Isa 58:6 "Is not this the kind of fasting I have chosen: to loose the chains of injustice and untie the cords of the yoke, to set the oppressed free and break every yoke? Isa 58:7 Is it not to share your food with the hungry and to provide the poor wanderer with shelter-- when you see the naked, to clothe him, and not to turn away from your own flesh and blood?
Wednesday, September 30, 2020
Tuesday, September 29, 2020
Prepare for Food Shortages! COFFEE with LYNETTE: Ice Age Farmer, Christian Westbrook
8. Revelation Red Pill, Exposing the Rapture Origins, Edward Irving, Margaret McDonald, John Darby, and CI Scofield with the Scofield Reference Bible
J Preston Eby called "LOOKING FOR HIS APPEARING" which can be found at http://www.hisremnant.org/eby/articles/kingdom/looking/lookingfor.html
THE ORIGIN OF THE PRE-TRIBULATION RAPTURE Did Jesus tell his followers that He would come back physically in two phases - one, secret and unexpected, "for" His saints, to rapture them away; and a second, publicly "with" His saints? Is this "rapture" really the "hope" of the Church as the preachers are wont to proclaim? Let me give you the history of how this theory got started.
It wasn't until the early or mid 1800's that there was any significant group of believers around the world that looked for a "rapture" of the Church prior to a seven-year tribulation period. It may come as a shock to some who read these lines, but it is a fact nonetheless, that the "rapture" teaching was NOT taught by the early Church, it was NOT taught by the Church of the first centuries, it was NOT taught by the Reformers, IT WAS NOT TAUGHT BY ANYONE (except a couple Roman Catholic theologians) UNTIL ABOUT THE YEAR 1830!
At the time of the Reformation the early Protestants widely held and Were convinced that the Pope was the supreme individual embodiment and personification of the spirit of antichrist, and the Roman Church the Harlot System of Rev. 17. This understanding was responsible for bringing millions of believers out of the Roman Catholic religious system. It therefore became expedient for certain Romish theologians to turn the attention of the people away from the Papacy, and this they endeavored to a counter-interpretation to that held by the Protestants. This new scheme of prophetic interpretation became known as FUTURISM. Rather than viewing the drama of the book of Revelation spiritually and historically, they would consign it all to a brief period of time at the end of the age. It was a Jesuit priest named Ribera who, in the days of the Reformation, first taught that all the events in the book of Revelation were to take place literally during the three and a half years reign of the Antichrist away down at the end of the age. Thus Ribera laid the foundation of a system of prophetic interpretation of which the Secret Rapture has now become an integral part.
A Counter-Reformation, the Jesuit Commission and possible events leading up to the false teaching
In 1545, the Catholic Church convened one of its most famous councils in history, which took place north of Rome in a city called Trent. One of the main purposes of this Council was for Catholics to plan a counterattack against Martin Luther and the Protestants. This warfare only confirmed in the minds of Protestants the conviction that Papal Rome was indeed the Beast which would ”make war with the saints” (Revelation 13:7). Therefore a new tactic was needed, something less obvious. This is where the Jesuits come in. On August 15, 1534, Ignatius Loyola founded a secretive Catholic order called the Society of Jesus, also known as the Jesuits. Jesuit priests have been known throughout history as the most wicked political arm of the Roman Catholic Church. At the Council of Trent, the Catholic Church gave the Jesuits the specific assignment of destroying Protestantism and bringing people back to the Mother Church. This was to be done not only through the Inquisition and through torture, but also through theology.
At the Council of Trent, the Jesuits were commissioned by the Pope to develop a new interpretation of Scripture that would counteract the Protestant application of the Bible’s Antichrist prophecies to the Roman Catholic Church. Francisco Ribera (1537-1591), a brilliant Jesuit priest and doctor of theology from Spain, basically said, ”Here am I, send me”. In 1590, Ribera published a commentary on the Revelation as a counter-interpretation to the prevailing view among Protestants which identified the Papacy with the Antichrist. Ribera applied all of Revelation but the earliest chapters to the end time rather than to the history of the Church. Antichrist would be a single evil person who would be received by the Jews and would rebuild Jerusalem. Following close behind Francisco Ribera was another brilliant Jesuit scholar, Cardinal Robert Bellarmine (1542-1621) of Rome. In his lectures, he agreed with Ribera. The futurists’ school won general acceptance among Catholics. Through the work of these two tricky Jesuit scholars, we might say that a brand new baby was born into the world. In fact, Francisco Ribera has been called the Father of Futurism.
For almost 300 years after the Council of Trent, Jesuit Futurism remained largely inside the realm of Catholicism, but the plan of the Jesuits was that these theological tenets be adopted by Protestants. This adoption process actually began in the early 1800s in England, and from there it spread to America. Dr. Samuel Roffey Maitland (1792-1866), a lawyer and Bible scholar, became a librarian to the Archbishop of Canterbury. It is very likely that one day he discovered Ribera’s commentary in the library. In any event, in 1826 he published a widely-read book attacking the Reformation and supporting Ribera’s idea of a future one-man Antichrist.
After Dr. Maitland came James H. Todd, a professor of Hebrew at the University of Dublin. Todd accepted the futuristic ideas of Maitland, publishing his own supportive pamphlets and books. Then came John Henry Newman (1801-1890), a member of the Church of England and a leader of the famous Oxford Movement (1833-1845). Through the influence of Maitland, Todd, Newman, and others, a definite ”Romeward movement was already arising, destined to sweep away the old Protestant landmarks, as with a flood.
https://bjorkbloggen.com/2011/10/18/history-of-the-very-recent-origin-of-the-pretribulation-rapture-and-dispensationalism/
Emannuel Lacunza, Jesuit Priest
Later, Emmanuel Lacunza, also a Jesuit priest, built on Ribera's teachings, and spent much of his life writing a book titled "The Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty." Lacunza, however, wrote under the assumed name of "Rabbi Ben Ezra," supposedly a learned Jew who had accepted Christ as his Saviour. With Jesuit cunning he thus conspired to get his book a hearing in the Protestant world - they would not even permit it in their homes coming from a Jesuit pen - but as the earnest work of a "converted Jew" they would consume it with avid interest! Within the pages of this elaborate forgery Lacunza taught the novel notion that Jesus returns not once, but twice, and at the "first stage" of His return He "raptures" His Church so they can escape the reign of the "future Antichrist." His book was first published in Spanish in the year 1812 and soon found its way onto the shelves of the library of the Archbishop of Canterbury in London, England. Now enter the name of Edward Irving. Born in Scotland in 1792, Irving became one of the most eloquent preachers of his time. In 1828 his open-air meetings in Scotland drew crowds of 10,000 people. His Church in London seated one thousand people and was packed week after week with a congregation drawn from the most brilliant and influencial circles of society. There were some among them who by prophetic declaration announced that the Lord was coming soon, and this idea became prominent in their prophetic utterances and teachings. Out of those prophetic declarations some began to study the scriptures in the light of a physical, literal coming of the Lord. Up until that time the coming of the Lord was understood as a coming of the Lord TO His people, and IN His saints, and there was no sense of His fleshly coming. Irving discovered Lacunza's book and was deeply shaken by it, in fact, fell in love with it, translated it into English, and it was published in London in 1827. And at this very time Irving heard what he believed to be a Voice from heaven commanding him to preach the Secret Rapture of the Saints. Then Irving began to hold Bible Conferences throughout Scotland, emphasizing the coming of Jesus to rapture His Church.
FRANCISCO RIBERA (1537-1591), FUTURISM
JESUIT Priest and Doctor of Theology
The Spanish Ribera was a Jesuit, a doctor of theology, who started writing (1585) a 500 page commentary on the book of Revelation six years before his death (1591). In his commentary, Ribera believed that the rapture would occur 45 days before the end of the 3-1/2 year tribulation period (also shades of the future PreWrath doctrine). This was the first time the second coming was split into two separate comings, one for the Church and then one at the end of the age with the raptured Church returning with Christ in wrath.
CARDINAL ROBERT BELLARMINE (1542-1621), FUTURISM
JESUIT Scholar, the most prominent of his time
Also during this period, acclaimed Jesuit apologist Cardinal Robert Bellarmine, wrote ”Polemic Lectures Concerning the Disputed Points of the Christian Belief Against the Heretics of This Time.” His purpose in doing so was to refute the Historic theory of figuring Daniel’s 1260, 1290 and 2300 days as years, relegating these to actual days, e.g., 1260 days, etc. By doing so, the reign of Antichrist was pushed into a future time and negated Catholicism and its pope as the man of sin and his system during his time.
MANUEL DE LACUNZA (1731-1801), FUTURISM, JESUIT Priest
In a book titled, ”Hidden Beast 2,” E. H. Scolfield writes ”There was a Spanish family living in Chili named de Lacunzas. In the year of our Lord, 1731, they had a baby boy. Fifteen years later, the lad was sent to Spain to become a Jesuit priest. Twenty-two years later after that, in 1767, the Jesuits were expelled from Spain because of their brutality. The now Father Manuel de Lacunza y Diaz had to move. He went to Imola, Italy, where he remained for the rest of his life. In Imola, he claimed to be a converted Jew. Under the alias of ‘Rabbi Ben Ezra‘ he wrote a book. The title: ‘The Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty.’ In that book he theorized that the church would be ‘raptured’ (taken up to be with the Lord) some 45 days before the real return of Jesus to the Earth. During that 45 days (while the church was in heaven with the Lord) God would judge the wicked still on earth.”
This last sentence shows shades of PreWrath doctrine of today, though that was put together during the 1990s. Lacunza wrote his manuscript in Spanish and it was published in 1812 under a pseudo-name, Juan Josafa [Rabbi] Ben-Ezra. By doing so, his book would more easily be accepted by Protestantism. This proved true as it was placed on Rome’s Index of prohibited books, which only made it sought out by the Protestants.
Lacunza emphasized a return to interpreting prophecy literally from the Futurist viewpoint. He wrote of a future Antichrist and a 1260-day (literal days) tribulation, events just preceding the coming of the Lord. He wrote in opposition to the ‘year-day’ theory of the Historicists (1260 days = 1260 years). He did not promote a pretribulational rapture of the saints at the future time of the Antichrist. His rapture of the saints occurred 45 days before the end of Daniel’s 70th week, probably an influence from Ribera. Lacunza’s book would have a dramatic influence on Edward Irving and his formation of the Pretribulation doctrine. It most likely influenced Irving to add another coming of Christ to the one described in Scripture.
Edward Irving
1. Irving and the Revival of 19th Century Premillennialism
The development of premillennialism in the nineteenth century, and the revolution in prophetic and apocalyptic speculation concerning the 'rapture' and the return of Christ can be largely attributed to the Scottish, Edward Irving1, also the forerunner of the Pentecostal and Charismatic movements.2
Having accepted a call in 1822 to pastor the Church of Scotland congregation at the Caledonian Chapel, Iriving soon became a popular if controversial speaker. So much so that the Chapel proved too small for the large numbers who wanted to hear him, and a larger church was built in Regent Square in 1827.3
Given his growing popularity Irving was invited to preach at the annual service of the London Missionary Society in 1824, and a year later in 1825 to the Continental Society, in which Henry Drummond was already influential. Irving's address on that occasion was provocatively entitled, 'Babylon and Infidelity Foredoomed',
...in it Irving advanced the assertion that the Church, far from being on the threshold of a new era of blessing, was about to enter a 'series of thick-coming judgments and fearful perplexities' preparatory to Christ's advent and reign.4
Irving published the address acknowledging in the foreword, his indebtedness to Hatley Frere, an influential layman who held premillennialist views.5
In 1828 Irving confidently wrote to Thomas Chalmers, who had just been appointed Professor of Divinity at Edinburgh, to ask whether he might be examined for a doctorate in divinity, as well as have further opportunity to preach in Edinburgh on the theme of the Kingdom. In that letter he gave some indication of his theological emphasis at that time,
The second coming of the Lord is the 'point de vue', the vantage ground, as one of my friends is won't to word it, from which, and from which alone, the whole purpose of God can be contemplated and understood.6
2. Irving Views on the Gentile Church and the Jewish People
In 1826 Irving was introduced to the views of Manuel Lacunza a Spanish Jesuit who wrote a book under the pseudonym of Juan Josafat Ben-Ezra, allegedly a converted Jew, entitled, 'The Coming of the Messiah in Glory and Majesty'. Lacunza interpreted all but the first three chapters of the Book of Revelation as describing apocalyptic events about to happen.
