilds are related to the English university?
 
Upvote 0

Tychicum

Well-Known Member
May 4, 2006
931
2
✟8,592.00
Faith
Protestant
mcfly1960 said:

Oh ... the Rhodes Scholarship folks?

Hmmm ... The European Rothschild's are inter married though all of European aristocracy.

I miss the issue (but at times I am a bit thick ... so this is not knew).

Sounds a bit conspiracy theory like to me ... Scofield was a humble a servant of the Lord. The brand of the printing press he used is irrelevant.
 
Upvote 0

mcfly1960

Active Member
Feb 23, 2002
159
2
Visit site
✟377.00
Faith
Protestant
Interesting read from:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1969542.stm

Since 11 September support among Americans for Israel has grown massively as many now see the Middle East conflict as the frontline in the US "War on Terror"....


Joining well-established Jewish lobby groups in America is a new and powerful phenomenon - Christian Zionism.
There are an estimated 40 million Christian Conservatives in America and they may be in a position to wield unprecedented influence in support of Israel.

At the Cornerstone Church in Texas 5,000 Christian worshippers cheer in support of Israel. "Jerusalem is the eternal capital of the Jewish state. Not since Camp David but since King David," says their leader, Pastor John Hagee.

Many high profile Israeli politicians have addressed this congregation, among them former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.

...By contrast, pro-Palestinian lobbyists say they face an uphill battle to make their voice heard. Khalid Turaani of American Muslims for Jerusalem says the pro-Israel lobby are better funded, better organised and much better established.

Also, from http://www.sundayherald.com/37707


Benjamin Netanyahu, was asked what the [September 11, 2001] terrorist strikes would mean for US-Israeli relations. He said: “It’s very good.” Then he corrected himself, adding: “Well, it’s not good, but it will generate immediate sympathy [for Israel from Americans].”

See also comments made at: http://engforum.pravda.ru/printthread.php3?threadid=137101&perpage=123

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5848378758602000405&q=911



 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

mcfly1960

Active Member
Feb 23, 2002
159
2
Visit site
✟377.00
Faith
Protestant
At the Cornerstone Church in Texas 5,000 Christian worshippers cheer in support of Israel. "Jerusalem is the eternal capital of the Jewish state. Not since Camp David but since King David," says their leader, Pastor John Hagee.

Many high profile Israeli politicians have addressed this congregation, among them former Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu.


Doesn't Hagee believe that he and his congregation will be raptured while Netanyahu is "left behind" to suffer through the tribulation...Do you know if Netanyahu sees it that way, as he addresses the congregation at Cornerstone? Why wouldn't he want to be raptured, too? Aren't both sides using the other deceitfully?



18 A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. 19Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Matthew 7:18-19
 
Upvote 0

eph3Nine

Mid Acts, Pauline, Dispy to the max!
Nov 7, 2005
4,999
6
77
In the hills of Tennessee
✟5,251.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
You might want to begin your own topic here, mcfly. You just hijacked someone elses.

We arent really interested in what Hagee or the other guy think. What the Bible says is what matters.

This is a forum for the discussion of dispensational theology. The rapture is part of the MYSTERY truths given to Paul for we , the church, which is His Body...a NEW creation.

We are looking to be taken UP to be forever with OUR Lord in the heavenlies.
 
Upvote 0

eph3Nine

Mid Acts, Pauline, Dispy to the max!
Nov 7, 2005
4,999
6
77
In the hills of Tennessee
✟5,251.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The war over dispensationalism comes from folks NOT acknowledging the difference between PROPHECY and MYSTERY, law and GRACE, and Israel and the Body of Christ.

It is imperative that one sees that Peter had the gospel of the Circumcision/Israel/Earthly program/Prophecy, while Paul was given a NEW revelation called the gospel of the UNcircumcision/Body of Christ/heavenly program/Mystery REVEALED.

IM not the one who warns people about being IGNORANT of the mystery truths...Paul warns us over and over NOT to be ignorant of the mystery truths entrusted to him by God.


Dont shoot the messenger. BELIEVE the message.
 
Upvote 0

Tychicum

Well-Known Member
May 4, 2006
931
2
✟8,592.00
Faith
Protestant
eph3Nine said:
The war over dispensationalism comes from folks NOT acknowledging the difference between PROPHECY and MYSTERY, law and GRACE, and Israel and the Body of Christ.

Oh I think it is deeper than that ...

It comes from trying to protect deep traditions ... even at the risk of ignoring the simple instructions left us by the Lord through Paul's epistles.