Irving was so excited by Lacunza's speculations, he mastered Spanish in order to translate and publish the work in English.7 Irving added a 203 page preface to the translation in which he presented with great conviction his own unique prophetic speculations about the end of the world, predicting the apostasy of Christendom, the subsequent restoration of the Jews and finally the imminent return of Christ.
When the Lord shall have finished the taking of witness against the Gentiles... he will begin to prepare another ark of testimony... and to that end will turn his Holy Spirit unto his ancient people, the Jews, and bring them unto those days of refreshing... This outpouring of the Spirit is known in Scripture by 'the latter rain'.8
These three points of doctrine concerning the Gentile church, the future Jewish and universal church, and the personal advent of the Lord to destroy the one and to build up the other, I opened and defended out of the scriptures from Sabbath to Sabbath, with all boldness, yet with fear and trembling... at that time I did not know of one brother in the ministry who held with me in these matters, and of those to whom I broke the subject, I could not get the ear, even for preliminaries. So novel and strange a doctrone... such uncivil and implacable language, concerning overwhelming judgments upon the very eve of the millennial blessedness... such low and derogatory of the risen and exalted Saviour, as that he should ever again come to visit earth, and be visibly present in it for any length of time, could not fail, and certainly did not fail, to call down upon my head all possibly forms and degrees of angry and intemperate abuse... But the more I examined, the more I was convinced, and resolved, though alone and single-handed, to maintain these three great heads of doctrine from the holy scriptures, against all who should undertake to uphold the commonly-received notion, that the present Gentile dispensation was about to burst forth with the millennial blessedness, after which, to wind up and consume all, the Lord would come in the latter end.9
In 1828 Irving wrote, a work of over 500 pages entitled, The Last Days: A Discourse on the Evil Character of These Our Times, Proving Them to be The 'Perilous Times' and the 'Last Days.' The first chapter is entitled, 'Introductory, to prove that the Last Times and Last Days of Holy Scripture are the Conclusion of the Jewish Captivity and the Gentile Dispersion.' Irving was clearly convinced that the Lord would return in his generation,
I conclude, therefore, that the last days... will begin to run from the time of God's appearing for his ancient people, and gathering them together to the work of destroying all Antichristian nations, of evangelising the world, and of governing it during the Millennium...
The times and fulness of the times, so often mentioned in the New Testament, I consider as referring to the great period numbered by times... Now if this reasoning be correct, as there can be little doubt that the one thousand two hundred and sixty days concluded in the year 1792, and the thirty additional days in the year 1823, we are already entered upon the last days, and the ordinary life of a man will carry many of us to the end of them. If this be so, it gives to the subject with which we have introduced this year's ministry a very great importance indeed.10
Unlike Hal Lindsey and later dispensationalists, Irving believed the reference to 'Gog' in Ezekiel 38 to be,
...a confederacy of all the nations of the East, which are left from the destruction of the Roman apostasy, which procedeth this great congregation of nations against Jerusalem spoken of in all the prophets.11
3. Irving and the Prophetic Conference Movement
Irving's premillennial and prophetic views concerning Israel came to have a profound influence over many Christian leaders and politicians not least John Nelson Darby, the founder of the Brethren and Henry Drummond (1786-1860), a city banker and politician, who later founded the Catholic Apostolic Church.
On the first day of Advent in 1826, the same year Irving was translating Lacunza's work, Drummond opened his home at Albury Park to a select group of some twenty invited guests to discuss matters of prophecy. These included the Revd. Lewis Way who had helped found the London Society for the Promotion of Christianity Among the Jews, or London Jews Society, as it was more commonly named, along with Joseph Frey. Also present was Hugh McNeile, another Anglican who, in 1830, published a book entitled 'The Prophecies Relative to the Jewish Nation,' from Albury Rectory. In this book McNeile made frequent references to 'dispensations' and the future national pre-eminance of Israel.12 Some twenty men attended the first conference and in the region of forty attended one or more of those held at Albury. The majority were like Lewis Way and Hugh McNeile, were Anglicans, although others were Moravian, Church of Scotland and Nonconformist ministers.13 Irving was to write of the first such conference,
...the six days we spent under the holy and hospitable roof of Albury House, within the chime of the church bell, and surrounded by the most picturesque and beautiful forms of nature... of which I can say is this, that no council, from that first which we convened at Jerusalem until this time, seemed more governed, and conducted, and inspired by a spirit of holy communion.14
Similar premillennial prophetic conferences were held at Albury each year until 1830, before proliferating, apparently under the increasing influence of J. N. Darby to other venues including the Powerscourt Conferences in Dublin held in the 1830's, to New York in 1868, London in 1873, Chicago in 1875, and culminating in the Bible Conference Movement and the Niagara Conferences of 1883 to 1897. Regular topics covered included speculations on the Second Coming.
Both the method of 'Bible readings' and the topics of the conferences strongly suggest that the gatherings were a result of J.N. Darby's travels in the United States and the influence of the Plymouth Brethren.15
Though already dead for fifty years, Irving is also attributed to have been the cause of the split that occurred at the 1884 Niagara Conference over what became known as the 'Rapture-Rupture'.16
https://www.stephensizer.com/articles/irving1.html
Margaret MacDonald
John Neslon Darby and the Plymouth Brethern.
About this same time there began the emergence of a new movement which came to be known as the "Plymouth Brethren." The Brethren movement had its beginning in Dublin in 1825 when a small group of earnest men, dissatisfied with the spiritually lethargic condition that prevailed in the Protestant Church in Ireland, met for prayer and fellowship. Soon others joined the fellowship and associated groups sprang up in various places. Though the movement had its beginning at Dublin ' , it was Plymouth, England that became the center of their vast literature outreach, thus the name !'Plymouth Brethren" became attached. Although there was interest from the start in prophetic subjects, the center of interest was on the body of Christ as an organism and the spiritual unity in Christ of all believers - in reaction to the deadness and formalism of the organized church systems and the ecclesiastical Heirarchy. A man by the name of John Nelson Darby was the leading spirit among the Plymouth Brethren from 1830 onward. Darby was from a prosperous Irish family, was educated as a lawyer, took high honors at Dublin University, then turned aside, to his father's chagrin, to become a minister. Thus Irving and Darby were contemporaries, though associated with different spiritual movements. Another series of meetings were in progress at this time, a group of seeking Christians were meeting in the castle of Lady Powerscourt for the study of Bible prophecy. Many clergymen attended, and quite a few who were Irvingites. The Irvingites came to the meetings obsessed with the ideas of the "Secret Rapture" and the future Antichrist, imbibed from the Jesuit Lacunza's book. J.N. Darby and the other Brethren leaders were invited to these meetings and became participators in them. It was there that he was introduced to the Jesuit teaching of the Secret Rapture and the futurist interpretation of prophecy, as well as the famous book by Rabbi Ben-Ezra, or, actually, Jesuit priest Emmanuel Lacunza! Darby was himself a prolific writer and from that time a constant stream of propaganda came from his pen. His writings on biblical subjects number over 30 volumes of 600 pages each. Darby developed and organized "futurism" into a system of prophetic teaching called "dispensationalism." Darby' s biographers refer to him as "the father of dispensationalism." And the crown jewel in the kingdom of dispensationalism is, of course, the so-called SECRET RAPTURE! The Secret Rapture teaching was introduced into the United States and Canada in the 1860's and 1870's, though there is some indication that it may have been taught as early as the 1840's. Darby himself visited the United States six times.
Min 6:00 French Revolution
7:30-12:00 Secret Rapture
"The thoughts are new...New Wine to the 1800 History of the Church"
"Be vague, it would not be good to have it so clear"
What was the fruit? Schism... self centered, autocratic.
Spurgeon lays the Plymouth Brethren Bare...
The Origin of the 'Secret Pretribulational Rapture' Doctrine
Darby exercises basically a Papal Authority...
trend toward exclusivity
12:45-14:00
14:30--- Only the Brethren
Darby began publishing his prophetic speculations in 1831. Coincidentally both he and Edward Irving began to postulate two stages to Christ's imminent return about the same time. First, there would be an invisible 'appearing' when Christians would meet Christ in the air and be removed from the earth, a process which came to be known as 'the rapture of the saints'. With the restraining presence of the Holy Spirit removed from the world, the Antichrist would arise and the seven year tribulation would begin. His rule would finally be crushed only by the public 'appearing' of Jesus Christ.
There is some speculation that this novel doctrine emerged as a result of the Powerscourt prophetic conference held near Dublin in 1831. 'Darby's prominence at the Powerscourt meetings has led to the supposition that he was responsible for it...'17 While dispensationalists have been most anxious to perpetuate this belief to ensure a measure of orthodoxy, there is much evidence to the contrary.18 Several have attributed the notion of a secret, pretribulational Rapture to Edward Irving.19 Dave MacPherson argues convincingly that the doctrine arose through a prophetic revelation given to Margaret MacDonald, one of Irvings's disciples.20
Corroborating evidence can be found in the division the doctrine caused among dispensationalists between pre-tribulationists and post-tribulationists at the Niagara Prophecy Conferences from about 1884.
The 'Rapture-Rupture' essentially had Robert Cameron, Nathaniel West, and later W. R. Erdman, holding for a 'Rapture' at the very end of the age. They were to be supported by W. G. Moorehead of Xenia Theological Seminary. An apparent majority of the Niagarans, including Brookes, Scofield, Gaebelein, Parson, Gordon and George Needham, were holding for what has become the traditional pretribulation view.21
Gaebelein, writing some fifty years later about the Scofield Reference Bible, looked back at the Niagara Conferences and linked the controversy to Irving.
Toward the end of the Niagara meetings several of the teachers, influenced by one man, who was considered an outstanding biblical and ecclesiastical scholar (as he undoubtedly was), began to abandon this distinction and branded it as mere invention. One of them went so far as to say that the teaching that the Lord would remove His true Church before the predicted Great Tribulation judgment, and that so far as His coming for His saints is concerned that it might occur at any moment, originated in the days of Edward Irving and his spurious gift of tongues revival. And so the blessed hope of the imminent coming of the Lord was more or less charged to the influence of subtle demons.22
Gaebelein may have merely been repeating the position known to be held by Darby via Scofield concerning Irving's later eccentricities. Despite the obvious influence Darby and Irving had upon one another in the early days of the Prophecy Conferences at Albury and Powerscourt, Darby eventually disassociated himself from the fanciful prophecies of the Irvingites and the Catholic Apostolic Church. Scofield himself denied that Irving was the source of this doctrine. Responding to criticisms from a former colleague at the Niagara Conference, and following its demise over infighting over the 'rapture' he wrote an anonymous editorial in Our Hope in 1902,
We cannot, however, in the interests of truth, allow the statement to stand that 'until the days of Edward Irving, who was excluded from the Presbyterian Church for heresy, no one ever heard of this 'coming for' and 'coming with his saints.'' As a matter of fact, Irving was excluded, not for heresy in doctrine, but for his view on church order... If the editor of the Watchword and Truth will turn to Zechariah 14:4,5, he will learn of a statement concerning the coming with which considerably antedates Edward Irving... And if, further, he will turn to 1 Thessalonians 4:15-18, he will find a revelation concerning the 'coming for His saints' later indeed than Zechariah by six hundred years, but still about eighteen hundred years before Edward Irving.23
As late as 1976 Walvoord was still anxious to distance the origin of the doctrine of the Rapture from Irving.
The often-repeated charge that Darby secured his pretribulationism from Edward Irving has never been actually documented. One can hardly account for the wide acceptance of pretribulationism by Plymouth Brethren, who are devoted students of the bible, to the offering of this view by a person who had no reputation for orthodoxy.24
Canfield notes that Walvoord's position contradicts several British historians who were closer to the issue.
Neatby, writing in 1901, Howard Rowden in 1967, F. Roy Coad in 1968 and Iain Murray in 1971, all find direct and reasonable links between the ideas of irving and the role of J. N. Darby. The link is so evident that a denial, using semantics on Walvoord's part, does not 'wash'.25
CI Scofield- Charlatan
The "new" teaching was spreading. A Congregationalist preacher by the name of C. I. Scofield came under the influence of Darby and the Plymouth Brethren. Scofield became a strong promoter of the teaching that had been promulgated by Darby, whom he considered "the most profound Bible student of modern times." He incorporated this teaching into his SCOFIELD REFERENCE BIBLE.
The Scofield Reference Bible was destined to have a tremendous impact upon the beliefs of many, when, three million copies were published in the first 50 years! Through this Bible Scofield shrewdly carried the teaching of the Secret Rapture into the very heart of Evangelicalism. Some ignorant souls look on the "notes" in this Bible as the Word of God itself! I do not doubt for one instant that many who read these lines have been influenced somewhere in their spiritual lives by the "footnotes" in the Scofield Bible! There is one final link in the chain of the development and spread of the rapture theory that should be mentioned in passing. I would draw your attention again to the SOURCE, the ORIGIN of the rapture doctrine and the chain of contact by which it has been brought down to us today. It began as a Roman Catholic invention! The Jesuit priest Ribera's writings influenced the Jesuit priest Lacunza, Lacunza influenced Irving, Irving influenced Darby, Darby influenced Scofield, Scofield and Darby influenced D. L. Moody, and Moody influenced the early PENTECOSTAL MOVEMENT. How? you ask. The Assemblies of God is today by far the largest Pentecostal denomination in the world. When the Pentecostal movement began at the turn of the century and the Assemblies of God held their first General Council in 1914 in Hot Springs, Arkansas they were a small movement and didn't have their own Publishing House. They needed Sunday School and study materials for their Churches - so where do you suppose they got it? They bought it from Moody Press and had their own cover stitched on it! So what do you think the Assemblies of God people believed? They believed what Moody Bible Institute taught! This had its impact on Pentecostal theology, because in the early years there were practically NO PREMILLENIALISTS IN THE PENTECOSTAL MOVEMENT! Most of the ministers in those early days came from Presbyterian, Methodist, or other historic denominations - men who, being baptized in the Holy Spirit and leaving their denominations, joined themselves to the Assemblies of God or one of the other emerging Pentecostal denominations. That is how the Pentecostal movement became influenced and saturated with the "Secret Rapture" doctrine - by a direct chain right back to the Roman Catholic Church!
by
EMMA MOORE WESTON
Condensed from J. M. Canfield's book "The Incredible Scofield"
In 1833, Elias and Abigail Scofield moved to Lenawee County, Michigan to help her father operate a sawmill on the Raisin River. Their home was on a cleared farm along the river.
They had four daughters from three to seventeen years of age. Their last child, Cyrus Ingerson Scofield, was born August 19, 1843. His mother died three months later. Not long after, Elias married again.
The older sisters soon married. Emeline married Sylvester V. Papin, from a prominent French family of St. Louis, March 19,1850. He was a law student and became a clerk in the City Assessor's office and later became head of the department. In 1855, Laura married a young dentist, William Eames. They moved to Lebanon, Tennessee. Cyrus's sister, Victorine, was listed in the 1860 Census in Tennessee, as living with Laura and William.
Cyrus was not listed in the census records in either state. By April 1861, when Fort Sumter was fired upon, Cyrus was visiting his sisters in Tennessee. He never returned to Michigan.
Though not yet eighteen, Cyrus gave his age as twenty-one and enlisted in the Seventh Regiment of the Tennessee Infantry. In April 1862, he was listed as a patient in a hospital in Richmond, Virginia. There was no mention of a wound, so he may have become ill.
In July, he wrote to the Confederate Secretary of War asking for exemption from further duty stating that he was a minor and a citizen of Michigan. He also claimed that he had been visiting his sister in Tennessee when he enlisted, that he had never voted in the South and that his health was broken by exposure and battle fatigue. He promised that in a short time he would enter the militia in Tennessee.
On September 5, 1862, Cyrus was with the Tennessee Regiment when they crossed the Potomac during heavy fighting. A discharge was issued for Private Scofield in 1862 after one year of service. There is no definite record of where he was for the next four years.
Among the refugees forced out of the South by the war were the Lames family and Victorine Scofield. They moved to St. Louis, Missouri in 1863 where Sylvester Papin helped Lames open a dentistry office. Victorine married and settled there so that was also the place Cyrus settled. Sylvester placed Cyrus in his office in the Assessor's Department and directed his training in law.
While working in this office, Cyrus studied to become familiar with the law regarding land grants, titles, and deeds. He got his law education on the job rather than in school. His name is listed in connection with a case in Circuit Court of St. Louis County, December term, 1866. This is the first definite date that appears in Cyrus's life after the Civil War.
There were dinners, dances and parties in the French society and Cyrus met Leontine Cerre, a Catholic society lady. She seemed taken with the dashing young man from Tennessee. Cyrus married her on September 21, 1866 when he was twenty-four. Daughter Abigail was born July 13, 1867. Marie Helene was born in October 1869. The family then moved from St. Louis to Atchison, Kansas.
Kansas politics was viciously crooked at that time and anyone in Kansas politics was suspected of corruption. Cyrus was deeply involved in it. Some of the problems involved his brother-in-law's interests and squatters being ejected from illegally-occupied land. Cyrus had engaged a lawyer, John J. lngalls, as legal counsel to serve the family interests. lngalls later became State Senator and had to be aware of the corruption and bloodshed. Scofield had some sort of law partnership with lngalls who seemed to sponsor him.
In 1871, Cyrus was elected Representative to the Lower House of the Kansas Legislature from the Fourth District for one term. Re-nomination from that District was blocked, so he filed from Nehama County and was elected from the Eighth District. There is no record to show he ever lived there during that period. The Atchison Directory for 1872-73 lists the same addresses as before. In June 1872, Scofield's first son, Guy Sylvester was born.
Though Ingalls served three terms in the Senate, he was very immoral and had no concern for the truth. He recommended his friend Scofield to President Grant for U.S. District Attorney for the Federal Judicial District of Kansas. Cyrus gave up his seat in the Legislature and took the oath of office on June 8, 1873. This ex-Confederate soldier solemnly swore that he had "never born arms against the United States."
That was rank perjury. We know he did military service in the South. Evidently in 1873, he was not concerned about perjury. However, a legal conflict of interest brought his term as District Attorney for Kansas to a sudden end in less than six months.
An article on December 14, 1873 in the Daily Times of Leavenworth suggested something was amiss in the D.A.'s office. A case was pending against ex-Senator Pomeroy, and there were hints that Pomeroy paid Cyrus to keep the case from coming to trial.
A later Daily Times item reported that Pomeroy, Scofield and Ingalls were involved in "the most infamous of all infamous political bargains ever transacted in Kansas." The reporter suggested that Ingalls and Scofield had received pay-offs from railroad officials and settlers in South Kansas. Cyrus resigned on December 20, 1873 and was not involved in politics again.
Now there is another mysterious time in Scofield's life. Though he was responsible for the support of a family of four, he disappeared for a period of three to five years. One acquaintance said, "Scofield had a bad reputation, and he just skedaddled out of town." In his story of Scofield's life, Trumbull gets around this by stating Cyrus did not like the type of life, associates, and activities related to the D.A.'s office.
Leontine Scofield had problems of her own in this period. The son, Guy Sylvester, died in December 1874, a year after Cyrus resigned from the D.A.'s office. In the Atchison City Directory for 1872-73 Cyrus's residence is still listed there. The St. Louis Directory for 1877 lists "Scofield, Cyrus I., lawyer. Res. 3029 Dickson, St. Louis, Missouri." This means Cyrus had written Kansas off--along with Leontine.
Mr. Trumbull's story states that Cyrus returned to St. Louis to practice law. But the publication, The Bench and the Bar of St. Louis County shows no evidence that C. I. Scofield was ever a member of the St. Louis Bar in the nineteenth century. Mr. Trumbull's story of a successful law practice is in question since the Court Records of St. Louis show that at one point Cyrus badly needed a lawyer of his own.
According to the court records, Cyrus had signed a note for a $200 loan, which was to be repaid within sixty days. The note also bore the alleged signatures of Emeline Papin and C. E Betts. When the borrower tried to collect on the note after sixty days, however, he was unable to locate either Cyrus's home or office. Between closing date for the 1877 City Directory and August, the "law" office had apparently been closed.
Both Cyrus's sister Emeline and Betts declined to pay the note. A Sheriff's Deputy stated that a petition was served to Betts on Sept. 14, 1877, although the other defendants could not be found in St. Louis. Emeline was later served a petition in Webster, Missouri. She claimed, though, that she had never seen nor signed the note and asked to be dismissed from the suit. In preparation for the hearing on March 1, 1878, Emeline's attorney subpoenaed Charles Bass, a teller at the Boatman's Bank, to testify on her behalf. After that, Simpson withdrew the action against Cyrus and Emeline, leaving Betts as the sole defendant with $219.30 owed--with the interest still accruing. There is no record of payment.
Scofield must have needed funds badly. On May 28, 1877, he took out a ninety-day note for $900, again with the supposed signature of Emeline Papin. This was case 46333. Again there was no payment. Emeline denied endorsement, and Scofield could not be located. A "successful lawyer" does not "blow town" to avoid a process server. It seems probable that Cyrus forged her name. There was a hearing on May 6, 1879, but the papers noted, "Dismissed on motion of the plaintiff." There is no evidence that the man involved ever got his $900 or that Cyrus made any effort to pay.
Another case strengthens the belief that Scofield was quite active in forgery. Case 44326 involved another note with Emeline E. Papin's signature for $250 on June 28, 1877. Emeline admitted later that she knew this note was a forgery. Her testimony on May 10, 1878 read: "Mr. Vollmer came out to the house and handed me a letter... I understood that there was a note due and that my brother was in great danger." It is hard to know whether she was a willing collaborator or if she was unaware her name was being used. According to the understanding in dispensational circles, Cyrus was by this time in the Kingdom and starting on the road to righteousness.
There is no evidence that Cyrus was a successful lawyer serving a respectable clientele. There were periods unaccounted for in his life at this time. It has been assumed that Leontine decided to leave Cyrus at the time and returned to Atchison. In fact, she had never left Atchison. Cyrus's role as husband and father had been irregular ever since he entered politics. Without regular employment and income, he wandered. As Trumbull tells it, he led the life of a bachelor.
The charges in the forgery lawsuits were dropped without proper adjudication, suggesting that Scofield's career was in the hands of someone with greater "clout" than Pomeroy or lngalls had ever known. However, that career meant Leontine, the Catholic wife, had to go. According to the Scripture (1Ti 5:8), a man who does not provide for his own household is worse than an infidel, although that did not appear to phase Cyrus; he never made any effort to clean up the black marks on his record.
The 1912 edition of Who's Who in America places Scofield's conversion sometime in 1879, and Trumbull indicates as much in his biography. However, the only definite dates in 1879 tend to raise doubts about what happened and when.
When did the conversion occur? Scofield says he was converted at the age of thirty-six, and it has been assumed the event did take place sometime before D. L. Moody's 1879-80 Evangelistic Campaign. This places the conversion sometime after his thirty-sixth birthday on August 19, 1879 and before the first meeting of Moody's ministers in St. Louis on November 25, 1879. As late as November 6, though, Cyrus was still involved with a forgery charge, and that case's records do not agree with the picture of a new convert trying to right matters of the past. Of course, God forgives the past and changes a man into a new creature if he is really born again (2Co 5:17), but one expects to see a change of behavior. The details of Cyrus's conversion are not supported by public records, so we do not know the whole truth about the conversion of a man who has profoundly influenced the church.
As the forgery cases were being dismissed with unseemly haste and without fair settlement, Cyrus entered his new role as a worker at the Moody meetings. Of course, until 1879, Cyrus was close to illiterate in things Christian, so it is unclear what role he could have played in Moody's campaign.
Scofield's Christian service was sponsored by Reverend James Brookes, the pastor of St. Louis's Walnut Street Presbyterian Church. As Scofield's ideas on prophecy began to take shape, they were sparked by the teachings of his sponsor who was in turn influenced by John Nelson Darby. About 1850, Darby began publishing his dispensationalist writings in Europe, and from 1862 to 1877, he made seven lecture trips to America and Canada to promote his teachings. Brookes's views of a failing church were also influenced by other theologians who wanted the same prophetic view taught and accepted.
Remarkably, with such limited theological background and training, as well as little real scholarship, Scofield was able to profoundly alter Christian theology. Indeed, the shape of fundamentalism, which has claimed to be Orthodox Christianity, has been determined by the influence of dubious characters like Scofield.
During this time, Friedrich A. Tholluck was teaching something more apostolic. In his study, Light From The Cross, he states his belief in a triumphant church prevailing on earth against Satan (Moody Press, Chicago, 1852.) He places the "Great Tribulation" in A. D. 70, rather than modern doomsday prophecies which foresee freeways littered with driver-less cars. The failure of Tholluck's views to remain prevalent in this country is largely due to the activities of Darby, Brookes and Scofield.