From the very beginning man has tried to do things "his own way". Establish his own righteousness.

But today with modern tools of communications and study ... there is little excuse. Senior leaders of the traditional denominations know better. They don't want to rock the boat so they continue to feed their flock the same pap week after week ...

They aren't stupid ... just lazy.

It would probably be better for them if they were stupid ... but I don't believe they are.

If you get a chance to read the book "The Controversy" by Cornelius Stam it is worth the effort. It contains quotes and letters from many famous names about the preaching circuit in the 60s and 70s.

While the book is more politics than theology it explains how evangelical Christianity got to where it is today ... and Rick Warren wasn't even born when it all started ...

But this too is going all according to prophecy ...
 
Upvote 0

Tychicum

Well-Known Member
May 4, 2006
931
2
✟8,592.00
Faith
Protestant
How Satan Opposes the Most Blessed Truth in the Bible

By J. C. O'HAIR

Satan has the great majority of church leaders so interested in their denominational programs that they are utterly ignorant of the fact that there is such a truth in the Bible as "the mystery of God's will," "the dispensation of the mystery," "the mystery of Christ" and "the mystery of the gospel." And so they never "open their mouths boldly" or in any other way, to make known "the mystery. "

Other Fundamentalists, who are looked up to as spiritual leaders, and authorities on dispensationalism, are like the lawyers of whom Christ on earth spoke. He said: "Ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that are entering in ye hindered" (Luke 11:52). These brethren make little or no effort to open their mouths boldly to make known the mystery, but on the other hand they help the devil by opposing the servants of Christ who are seeking to do God's will in this respect.

Then there are some dear brethren who call themselves "diplomats." They are like Nicodemus, who came to Jesus by night, or like Peter who practiced duplicity at Antioch because he feared them that were of the circumcision (Gal 2:11-15). These brethren keep their mouths dosed concerning their knowledge of the mystery to keep peace in the camp, and incidentally to keep themselves in good standing for speaking engagements and financial offerings.

Of course Paul could have been such a diplomat compromiser-or coward-and kept out of jail; but his motto in Christian service was Gal. 1:10: "For do I now persuade men or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ." He fought a good fight. He kept the faith. In 1 Tim. 1:16 the Holy Spirit presents Paul as the pattern for believers. In the midst of his afflictions and bonds, Paul wrote from jail: "Brethren be followers together of me" (Phil 3:17).
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

LamorakDesGalis

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2004
2,198
234
Dallas Texas
✟11,088.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Thanks Tychicum for taking the time to post the links. These kinds of articles are always interesting to me. I've got some criticisms of the way the information was presented, and I think the conclusions were reductionistic. At the same time it did touch upon a few things I've been researching, namely the Reformed/Presbyterian links with dispensationalism.
 
Upvote 0

eph3Nine

Mid Acts, Pauline, Dispy to the max!
Nov 7, 2005
4,999
6
77
In the hills of Tennessee
✟5,251.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Tychicum said:
Oh I think it is deeper than that ...

It comes from trying to protect deep traditions ... even at the risk of ignoring the simple instructions left us by the Lord through Paul's epistles.

From the very beginning man has tried to do things "his own way". Establish his own righteousness.

But today with modern tools of communications and study ... there is little excuse. Senior leaders of the traditional denominations know better. They don't want to rock the boat so they continue to feed their flock the same pap week after week ...

They aren't stupid ... just lazy.

It would probably be better for them if they were stupid ... but I don't believe they are.

If you get a chance to read the book "The Controversy" by Cornelius Stam it is worth the effort. It contains quotes and letters from many famous names about the preaching circuit in the 60s and 70s.

While the book is more politics than theology it explains how evangelical Christianity got to where it is today ... and Rick Warren wasn't even born when it all started ...

But this too is going all according to prophecy ...

Aaaaamen...agreed. I try to keep things simple, but at its most basic level, you are absolutely correct. I have two copies of the Controversy actually...isnt it an awesome book????? I became a right divider thru reading CR Stams "Things that Differ" ...couldnt put the danged thing down and was embarrassingly APPALLED at how I had MISSED IT! DUH....a change of mind, or METANOIA moment is decidedly needed by most of professing christendom today...ehhhh? ;)

A right divider friend of mine wanted me to tell you how much she has enjoyed your posts...me tooOOOOOOOOOO. Seems you found right division thru studying on your own...wow...I had to have someone show it to me step by step...thats how steeped I was in the commonly held views of Christian thot and theology today.