While involved in Moody's campaign, which remained in St. Louis until April 1880, Cyrus avoided the reality of securing an income for himself or support for his family left in Atchison, Kansas. He paid his room rent, but sent very minimal amounts of money to his wife, and only occasionally.
After the Moody meetings, Cyrus became Acting Secretary of the St. Louis Y.M.C.A. in August 1880. If he still had a law practice, it did not intrude on his Y.M.C.A. duties.
In July 1880, Cyrus joined the Pilgrim Congregational Church of St. Louis. Rev. D.C. Goodell, the pastor, was a personal friend of Brookes and apparently agreed with Brookes's views on prophecy. The church issued Scofield a license to preach. He organized and pastored the Hyde Park Congregational Church of St. Louis, where he continued until the summer of 1882. Then someone suggested that he might be the man to fill a vacancy in their Dallas, Texas church.
On July 28, 1881, about the time Cyrus was licensed, Leontine Scofield had divorce papers drawn up, although case number 2161 was not filed until December 9,1881. Leontine charged that Cyrus had absented himself, abandoned the family, and neglected his duties. Further, she charged that he had failed to contribute to the family's economic well-being. Scofield denied each and every allegation. The Court issued a decree for Leontine, but somehow the divorce never became final. In March 1882, Cyrus's lawyer requested a dismissal, which was granted. The case remained in limbo.
Cyrus never disclosed that he had a wife to his congregation; in fact, be gave them the impression that he was a bachelor. In 1883, Leontine became a librarian at the Atchison Public Library. On October 1, 1883, she filed a second divorce petition, and on December 8, 1883 the divorce was granted. Divorce papers deemed Cyrus unfit for custody of the children.
It is assumed that the character of a candidate for a pastorate would be carefully evaluated. No such evaluation could have been made by the church in Dallas, Texas. Converted for less than four years at the time, Cyrus had no theological training and limited formal schooling. He had been admitted to the Bar in Kansas, but had abused that privilege. He was separated from his Catholic wife and family without the benefit of a divorce.
Scofield had received a fair amount of publicity during his political life in Kansas. His sudden disappearance at the beginning of 1874 left editors wondering. The contrast between the politician of 1873, the scalawag of 1874, and the minister of 1881 was too profound to ignore. So we find a Scofield story in the Atchison Patriot that was picked up by the Topeka paper, August 27, 1881. It follows, with the journalist's misspelling of Scofield's name intact:
"CYRUS I. SCHOFIELD, formerly of Kansas, late lawyer, politician and shyster generally has come to the surface again, and promises once more to gather around himself that halo of notoriety that has made him so prominent in the past. The last personal knowledge Kansans have had of this peer among scalawags was when about four years ago, after a series of forgeries and confidence games, he left the state and a destitute family and took refuge in Canada. For a time he kept undercover; nothing being heard of him until within the past two years when he turned up in St. Louis, where he had a wealthy widowed sister living who has generally come to the front and squared up Cyrus's little follies and foibles by paying good round sums of money. Within the past year, however, Cyrus committed a series of St. Louis forgeries that could not be settled so easily, and the erratic young man was compelled to linger in the St. Louis jail for a period of six months.
"Among the many malicious acts that characterized his career was one peculiarly atrocious that has come under our personal notice. Shortly after he left Kansas, leaving his wife and two children dependent upon the bounty of his wife's mother, he wrote his wife that he could invest some $1,300 of her mother's money, all she had, in a manner that would return big interest. After some correspondence. he forwarded them a mortgage, signed and executed by one Charles Best, purporting to convey valuable property in St. Louis. Upon this, the money was sent to him. Afterwards the mortgages were found to be base forgeries, no such person as Charles Best being in existence, and the property conveyed in the mortgage fictitious.
"In the latter part of his confinement, Schofield, under the administration of certain influences, became converted, or professedly so. After this change of heart, his wealthy sister came forward and paid his way out by settling the forgeries, and the next we hear of him he is ordained as a minister of the Congregational Church, and under the chaperonage of Rev. Goodell, one of the most celebrated divines of St. Louis. He causes a decided sensation.
"It was known that Schofield was separated from his wife, but he had said that the incompatibility of his wife's temper and her religious zeal in the Catholic Church was such that he could not possibly live with her.
The fact that in 1892 he began calling himself 'Doctor Scofield' without producing any Doctorate degree from any Seminary or University is the least of his devious activities. Even the details he gave in his story of conversion are proven to be fabricated, including the time, place and other particularities, thereby placing doubt on the whole story .[iv]
"A representative of "The Patriot" met Mrs. Schofield today, and that little lady denies, as absurd, such stories. There were never any domestic clouds in their homes. They always lived harmoniously. As to her religion, she was no more zealous than any other church member. She attended service on the sabbath and tried to live as becomes a Christian woman and mother. It was the first time she had ever heard the objection raised by him. As to supporting herself and children, he had done nothing. 'Once in a great while, say every few months, he sends the children about $5, never more. I am employed with A. L. Gignac and Co. and work for their support and mine. As soon as Mr. Schofield settles something on the children to aid me in supporting them and giving them an education, I will gladly give him the liberty he desires. I care not who he marries, or when, but I do want him to aid me in giving our little daughters the support and education they should have.'"
If the Dallas church officials had read the newspapers there might have been a different outcome to this story. The Scripture says, "Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil." (1Ti 3:7.)
Cyrus had a terrible report with the public but was on his way to take a pastorate. He seemed to arrive in Dallas with little luggage. New books came regularly and were used in preparing sermons. If Scofield began "cramming" for ordination as early as April 1882, either Goodell with Brookes's assistance, was doing a "snow job" among the Congregationalists or else someone not yet discovered had chosen Scofield for a ministerial role, as a step to something else.
On his first full day in Dallas, he spoke twice to small crowds. After one year, the membership was up to seventy-five, including, as new attendants, the VanWark family. Hettie VanWark and her sister joined in December 1883. Cyrus began paying attention to Hettie. Their marriage certificate is dated March 11, 1884, but Cyrus gave the date as July 14, 1884.
Scofield started cottage prayer meetings that were popular and added members to the church. His call as pastor for a one year term came October 22, 1882. In June 1883, his salary was set at $1,500 a year. His ordination to the ministry in October 1883 was conducted while he was a defendant in the second divorce proceeding, which became final in December 1883.
His ordination statement, read in part: "I hold that such faith is always accompanied by that sincere repentance which involves a change of mind toward God, and in respect of the guilt of sin." His "repentance," however, did not include restitution to the men involved in the forgery cases or making up for the neglect of his family.
God seemed to bless Cyrus as his church grew numerically. After four years, the church was able to assume its own support. The American Home Missionary Society offered Cyrus the position of Superintendent for Louisiana and Texas. He accepted and served for many years. It meant that he would be absent from July to October to minister at Bible conferences. He also taught classes at the Y.M.C.A. and training classes for ministerial students.
By 1888, the church had 250 more members and built a new church. Hettie was pregnant then and their son, Noel Paul, was born December 22, 1888.
A Southern Baptist minister, J. R. Graves, published a book, The Work of Christ Consummated in Seven Dispensations in 1883. It has a dispensational scheme quite similar to the one which Cyrus used later in the Scofield Reference Bible. Of course, both were similar to the writings and lectures of J. N. Darby of a few years earlier. This work of Graves was circulated in Scofield's area. Judging from his later dispensationalism, Darby, Graves, Trotter and Kelly must have contributed a great deal.
In 1888, Scofield printed Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth to teach his classes the dispensational view. In 1856, a godly Scot named Patrick Fairbairn wrote a scripturally-based refutation of the whole dispensational business. Unfortunately, Scofield was not enlightened on the matter. The Dallas church agreed to lengthy vacation periods so Cyrus could minister wherever called, carry on the Home Missionary Society work and speak at conferences. They wanted to keep him as their pastor, so they willingly let others fill in for the five months of the year during his absence. These Bible conferences were to reshape a significant part of American Protestantism.
During this time, Scofield was the head of Southwestern School of the Bible in Dallas, the forerunner of the Dallas Theological Seminary. This school is now a major center for spreading Scofield's views.
The heart of Scofield's system is the teaching of prophecy that proponents claim restores "lost truth," which has been lost since the early days of the church. These were actually the heresies lost since Cerinthus in the first century and Ribera in the sixteenth century. Darby's dispensational schemes were promoted at Bible conferences, particularly the ones at Niagara Falls. The leadership was in the hands of James H. Brookes until his death in 1897. Later, A. C. Gaebelein took the lead but was unable to keep it going. There was "rupture over the rapture" as differing views were held.
As one early writer said, "There is not a Bible teacher or anyone else living in the world today, who has found a secret rapture in the Bible by his own independent study of the Bible itself. These teachers come to the Bible with cut and dried theories which they have learned elsewhere, and twist and torture texts to fit the theory."
This Scofield teaching is concerned with
1. a literal Jewish kingdom to last for a millennium. It was first brought into the early church by some Jews who still could not give up the hope taught to them by the scribes and Pharisees. The Bible does not teach it, and the disciples who had been taught it, rejected it after Pentecost. Jesus warned about it in Mt 16:6-12. 6Then Jesus said to them, “Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees.”
Scofield's work was calculated to promote certain ideas. We must ask ourselves if Jesus ever offered or announced himself as an earthly King or claimed David's throne? Had he ever in any way suggested he was going to set up an earthly kingdom? He said to Pilate, "My kingdom is not of this world, if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews, but now is my kingdom not from hence." (Jn 18:36.) They could not prove him guilty before Pilate of any offense against Rome.
Philip Mauro, author of numerous books on prophecy in the 1940s, has pointed out that in the New Testament the kingdom is mentioned 139 times. But Scofield avoids comment on 118 of them because they will not sustain the postponed kingdom theory.
In 1890, Scofield started a Bible Correspondence Course which he directed until 1914 when it was taken over by the Moody Bible Institute. Tens of thousands of students scattered over the world were indoctrinated with his dispensational ideas.
Dwight L. Moody was born in Northfield, Massachusetts and in his later years made his home base there. In 1895, Moody's home church called Scofield to be its pastor for a year which meant Cyrus had to leave Dallas and sever connections with the Missionary Society.
In January 1896, Cyrus submitted his final report for his ministry in Dallas reviewing his fourteen years there. Membership had grown from 14 to 812. The active membership was 533. He sent the report from Northfield, where he was already at work. He arrived there early in 1896, but there was no mention of Hettie or son Noel.
At the end of the year, the Dallas Church called for him to return at a salary of $2,400 a year with two months annual leave. He declined the offer as two months would not be enough time for his wider ministry. He suggested that they seek another pastor and moved his membership to the Northfield church.
In April 1897, Cyrus received word that Dr. James Brookes had died. Later Scofield wrote of him, "My own personal obligations to him are beyond words. He sought me in the first days of the Christian life and was my friend and first teacher in the oracles of God."
Moody also established the Northfield Summer Conferences for Scripture searching and heart searching. These continued for many years. Robert Scott of Morgan and Scott, a British publishing house linked with the Plymouth Brethren, met Scofield there. That played a role in Cyrus's later life.
Friends raised money in 1898 to build a chapel on the Northfield campus for Moody's sixtieth birthday. It was finished in 1899, shortly before Moody died. The chapel was organized as a church in November 1899 and held its first service. Cyrus Scofield was called as pastor. He remained there three more years.
In 1901, several men wanted to revive the Niagara Conferences. A[n] estate was made available at Sea Cliff on Long Island. Arno Gaebelein was at one of the first conferences. Cyrus took leave of his church in Northfield. He reported later that he and Gaebelein walked on the shore until midnight, and Cyrus told him of his plan to produce a reference Bible.
At this time, Scofield purchased eight and a quarter acres of land in the village of Ashuelot, Cheshire County, New Hampshire. He was eager to erect a building on it.
In 1901, Scofield was admitted to membership in the Lotos Club in New York City. This is an exclusive club founded by prominent New Yorkers such as Whitelaw Reid of the N.Y. Tribune and Samuel Untermeyer, the notorious criminal lawyer. Untermeyer was on the Club's Literary Committee when Scofield's application was presented. "The club was to promote social intercourse among journalists, artists and members of musical and dramatic professions and representatives, amateurs, and friends of literature, science and the fine arts. At least one third of the members shall be connected with said classes." Someone must have thought Cyrus could qualify in the literary category. Scofield's "postponed kingdom" teaching was most helpful in getting Fundamental Christians to back the international interest in the Zionist movement. Scofield kept up his Club membership until his death. The selection of Scofield for admission to the Lotos Club strengthens the suspicion that someone was directing his career by concerns remote from fidelity to the truth of Jesus Christ.
Because Cyrus was in poor health, he resigned from the Northfield pastorate. By early February 1903, he had settled affairs in Northfield and returned to take up his duties in Dallas. He still covered his summer circuit. Later that year, he realized he must either give up the church or the work on the Bible.
By early 1904, a trip to Europe was planned for research. (No mention is made of Noel on this trip that lasted nine months.) As Trumbull describes it, research there was presumably necessary for a full rounded understanding of all view points.
Mr. Scott, the Morgan and Scott publisher who first met Scofield at Northfield, took the Scofields to his home near Dorking. As Trumbull reports the story, the men discussed a publisher. Mr. Scott took Cyrus to see McHenry Frowde, head of the Oxford Bible Publishing House of Great Britain. He was interested and said he would consult Mr. Armstrong, head of the American Branch of Oxford University Press. And so it happened that the great publishing house of the English speaking world would publish the Scofield Bible.
After about two months in England, the Scofields went to Switzerland, settling at Montreux where Cyrus planned to work on the Bible.
Scofield had a supply of large page, wide margin notebooks purchased for the Bible work. While Cyrus was sick, Hettie cut up an entire Bible and pasted it page by page in the notebooks. Later. Cyrus put his notes beside the text.
Before that time, though, the Scofields returned to Dallas because of lack of funds. It was 1905. The church still wanted him for its pastor, but it needed more attention than he could give and work on his notes. The church called Reverend Irving Carrott as associate pastor at a salary of $1,500 yearly and retained Scofield as pastor with a salary of $1,000 a year. That hardly seems enough to support a family and pay his Lotos Club dues. In January 1906, though, the church raised the salary to $3,000 a year, and gave him his freedom to travel.
Cyrus became ill again and went to a sanitarium in Clifton Springs, New York to gain strength and to work on his notes. It appears that they went by way of New York for he wrote to Gaebelein on Lotos Club stationery dated 2 Sept. 1905: "By all means follow your own views of prophetic analysis. I sit at your feet when it comes to prophecy and congratulate in advance the future readers of my Bible on having in their hands a safe, clear, sane guide through what to most is a labyrinth." Many believe Gaebelein had much to do with the shaping of Scofield's dispensational prophetic views.
Miss Ella Pohle, who had helped with the Bible Correspondence Course, joined the Scofields to help with the work for the next year. By May 1906, the three went to New York City with the notebooks. While Cyrus stayed at the Lotos Club, Hettie and Ella stayed some place where work was continued on cross references. Later in May, they moved to New Hampshire to the Crestwood Camp where they stayed in tents--one large one for living and a smaller tent for working.
The Bible work continued through 1906, and Cyrus was in constant contact by mail with his seven consulting editors: Arno C. Gaebelein, Henry G. Weston, James M. Gray, Arthur T. Pierson, W. G. Moorhead, William Erdman and Elmore Harris.
In September 1906, Scofield wrote to the Dallas church of his need to go to London for more study. Again the notebooks went to Europe with the Scofieids. Once more the biographers are mixed up. Trumbull states that the Scofields stayed in Europe for two years, but this conflicts with church records. Trumbull writes, "The treasures of the Oxford libraries were fully at the disposal of the man who was making himself a Bible scholar by mastering the Bible scholarship of the world...He covered the whole field of such scholarships whether friendly or unfriendly--to the Bible." (To cover the whole field is patently impossible in the time available.) He did not give a lifetime to study as real scholars have done.
There are so many discrepancies in the stories of this trip, which brings up the suspicion that the trips were for effect and publicity. Finally, in less than one year, the Scofields were back at Crestwood Camp and were again joined by Ella Pohle. The manuscript boxes were stored in a small workshop and the work was done in a small tent. A fire burned the living quarters, but the work tent and shed and all the notebooks were unharmed.
In June, they left Ashuelot and went to Lake Orion, Michigan to do the work. En route, Cyrus went via New York and, on June 5, 1907, signed the contract with the Oxford University Press for publication of the Scofield Reference Bible. It was officially published on January 15, 1909.
Harry Ironside, a dispensationalist and pastor of Moody Memorial Church, Chicago, said, "Alas, how ready are well-meaning people to put the ministry of human teachers in the place of the Holy Scriptures and almost unconsciously begin 'teaching for doctrines the commandments of men' never realizing his indictment could be applied to the very system he spent his life defending and propagating."
One wonders why Scofield's work took seven years. His ideas had been formulated (or handed to him) early in his ministry. His teaching and correspondence course had followed along the same lines. The Plymouth Brethren, his spiritual forebears, had extensively published Darby's writings, which he could have culled.
Trumbull said. "Scofield was concerned to find and state exactly what the Bible itself had to say on any and every point." But there are gaping omissions. Scofield does not comment on verses dealing with divorce, family responsibilities and breaches of moral and/or civil law:
His own litany of such breaches:
1873 --false oath of office1874 --taking bribes
1874 --failure to provide for family
1877 --fraud and forgery
1879 --failure to pay notes
1883 --divorce
1909 --adding to the Word of God
When Scofield received a request from Chicago's Marquis Publishing Co. for information for an entry in Who's Who in America. Vol. 7, Cyrus filled it in and returned it. In this 1912 entry, year 1912, we note the following on page 1850:
A. Misstatements or inaccuracies
1. Reared in Wilson Co., Tenn.: no contact before 18582. University studies interrupted: no evidence
3. Served in Confederate Army to end of war: discharged 1862
4. Decorated for valor: utterly false
5. Wedding day, July 14, 1884: correct dates are Sep. 21, 1866, and March 11, 1884. Certificates available.
B. Omissions
1. Wife: Leontine2. Children: Abigail, Marie Helene, Guy Sylvester
3. The divorce proceedings of 1882-83.
C. Items omitted but circulated in areas of his ministry
1. Story of birth in Tennessee2. Existence of son, Noel
3. The law practice in St. Louis, Missouri
Some readers may feel that too much has been made of discrepancies in Scofield's stories. Some could have been through carelessness or misunderstanding, but that is not possible with this entry in Who's Who. The story of the law practice has no support in official records. It seems that whoever prepared this data was very selective and calculated the deception. Can the system be credible if its "patriarch" uses calculated falsehood?
In Trumbull's biography there are 38 errors in 130 pages. Some could be caused by careless editing or condensation, but there are discrepancies for which the most ready explanation is deliberate fabrication. If Scofield appeared to have a clear mind and memory in 1919, then he must be responsible for being inaccurate. What Trumbull related may be what Scofield wanted known. Trumbull, with Scofield's assistance, used a pitchfork to do a cover up.
https://www.gospeltruth.net/scofield.htm
Dispensationalism and CI Scofield's most egregious Teachings
l Sa 2:30: "Wherefore the Lord God of Israel saith, I said indeed that thy house, and the house of thy father, should walk before me forever: BUT NOW the Lord saith, Be it far from me; for them that honor me I will honor, and they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed." Definitely forever does not mean unconditionally. We see God's promises are conditioned by his person and sovereignty. Then we realize that IF a so called unconditional promise COULD be made it would nullify God's sovereignty -- an absolute impossibility. So any claim of this or that promise being unconditional is false. God says, "IF thou wilt...then will I." There is always an IF.
See also Jer 18:5-10, quoting 7-10, "At what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to pluck up, and to pull down, and to destroy it; If that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil that I thought to do unto them. And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it; If it do evil in my sight, that it not obey my voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them."
These words spoken to Israel were applicable to lsrael as a nation. It totally eliminates all so called unconditional promises and prophecies to Israel or to any nation. God is no respecter of persons or nations, but is just and fair to all alike with abundant mercy to all who call upon him in truth.
Hope was not blotted out despite the destiny prophesied for the carnal apostates. (lsa 5:1-14.) Any person who would repent could find mercy and blessing with the godly Remnant. (Isa 1: 16-20: Joel 2:32.) Furthermore, God promised a sure attainment of the promises of Ex 19:5-6 when he would make a New Covenant with the house of lsrael and the house of Judah. (Jer 31:31, 34-37.)
The Lord spoke of his Remnant in Mal 3: 16-17:"...they shall be mine saith the Lord of Hosts, when I make up my jewels." (Heb Cegulah). The same peculiar treasure (Cegulah) as at Ex 19:5-6. The same Remnant of lsa 10:22-23, and of Hos 1:10 and 2:23, spoken of by Jesus at Jn 1:11-13, by Paul at Ro 9:23-26, and by Peter at 1 Pe 2:3, 910. These who love God continually honor the Lord of that New Covenant as the Lord taught them, (Lk 22:19-20 ) and as Paul taught, (1 Co 11:23-26) for the Promised SEED gave himself for whosoever, for the Jew first and also for the Gentiles. (Ge 22:18; Jn 3:16; Gal 3:8-16, 29; Heb 8:6-13; 9:15; 12:22-28.)
Jesus, the Impregnable Rock of the New Covenant, may not be chipped, altered, moved, obscured or ignored without disastrous consequences. His ministry was to bring this New Covenant, (lsa 42:6;
“I, the Lord, have called you in righteousness;
I will take hold of your hand.
I will keep you and will make you
to be a covenant for the people
and a light for the Gentiles,
49:8
For my own name’s sake I delay my wrath;for the sake of my praise I hold it back from you,
so as not to destroy you completely.;
Jer 31:31-37 27 “The days are coming,” declares the Lord, “when I will plant the kingdoms of Israel and Judah with the offspring of people and of animals. 28 Just as I watched over them to uproot and tear down, and to overthrow, destroy and bring disaster, so I will watch over them to build and to plant,” declares the Lord. 29 “In those days people will no longer say,
‘The parents have eaten sour grapes,
and the children’s teeth are set on edge.’
30 Instead, everyone will die for their own sin; whoever eats sour grapes—their own teeth will be set on edge.
31 “The days are coming,” declares the Lord,
“when I will make a new covenant
with the people of Israel
and with the people of Judah.
32 It will not be like the covenant
I made with their ancestors
when I took them by the hand
to lead them out of Egypt,
because they broke my covenant,
though I was a husband to[d] them,[e]”
declares the Lord.
33 “This is the covenant I will make with the people of Israel
after that time,” declares the Lord.
“I will put my law in their minds
and write it on their hearts.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people.
34 No longer will they teach their neighbor,
or say to one another, ‘Know the Lord,’
because they will all know me,
from the least of them to the greatest,”
declares the Lord.
“For I will forgive their wickedness
and will remember their sins no more.”
35 This is what the Lord says,
he who appoints the sun
to shine by day,
who decrees the moon and stars
to shine by night,
who stirs up the sea
so that its waves roar—
the Lord Almighty is his name:
36 “Only if these decrees vanish from my sight,”
declares the Lord,
“will Israel ever cease
being a nation before me.”
37 This is what the Lord says:
“Only if the heavens above can be measured
and the foundations of the earth below be searched out
will I reject all the descendants of Israel
because of all they have done,”
declares the Lord.
Mal 3:1-2
The Coming Messenger
3 “Behold, I send My messenger,
And he will prepare the way before Me.
And the Lord, whom you seek,
Will suddenly come to His temple,
Even the Messenger of the covenant,
In whom you delight.
Behold, He is coming,”
Says the Lord of hosts.
2 “But who can endure the day of His coming?
And who can stand when He appears?
For He is like a refiner’s fire
And like launderers’ soap.
3 He will sit as a refiner and a purifier of silver;
He will purify the sons of Levi,
And [a]purge them as gold and silver,
That they may offer to the Lord
An offering in righteousnes
Mat 24:35,) bringing the fulness of divine revelation.
John 8:47 He who is of God hears the words of God; because of this, you do not hear, because you are not of God."
Dt 18:18-19“And the Lord said to me: ‘What they have spoken is good. 18I will raise up for them a Prophet like you from among their brethren, and will put My words in His mouth, and He shall speak to them all that I command Him. 19And it shall be that whoever will not hear My words, which He speaks in My name, I will require it of him.
Acts 3:22-23.) Moses' great prophecy emphasizes that Christ would bring the fulness of the Word of God. 22For Moses truly said to the fathers, ‘The Lord your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your brethren. Him you shall hear in all things, whatever He says to you. 23And it shall be that every soul who will not hear that Prophet shall be utterly destroyed from among the people.’ 24Yes, and all the prophets, from Samuel and those who follow, as many as have spoken, have also foretold these days. 25You are sons of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying to Abraham, ‘And in your seed all the families of the earth shall be blessed.’ 26To you first, God, having raised up His Servant Jesus, sent Him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from your iniquities.”