Life is grand when you understand the Master Plan...yeee haw.:clap:
 
Upvote 0

mcfly1960

Active Member
Feb 23, 2002
159
2
Visit site
✟377.00
Faith
Protestant
LamorakDesGalis said:
Thanks Tychicum for taking the time to post the links. These kinds of articles are always interesting to me. I've got some criticisms of the way the information was presented, and I think the conclusions were reductionistic. At the same time it did touch upon a few things I've been researching, namely the Reformed/Presbyterian links with dispensationalism.

Dispensationalism found an ear with many of the historical premillennialists among the Presbyterians, particularly in the 1800's and early 1900's, such as Brookes... Scofield was also (at one time) a Presbyterian...as was Chafer and Woolvord and McGee. Liberalism in some of the seminaries left a vaccum among many conservative Presbyterians, and dispensationalism seemed to fill the void. But conservatives were also among its strongest critics from the beginning.

The report the PCUS issued in 1944? appears to have been a turning point where Presbyterians as a whole turned away from it because of too many conflicts with the Westminster Confession of Faith. Historical premillennialism was still considered orthodox among them, however. Even so, Chafer still remained ordained in the PCUS, even after 1944, until his death.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

LamorakDesGalis

Well-Known Member
Sep 22, 2004
2,198
234
Dallas Texas
✟11,088.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
mcfly1960 said:
Dispensationalism found an ear with many of the historical premillennialists among the Presbyterians, particularly in the 1800's and early 1900's, such as Brookes... Scofield was also (at one time) a Presbyterian...as was Chafer and Woolvord and McGee. Liberalism in some of the seminaries left a vaccum among many conservative Presbyterians, and dispensationalism seemed to fill the void. But conservatives were also among its strongest critics from the beginning.

It is true that many leading dispensationalists were conservative Presbyterians. This was the case even up through the early 1950s, where most of Dallas Seminary's faculty were Presbyterian. But criticism of dispensationalism was very sporadic until it was "politicized" in the late 1930s through the 1940s.

Because of the modernist controversy, many conservative Presbyterians were either ousted or they left. At first they found much in common with non-Reformed fundamentalists. In the years shortly after Westminster Seminary was founded, about 20% of Westminster's student body were Methodists, and the faculty included premillennialist John MacRae. But soon a different camp arose who wanted a "truly Reformed" denomination - a group fighting not only against modernism but against non-Reformed fundamentalists as well. Their favorite targets were Arminianism and dispensational premillennialism.

In the OPC it came to a head in 1937 when Kuiper published an extremely critical article on Arminianism and dispensational premillennialism. John MacRae resigned from Westminster and a short while later the Bible Presbyterian Church was formed and Faith Theological Seminary founded, with MacRae as president.

The "truly Reformed" faction continued to criticize dispensationalism, especially singling out Chafer, Walvoord and Dallas Seminary, even though many Presbyterian pastors were also dispensationalists. Grads of Dallas Seminary continued to be appointed as pastors in the Presbyterian church until the 1944 PCUS AIC report condemned dispensationalism. While existing dispensational pastors were "grandfathered" and not forced to resign, all new candidates who held to dispensationalism were automatically rejected.

mcfly1960 said:
The report the PCUS issued in 1944? appears to have been a turning point where Presbyterians as a whole turned away from it because of too many conflicts with the Westminster Confession of Faith. Historical premillennialism was still considered orthodox among them, however. Even so, Chafer still remained ordained in the PCUS, even after 1944, until his death.

The 1944 PCUS AIC report misrepresented dispensationalism. Certain dispensational statements were taken out of context. Quotes from the "moderate" dispensationalists were dropped from the final report. They focused almost entirely on Chafer. However the committee never allowed Chafer to personally appear before them to defend his views.

Also it is relatively easy to find later statements from dispensationalists which clarified views, views which ran counter to everything that the AIC said dispensationalists held.

Also what is not well-known is the deep suspicion and opposition of Presbyterian premillennialists against those who criticized dispensationalism. Quite often in their zeal the critics "overstepped their bounds" - essentially making premillennialism and dispensationalism synonymous. Even in the 1944 AIC report the claim is made that the Confession of Faith runs counter to dispensationalism's teaching of multiple resurrections. However, all premillennialists hold to at least two resurrections according to Rev 20:4-5. So while lip service was seen to be given to "allow" historical premillennialism, the criticisms revealed otherwise.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.