Heb 12:1-2 is comparable to Moses' prophecy. 12 Therefore we also, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which so easily ensnares us, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us, 2 looking unto Jesus, the [a]author and [b]finisher of our faith, who for the joy that was set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God
In Dt 18:18, God says. "I will put my words in his mouth, and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him." Then Peter declares that whoever will not hear HIM shall be destroyed from among the people. (Ac 3:23. ) And Paul says, "If any man teach otherwise and consent not to the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, he is proud, knowing nothing, destitute of the truth; from such withdraw thyself." (1Ti 6:3-5.) Consider: Jesus is the Way, the Truth and the Life. Any omission or variation of his word is a departure from the Truth and the Way, and we fear, from the Life itself. (Col 2:8-9 8Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ. 9For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily; 10and you are complete in Him, who is the head of all principality and power.
Tit 1:9-11 9holding fast the faithful word as he has been taught, that he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who contradict.
1Ti 3:3-4,7; 2Ti 4:2-4.)
The list of Scripture passages that are ignored, resisted, twisted, shaded, perverted, brushed by or veiled by diversionary notes is a testimony against its content in the preaching and Bible teaching of this 20th century, including the creeds and dogma on which it may seek to justify itself. Men today, as the Pharisees did, are doing these things to Christ.
When men preach a doctrine that finds no room for a full clear presentation of Mt 13:36-43 36Then Jesus sent the multitude away and went into the house. And His disciples came to Him, saying, “Explain to us the parable of the tares of the field.”
or of Acts 3:22-23, 2For Moses truly said to the fathers, ‘The Lord your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your brethren. Him you shall hear in all things, whatever He says to you. 23And it shall be that every soul who will not hear that Prophet shall be utterly destroyed from among the people.’ The dispensational scheme that Scofield picked up from others divided time into seven dispensations during which time man is tested, he said, in respect of obedience to some specific revelation of the will of God.
He lists seven periods of time:
1. Innocence -- creation to the Fall. (Ge 2:16-17.)2. Conscience -- from the Fall to the Flood.
3. Human government -- from the Flood to Abram
4. Promise -- Abram to the giving of the Law on Sinai.
5. Law -- Sinai to the Cross of Christ.
6. Grace -- from the death of Christ to the judgments in Revelation.
7. Kingdom -- the last of the ordered ages -- the time Christ will restore the Davidic kingdom and reign one thousand years.
This is Scofield teaching, not the Bible. He gives no scriptural authority for there is none to be given. These divisions are arbitrary and they all overlap. God made a promise in Eden of a Coming One. Adam had a conscience for he hid after he disobeyed. No one can be saved apart from God's grace in any age.
In the Bible, the word oikonomia means stewardship, i.e., "Give account of thy stewardship." (Lk 16:2; 12:3; Col 1 :25.)
INSTEAD, God dealt with his people by Seven Covenants:
1. Edenic -- a charge and a test. (Ge 1:26-31.)2. Adamic -- the entry of sin required a hope and a discipline. (Genesis.)
3. Noahic -- a new start and promise of the SEED of a woman. (Ge 6:3, 9:1-17.)
4. Abrahamic -- a series of revelations to Abraham make up the Covenant (Ge 12:1-3; 13:14-17: 15:1-21; 17:1-27; 18:1-53; 21: 1-13; 22:1-18.)
5. Mosaic -- this Covenant was written and dedicated with blood. (Ex 19:1-9; 20:1-22; 24:1-18; Dt 5:2-5.)
6. Davidic -- 2Sa 7:10-17; 1Ch 17:9-15; major portions are found in Psalms 16;22; 89:3-4, 34, 37; 110:1-4.
7. The New Covenant in our Lord. (Mt 25:26-28; Lk 22:20; Jn 12:47-50; 14:6; Heb 1:1-3; 2:1-4; 4:16; 5:9-10; 12:22-28; Ro 14:9; 10:9: Ac 2:33; Eph 4:8; 1Ti 2:5.) (From The Seven Covenants by Charles G. Weston.)
When Albertus Pieters wrote about the Scofield Bible in 1938, he said it was one of the most dangerous books on the market.
1. He disregards the witness, the doctrines and the examples of interpretation of the Old Testament that are given us by the apostles in the New Testament.
2. He usurps apostolic authority by contradicting their clear teaching and so setting himself above them.
3. He makes false statements exactly opposite to known facts to support his false doctrines.
4. The greatest reigning error of this century is his teaching that promises a millennial kingdom on the earth after Christ returns for his church. (cf. Ro 8:18-23.)
5. That the church was not foreseen and that the prophets never prophesy of the church. (Isa 54:1; Hos 1:9-10; 2:23; Gal 4:2130; Ro 9:22-26 and 1Pe 2:9-10.)
The leaven of these teachings has permeated everywhere, even where his notes are unknown. For proof to back up my accusations see the following:
SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917, 1967) from the Introduction to THE FOUR GOSPELS: "All (gospels) record Christ's offer of Himself as King."
ANSWER: That statement is plainly false. Nowhere does Jesus ever suggest in the faintest way that he is waiting for popular or national approval to establish his kingdom or to be an earthly king. Jn 6:15, "When Jesus perceived that they would come to take him by force to make him a king, he departed..." His offer of the kingdom is the same he made to Nicodemus at the beginning of his ministry, "Except a man be born again, he cannot SEE the Kingdom of God," Jn 3:3. Also Jn 3:14-16. Take it and be saved; neglect it and be lost.
SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917, 1967) on Mt 4:17: " 'At hand' is never a positive affirmation that the person or thing said to be at hand will immediately appear, but only that no known or predicted event must intervene." The verse reads "From that time, Jesus began to preach and say, repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."
ANSWER: Scofield is speaking pompous nonsense. Mk 1:15 reads: "The time is fulfilled for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. Repent ye and believe the gospel." The Scripture gives us plenty of examples as to what the term at hand means. In Mt 26:46, Jesus said, "He that betrayeth me is at hand." And while he was yet speaking Judas came and kissed him and betrayed him. 'At hand' means something within your reach. So the Scripture uses it continually.
SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917, 1967) on Mt 4:17: "When Christ appeared to the Jewish people, the next thing, in the order of revelation as it then stood, should have been the setting up of the Davidic kingdom. In the knowledge of God, not yet disclosed, lay the rejection of the kingdom and the King, the long period of the mystery-form kingdom, the worldwide preaching of the cross and the out-calling of the church. But this was as yet locked up in the secret counsels of God." Then he gives Mt 13:11,17 and Eph. 3:3-10.
ANSWER: The first statement -- "When Christ first appeared to the Jewish people the next thing should have been the setting up of the kingdom," is the error of the Pharisees, that Christ should appear as a mighty warrior conquering the world for Israel and setting up such a kingdom on earth. Scofield's notes reveal this as his understanding of the kingdom. He declares that is what should have been according to the revelation to that point. Nothing could be further from the truth. That is absolute heresy. Israel, clinging to this false hope, lost everything in A.D. 70. Scofield falsely assumed that the Davidic Covenant prophesied an earthly enthronement of Christ upon the throne of David with Jews ruling over all.
The first year of Christ's ministry is given in the first four chapters of John. In Jn 3:1-2, we read, "There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews, the same came to Jesus by night and said unto Him, 'Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God, for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.'" Who came? Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews, a member of the Sanhedrin. He came by night to talk with Jesus alone.
The Sanhedrin knew that Jesus was a teacher come from God. What then was on their minds? The Messiah! They were looking for the kingdom. They knew the prophecy that Messiah should come 490 years or so, after the commandment to rebuild Jerusalem and the Temple. It was now time for Messiah to appear. That is why they sent inquirers to John the Baptist and why Nicodemus has come to question the Lord.
Jesus answered him, "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus said unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? Jesus answered, Verily, verily I say unto you except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, that which is born of the Spirit is Spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again." (Jn 3:5-7.) That was the beginning of Jesus' ministry and at its very beginning he is preaching the kingdom. What kind? A kingdom with a sword-rattling, warrior Messiah? No way! A Messiah who will be lifted up as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have eternal life. (Jn 3:14-15.)
"You mean that Jews cannot see the kingdom of God unless they are born again?" Nicodemus, you are Jewish flesh, a member of the Sanhedrin, a Pharisee. Your Mosaic religion, Abrahamic descent, your Jewish flesh with all its pride, none of it can get you into the kingdom of God--only the new birth."
This is the kingdom that Jesus preached from the beginning of his ministry, but Scofield twists things up to make it appear Jesus was preaching the Pharisees' earthly kingdom.
Look at the second statement where Scofield says, "In the knowledge of God, not yet disclosed lay the rejection of the kingdom and King." Scofield thereby denies great and clear prophesies where the rejection, crucifixion, death, burial, resurrection and enthronement of Christ in glory are all set forth. (lsa 53; 1Who has believed our report?
Ps 2 The Messiah’s Triumph and Kingdom
Ps 16:8-11 8I have set the Lord always before me;
Ps 110:1-4)
According to the order of Melchizedek.”Was he totally ignorant of these wonderful prophecies?
The third statement reads: "The long period of the mystery-form kingdom, the worldwide preaching of the cross and the out calling of the church. But this was as yet locked up in the secret counsels of God." (Mt 13:11,17; Eph 3:3-10) Using mystery in this context defines it as something beyond our knowing in this age. Jesus spoke to this age in Mt 13:11, saying, "...it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven" and Mark says "... unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God..." (Mk 4:11.) The prophets caught the reality of the Messianic, that is, the Christian, age. For example, in 1Pe 1: 12, "Unto whom it was revealed..." Also David, (Ac 2:25-31) and Moses, (Ac 3:22-23) concerning Israel. And Peter and Paul. (Ac 3:24 with 26:22, 23) Christ unveiled the mysteries of the kingdom for this age.
SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917) on Mt 6:33: "The kingdom of God is to be distinguished from the kingdom of heaven." Part (4), The kingdom of God ... is chiefly that which is inward and spiritual; while the kingdom of heaven is organic, and is to be manifested in glory on the earth." Scofield implies that one does not enter the kingdom of heaven by being born again, this is required only for entering the kingdom of God. See also Scofield note (SRB 1917, 1967) and (I Co 15:24 part 4)
ANSWER: Such a view causes more problems. Jesus said, "Except ye be converted ... ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven." (Mt 18:3) "Except a man be born again he cannot see the kingdom of God." (Jn 3:3) The kingdom of God and the kingdom of heaven are one and the same.
SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917, 1967) on Mt 11.11: "John Baptist was as great morally, as any man 'born of woman,' but as to the kingdom he but announced it at hand. The kingdom did not then come, but was rejected, and John was martyred and the King presently crucified. The least in the kingdom when it is set up in glory ... will be...in the fulness of power and glory. It is not heaven which is in question, but Messiah's kingdom."
ANSWER: Scofield here, as often, makes anti-christian Israel sovereign over God, as if their opposition spoiled God's plans and purpose and the kingdom had to be postponed. What impossible nonsense! (Cf. Isa 46:10)
SCOFIELD note (SRB 1967) on Jn 18:36: "'My kingdom is not of this world' -- this verse has erroneously been taken to mean that Christ was disavowing that his kingdom would be established on earth."
ANSWER: Read Eph 1:19-23, which shows this Scofield teaching is utterly false. This is God's description of Christ's present exaltation. 17that the God of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of glory, may give to you the spirit of wisdom and revelation in the knowledge of Him, 18the eyes of your understanding being enlightened; that you may know what is the hope of His calling, what are the riches of the glory of His inheritance in the saints, 19and what is the exceeding greatness of His power toward us who believe, according to the working of His mighty power 20which He worked in Christ when He raised Him from the dead and seated Him at His right hand in the heavenly places, 21far above all principality and power and might and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this age but also in that which is to come.
It is described again in Php 2:9-10; 9Therefore God also has highly exalted Him and given Him the name which is above every name, 10that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of those in heaven, and of those on earth, and of those under the earth, 11and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
1Ti 6:15-17 15which He will manifest in His own time, He who is the blessed and only Potentate, the King of kings and Lord of lords, 16who alone has immortality, dwelling in unapproachable light, whom no man has seen or can see, to whom be honor and everlasting power. Amen.
17Command those who are rich in this present age not to be haughty, nor to trust in uncertain riches but in the living God, who gives us richly all things to enjoy.
and Mt 28:18. 18And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.” Amen.
SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917, 1967) on Mt 11:28: "Come unto me all ye that labor and are heavy laden and I will give you rest." "The new message of Jesus. The rejected King, now turns from the rejecting nation, and offers, not the kingdom, but rest and service to such in the nation as are conscious of need. It is a pivotal point in the ministry or Jesus (1917).
ANSWER: Mt 11:28: "Come unto me all ye that labor and are heavy laden and I will give you rest, take my yoke upon you and learn of me, for I am meek and lowly in heart, and ye shall find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light." How beautifully these words fit together with the very beginning of Jesus' message. These blessings are for those who are born again, finding rest in the loving care of Jesus.
"In old Israel when the Jews said the Shema, it was their formula for taking the yoke of the kingdom." (Life and Times of Jesus, pg. 267, par. 3, by Edersheim). "Take my yoke" in Jewish context meant entering the kingdom. Jesus never changed his message.
Scofield overlooked verse Mt 11:27. Jesus said, "All things are delivered unto me by my Father." Also Mt 28:18: "All authority is given unto me in heaven and in earth." He is speaking of his kingship. (Ps 2:6-7; Ac 13:33. What is he saying? "Come unto me all ye that labor and are heavy laden and I will give you rest unto your souls." You will have entered the kingdom that cannot be moved. l am able to care for you. All things are delivered into my hands. Scofield says the new message, "The rejected King now turns from the rejecting nation and offers, not the kingdom but rest and service to all who are in conscious need of his help," (1967). In Mt 12. Jesus healed a man deaf, blind and possessed of the devil. "And all the people were amazed and said, Is this not the son of David, the King?"
If he had withdrawn the offer of the kingdom, why would the kingdom be so much on the people's minds? But the Pharisees said, "This fellow does not cast out devils but by Beelzebub, the prince of devils." What disturbed the Pharisees? These people were getting the idea that Jesus was indeed the king. They didn't like it. So they smeared the name of Jesus, saying he was possessed of the devil.
Jesus said, "Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation, and every city or house divided against itself cannot stand. If Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself, how then shall his kingdom stand? If I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your children cast them out? Therefore they shall be your judges, but if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then The Kingdom of God has come unto you."
Casting out devils manifested authority over Satan's realm. This must indeed be the Messiah, the people thought. "Is not this the son of David'?" How that disturbed the Pharisees with their idea of a warrior king. They didn't want anything like this. The kingdom was not waiting to come. It had not been postponed to the millennium. It was there and in action then and if they could believe and accept it, they could be born into that kingdom. Jesus never changed his message. They did kill the King, but three days later God gave him his eternal throne. Rev 1:4-6 is the present kingdom. (Cf. Mt 28:18; Ps 16:8-11) We know he arrived in heaven because he sent the Holy Spirit back. (John 7:39; Ps 110: 1-4)
SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917, 1967) on Mt 3:2: "The kingdom of heaven ... signifies the Messianic earth rule of Jesus Christ." (1917) "The kingdom of heaven will be realized in the future millennial kingdom" (1967).
ANSWER: That is heresy! Jesus told Pilate, "My kingdom is not of this world, if my kingdom were of this world then would my servants fight." His kingdom is of the new creation. Peter in Acts 2:22-26 and Paul in Acts 13:22, 33, 47, their first recorded sermons, make it clear that the Davidic Covenant is fulfilled with its accompanying Messianic Psalms, 2 and 110:1. Paul comments on 110:1 at 1Co 15:24-26, showing Christ in his present session working from his heavenly throne conquering every enemy. 24Then comes the end, when He delivers the kingdom to God the Father, when He puts an end to all rule and all authority and power. 25For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet. 26The last enemy that will be destroyed is death. 27For “He has put all things under His feet.” But when He says “all things are put under Him,” it is evident that He who put all things under Him is excepted. 28Now when all things are made subject to Him, then the Son Himself will also be subject to Him who put all things under Him, that God may be all in all.
There is no honest teaching that would bring that throne to earth for the Father says it is in heaven and the Son is to sit there UNTIL he puts all enemies under his feet. Ps 110:2 indicates he has enemies in Zion.
Those wedded to the millennial heresy seem to be capable of any atrocity against the Word of God to try to support that teaching, even if Scripture has to be flatly contradicted to fit it.
SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917, 1967) on Mt 8:11-12: HE HAS NO NOTE on these verses, "And I say unto you, That many shall come from the east and west, and shall sit down with Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, in the kingdom of heaven. But the children of the kingdom shall be cast into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth."
ANSWER: These verses are Jesus' tremendous prophecy of the fate of Israel at his Second Coming. Scofield ignores it and teaches just the opposite elsewhere. These Scriptures show all the evil persons burning in hell fire and all the saved ones in the glory of God's kingdom. (cf. Lk 13:24-28) Scofield flatly denies this and the words of Mt 13:37-43. He says, No, the millennium comes next and the judgment pictured here is one thousand years later. In all these contradictions, he is contradicting him whom he calls Lord. "For the Son of Man shall come in the glory of his Father with his angels; and then he shall reward every man according to his works." (Mt 16:27) The final day of judgment is at the end of this age--the end of all things of this fallen creation.
SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917, 1967)on Ro 11:1-6, last paragraph: "That the Christian now inherits the distinctive Jewish promises is not taught in Scripture. The Christian is of the heavenly seed of Abraham and partakes of the spiritual blessings of the Abrahamic Covenant, but Israel as a nation always has its own place, and is yet to have its greatest exaltation as the earthly people of God."
And SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917, 1967) on Ro 11:26, last paragraph: "According to the prophets, Israel regathered from all nations, restored to her own land and converted, is yet to have her greatest earthly exaltation and glory."
ANSWER: This is the millennium of the Pharisees, not of the Bible. It contradicts the plain prophecies of Jesus himself. Israel's only hope is Ro 11. Paul says they were cast away because of unbelief but verse 23 says, "If they abide not still in unbelief, shall be grafted in: for God is able to graft them in again." See lsrael's end as in Jer 23:39-40; 24:910; 29: l0-11 and Isa 65:1-15. Israel after the flesh is not an heir of God and never, ever will be. Israel is cast out. 1Co 15:50, "Flesh and blood cannot inherit." Gal 4:21-30 says. "Shall not be heir with...."
See also 2Th 1:6-10: "...And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: who shall be punished with everlasting destruction from the presence of the Lord, and the glory of his power: when he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe."
See also Lk 17:26-27; Mt 24:35-39: "As it was in the days of Noah, so shall it also be in the days of the Son of Man. They ate, they drank, they married wives, they were given in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and the flood came and destroyed them all." Why not believe the Lord'? Oh, but that millennium.
See also Lk 17:29-30: "The same day that Lot went out of Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven and destroyed them all. Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of Man is revealed."
If the flood takes away all the unsaved in this one day, where does a millennium come in? Only those in the ark are saved. There are no others left. Scofield has no note on this. He cannot give an honest comment for it would ruin his teaching, such as in his note on Mt 3:2: "The prophetic aspect, the kingdom is to be set up after the return of the King in glory."
You cannot ignore any Scripture and pretend honesty in interpretation. Jesus has all power. What more could be given him? He is above all now. ( Mt 28:18: Eph 1:20-21)
In Lk 19:11-27, Jesus teaches by parable, about his kingdom because the Jews supposed it should immediately appear. But, in verse 12, he taught them he must leave and go to a far country to receive his kingdom and after that return; but his citizens hated him, and sent a message after him, saying, "We will not have this man to reign over us." Upon his return he would judge his servants and his enemies. The parable illustrated his judgments of his servants, good and bad. He said, "But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me." (v. 27.)
"Oh no," some would say. "We have a greater revelation. After he comes again he is crowned king and the kingdom is set up and those, who would not have him, now see him in his glory and believe in him and with him reign over the Gentiles for a thousand years."
Now, that is something indeed! Isn't it amazing what can be done by just a little art of interpretation?
Mt 13:47-50 gives the parable of the net cast into the sea, in which good and bad fish are drawn in and sorted. The bad are thrown away. "So shall it be at the end of the 'aion' age: the angels shall come forth and sever the wicked from among the just, and shall cast them into a furnace of fire; there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth." This is an ignored text, as some prefer to teach the opposite.
In Ps 110:1, Jehovah, the Father, says to the Son, David's Lord, "Sit thou at my right hand until I make thine enemies thy footstool." In 1Ch 29:23 we see David's throne: "Then Solomon sat on the throne of the Lord, i.e., of Jehovah as king instead of David his father." The same throne, not a make do, nor a special throne just for Jesus, but the throne of Jehovah in each case, and now Jesus sits upon it in heaven. It is God's throne and kingdom, and God has promised that Jesus would be there forever. (1Ch 17:14.) The same throne at 1Ch 28:5; 29:23 and 2Sa 7:5, 16 is also called David's throne forever. So it is one eternal throne over one eternal kingdom of God and of Christ, which was shown on earth in type form as David's.
But David in Hebrew means, The Beloved, and is the name of Christ at Eph 1:6 and at several prophetic references, including Eze 34:23-24; 37:24-25; Isa 55:3-4: Ps 89. God has exalted Jesus to sit upon that throne forever. And Jesus took that throne at his Resurrection.
If it is "forever" then why does the Psalmist prophesy "till I make thine enemies thy footstool?" That is a set time, the time of the struggle with evil, the measure of this age with its gospel work and mercy For whosoever will. John in Rev 1:9 calls it "His kingdom and patience." Peter speaks of the time measure and its work in Ac 2:29-36; 3:20-21. It is 2Pe 3:8-10. David says in Ps 110:2. "Rule thou in the midst of thine enemies." It is now and it will end at his coming, for this session of his reign will bring every enemy into submission, and that from his heavenly throne, not after he comes back to earth, but definitely before. (1Co 15:24-26 and verses 50-54) The early church, the reformers, Calvin, Luther. Melancthon, Ridley, Arminius, Latimer, Whitefield, John and Charles Wesley and Spurgeon all saw this truth. Eph 1:19-23 shows the Scofield teaching utterly false. This is God's description of Christ's present exaltation, described again in Php 2:9-10 and 1Ti 6:15-16 and Mt 28:18.
SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917, 1967) on Dt 30:3: "It is important to see that the nation (Israel) has never as yet taken the land under the unconditional Abrahamic Covenant, nor has it ever possessed the whole land."
ANSWER: The conditional physical land promise to Moses and the nation, (Ex 3:8, 17; Lev 18:28) was completely fulfilled. (Jos 21:43,45) "And the Lord gave unto Israel all the hind which he sware to give unto their fathers; and they possessed it, and dwelt therein. There failed not ought of any good thing which the Lord had spoken unto the house of Israel, all came to pass."
The unconditional land promise to Abraham's SEED was a different promise. The Apostle Paul defined this different promise in Gal 3:16, saying God made promises to Abraham concerning Abraham's SEED that the promises were to the single descendant, Jesus Christ, in whom all the nations would be blessed, (Ge 22:17-18); the same to Isaac, (Ge 26:4) and to Jacob, (Ge 28:13-14.) Scofield very conveniently HAS NO EXPLANATORY NOTES on these Scriptures. Many modern Bible translations have furthered Scofield's Abrahamic Covenant error by changing SEED from the singular (Christ) to the plural "descendants" and thus have substituted the many physical descendants as heirs to the promises in place of the one true spiritual inheritor, Jesus Christ! This is a crucial error of immense import. Paul further develops the meaning of SEED to include all those who are one in the Body of Christ. (Gal 3:26-29; Ro 12:5.) The promises of the land and of multiplying the SEED are fulfilled forever in the saints of the Body of Christ who have, do now, and will occupy his Kingdom in this present age. (Heb 11:8-16.)
SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917, 1967) on Lev 23:24: "...these trumpets, always symbols of testimony, are connected with the regathering and repentance of Israel after the church, or pentecostal period is ended."
And SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917, 1967) on Lev 23:27, last lines: "Historically the fountain of Zec 13 was opened at the crucifixion, but rejected by the Jews of that and succeeding centuries. After the regathering of Israel the fountain will be efficaciously 'opened' to Israel."
ANSWER: Scofield speaks above as if he were God. But Lk 13:2528 says, "When once the master of the house has risen up, and hath shut to the door, and ye begin to stand without, and to knock at the door saying, Lord, Lord open to us; and he shall answer and say unto you, I know you not whence you are ... depart from me, all ye workers of iniquity. There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and you yourselves shut out."
SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917, 1967) on Lk 13:28: HE HAS NO NOTE HERE. What could he say that would not contradict Jesus? 28There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth, when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, and yourselves thrust out. 29They will come from the east and the west, from the north and the south, and sit down in the kingdom of God. 30And indeed there are last who will be first, and there are first who will be last.”
Any doctrine that clearly contradicts a plain, clear statement of Scripture, be it prophecy or the words of Jesus, cannot be true, no matter how many Scriptures are quoted in an attempt to prove otherwise or that contradict Moses' statement in Ac 3:22-23: "Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren, like unto me, him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you ... Every soul which will not hear that prophet shall be destroyed from among the people."
God said upon condition of your disobedience, "I will make Jerusalem a curse to all nations of the earth." (Jer 26:4-8) Those pinning their hopes on an earthly city will be cursed along with her. There is no salvation at all for the earthly city, as Gal 4:22-30 plainly teaches.
The book of Revelation is a book of signs and symbols; if a few verses in chapter 20 about a thousand year period contradict Jesus, Peter, Paul and Moses, something is wrong with the interpretation of the passage. Scofield is the arch heretic of all church history and his notes have influenced, and in some cases have controlled, a large portion of church thinking for this century.
These strong words may draw blood, but the Scripture warns, "Cursed be he that doeth the work of the Lord deceitfully and cursed be he that keepeth back his sword from blood." (Jer 48:10) There is much good material in the Scofield 1917 notes, and more in the 1967 edition, but the old heresies are still there. No poison pill is all poison, only enough to kill you.
SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917, 1967) from Introduction to THE FOUR GOSPELS part 1: "...the mind should be freed from presuppositions, especially the notion that the Church is the true Israel."
ANSWER: Scofield asks you to free your mind from the truth of the biblical teaching of the Church and swallow his false teaching. Listen to Paul, (Ro 2:28-29): "For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; but he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men but of God." See also Ro 9:6b-8: "They are not all Israel which are of Israel. Neither because they are of the seed of Abraham, are they all children; but, in Isaac shall thy seed be called." That is, "They which are the children of the flesh, these are NOT the children of God; but the children of the promise are counted for the SEED." (cf. Hos 1: 10; Ro 9:24-26)
G. Campbell Morgan, in 1943, two years before he passed to be with the Lord, wrote to a correspondent concerning the union of Israel and the church: "I am quite convinced that all the promises made to Israel are found, are finding and will find their perfect fulfillment in the church. It is true that in time past, in my expositions, I gave a definite place to Israel in the purposes of God. I have now come to the conviction, as I have just said, that it is the new and spiritual Israel that is intended." (Letter to Rev. H.F. Wright, New Brunswick, Victoria. From A New Heaven and a New Earth, Archibald Hughes, Presbyterian and Reformed Press, Box 185, Nutley, N.J.)
SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917, 1967) on Mt 28:18-20: The Great Commission. He gives a dissertation concerning the name of the Trinity, but nothing about the exalted authority of Christ or the command to go and teach all nations to observe whatever he commanded his disciples. Nothing about Christ backing them up and being with them all the days.
ANSWER: Then what do these notes amount to? They are an extensive diversion to turn your mind away from the real meaning of the passage, for Scofield is against these teachings having anything to do with the Church of Jesus Christ.
Look at the Great Commission: "And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth." (Power here is Greek -- authority). "All authority is given unto me." ALL AUTHORITY. There is no other. "Go ye therefore, and teach (or disciple) all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you; and, lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the world." Whatever he commanded his disciples, all nations were to be taught to keep and obey. Then he said that he would be with them to the end of the world. A literal rendering would be, "I am with you all the days, even unto to the end of the age."
This word has come to us, and Jesus has commanded us to keep all the commandments that he gave his disciples when he was with them. Shall we send back word to the Lord that we are not about to do so on the authority of Scofield?
SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917) on Introduction to 2 Corinthians: (This outrageous heresy has been removed from the 1967 Scofield Bible. However, millions of copies of the 1917 Bible are still being used around the world so I am including this note from p. 1230.)
"It is evident that the really dangerous sect in Corinth was that which said, 'And I of Christ."' He puts in parenthesis, (1Co 1: 12) and continues, "They rejected the new revelation through Paul of the doctrines of grace, grounding themselves, probably, on the kingdom teachings of our Lord as a minister of the circumcision, (Ro 15:8) seemingly oblivious that a new dispensation had been introduced by Christ's death. This made necessary a defense of the origin and extent of Paul's apostolic authority."
ANSWER: What made it necessary? Some people said, "I am of Christ," and they were wrong? Is PAUL the one who has the new revelation for this dispensation? This completely rejects all the teachings of Christ and acceptance of his death. Scofield says his teaching as a minister of the circumcision had been blotted out by his death. His teachings had been kingdom teachings, which according to Scofield, are postponed until his hypothetical millennium and they were oblivious to Paul's new revelation.
See 1Co 1:10-17. Paul says, "It is reported to me that every one of you is saying, I am of Paul. I am of Apollos and I of Cephas and I of Christ." Then, he points out it was not Paul or Cephas who died for them, but Christ. Paul, Apollos, Cephas are only those who helped, but Christ is the center. Then concluding, he says, "All things are yours, whether of Paul, or Cephas or life or death or things present or things to come, but all are yours and ye are Christ's and Christ is God's." (1Co 3:21-23.) Paul rebukes them for some things, but he never rebukes the ones who said, "I of Christ." In that you are right, you are of Christ.
Scofield is saying that Paul is the mediator of the new covenant. That the new dispensation begins with Paul. That he reveals the gospel. That Jesus was only teaching law. Scofield makes that clear in his notes (SRB 1917, 1967) on Mt 5:2-20 where he claims, when you look closely, that Jesus taught law and that it was not our privilege or duty to keep all his words. Here we have heresy of the first water. Jesus, over and over in his discourse to the disciples in the upper room, emphasizes the necessity of keeping his commandments because they are the will and Word of God. Scofield says, "No, put it all away."
This is major heresy. This is what Paul says to withdraw yourself from. Scofield takes the death of Christ as the turning point of the dispensation, whereas Jesus took the coming of John Baptist as the turning point. (Lk 16:16. Satan deceived Scofield.)
See Heb 2:1-4: "Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed, lest at any time we should let them slip. For if the word spoken by angels was steadfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just recompense of reward: How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him; God also bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will."
Where did the gospel begin? "...which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, [not by Paul, but by the Lord] and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him," --the twelve plus Paul, for Paul heard him also. The source of the gospel is not Paul, as Scofield teaches. The gospel of grace came by our Lord Jesus Christ. "The law was given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ." We all agree that anyone who gets saved gets saved by the grace of God, forgiveness of sins, and the regenerative work of God through the Holy Spirit, and only then. But when this has taken place, it will manifest itself in obedience. Note Heb 5:8-9: "Though he were a son, yet learned he obedience through the things which he suffered. And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation, unto all them that obey him." Now that's clear. In 1Jn 2:4, we read: "He that saith I know him and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar and the truth is not in him."
SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917, 1967) on Mt 5:17: "Christ's relation to the law of Moses may be thus summarized: 1. Christ was made under the law. 2. He lived in perfect obedience to the law. 3. He was a minister of the law to the Jews, clearing it from rabbinical sophistries, enforcing it in all its pitiless severity upon those who professed to obey it."
ANSWER: "For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments, for his commandments are not grievous." (1Jn 5:3.) Even the Ten Commandments could not be called grievous, that a person should be true to God and not depart to idols. That was not grievous, or that one should honor God and not take his name in vain. Was that a painful commandment, or to honor his father and mother, to keep the Sabbath day of rest, to refrain from lying about his neighbor, or not to commit adultery, or not to covet things that were not his own? Are these things pitiless? Scofield speaks as if they are. He speaks of Christ as being a minister of the law to the Jews clearing it from rabbinical sophistries and enforcing it in all its "pitiless severity." My Bible says the law was added because of sin, but grace did much more abound, cf: Jn 8:1-11 I don't see anything pitiless about God dealings with the Jews. Certainly, there is none in the Sermon on the Mount.
SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917, 1967) on Jn 14:6: "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth and the life; no man cometh to the Father but by me." Scofield HAS NO NOTE on Jn 14:6.
ANSWER: Scofield denies Jn 14:6 elsewhere by teaching that Israel is still God's people, walking with the Father, but at Christ's Second Coming they will then accept Christ. See 1Jn 2:22-23, "Who is a liar but he who denieth that Jesus is the Christ? He is antichrist that denieth the Father and the Son. Whosoever denieth the Son. hath not the Father." See also 1Jn 4:1-6.
SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917) on Mt 13:47 last lines: "He sees the redeemed of all ages, but especially his hidden Israel, yet to be restored and blessed."
SCOFIELD notes (SRB 1917, 1967) on Rev 3:21 and 2Sa 7:16: These notes advocate that we are not to assume 'the throne of his father David,' is synonymous with 'my Father's throne,' or that the 'house of Jacob' is the Church composed of both Jew and Gentile. (cf. 1Ch 29:23: Ps 110:1; Ac 2:29-35 of the throne and 1Ch 17:14.)
ANSWER: See Lk 1:32-33. "He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the Highest, and the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his father David: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob forever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end." One throne forever, all others are destroyed. Ac 3:22-23 describes the house of Jacob.
SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917); Ro 4:2-6: "Paul speaks of that which justifies man before God; faith alone, wholly apart from works."
ANSWER: False, for works of obedience are the fruit of faith, Jas 2:14-26; 1Co 9:25.
SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917, 1967); Ac 7:38: "Israel in the land is never called a Church (SRB 1917)." "A better translation would be 'the congregation' (SRB 1967)."
ANSWER: He is against the church being in the Old Testament; see 1Ch 28:8; 29:1,10, 20; Dt 23:1-8, Israel the Church of God, Ac 7:38. 37“This is that Moses who said to the children of Israel, ‘The Lord your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your brethren. Him you shall hear.’
The Church in the wilderness -- ekklesia is Greek for Church. This appears over eighty times in the Old Testament. Qahal, Hebrew for Church, appears 133 times and is translated congregation. Edah, a synonym for Qahal, appears over 120 times. The Old Testament Church was a type of the New Testament Church. (Dt 23:1-8; Heb 9:7-10, 15, 23, cf. Ex 24:4-8) All are now New Testament. (Heb 12:22-24; Eph 2:11-22) Qahal equals Church in Salkinson's Hebrew New Testament. Congregation is not merely a better translation. It is synonymous with Church. It is the Church in the land.
SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917, 1967) on 1Co 14:1: "Tongues and the sign gifts are to cease, meantime they are to be used with restraint."
ANSWER: Scofield spins his prohibition to cease out of thin air. Nowhere do the Apostles, who gave us instructions for this age, call for a ceasing of the gifts of the Spirit. "Wherefore, brethren, covet to prophesy. and forbid not to speak with tongues." (1Co 14:39.)
God set the ministry gifts in the Church: apostles, prophets, gifts of healing, helps, governments and diversities of tongues. These gifts of the Spirit were to empower the Church to carry out the Great Commission.
Lennard Darbee makes a thought provoking comment in Tongues the Dynamite of God: "Unlike ancient Israel, the Church no longer kills the prophets, it simply ignores them, and it is not so much the neglect of the fruits, but rather the contempt of the gifts that hamstrings the Church of our day. Does God go to great length describing the gifts of the Spirit--of which he would not have us ignorant, line them up like ninepins and then with love for a bowling ball, do away with them? We are to desire spiritual gifts." (pp. 26-27.)
Three chapters, 1 Corinthians 12, 13 and 14, give instructions for the Church about the value and use of the gifts of the Spirit.
SCOFIELD: This note on Mt 5:2-12 (SRB 1917) was also removed from the 1967 Bible. "For these reasons, the Sermon on the Mount in its primary application gives neither the privilege nor the duty of the Church. These are found only in the Epistles." Scofield explains that these words mean very little to you. They are reserved for a future kingdom.
ANSWER: That is rank heresy! Jesus says you will not get into his kingdom unless you are busy keeping his words. 1Ti 6:3-5 says "If any man teach otherwise and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ and to the doctrine according to godliness," (That, believe me, is the Sermon on the Mount). "He is proud, knowing nothing but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmisings. perverse disputings by men of corrupt minds and destitute of the truth ... From such withdraw yourself." Scofield calls Jesus, "Our Lord," but says it is not your duty or privilege to keep his sayings.
Peter quotes Moses in Acts 3:22-23, as he has told the people of Israel, "to repent and be converted that your sins may be blotted out ... For Moses truly said unto the fathers, A prophet shall the Lord your God raise up unto you of your brethren like unto me, him shall ye hear in all things whatsoever he shall say unto you. And it shall come to pass that every soul which will not hear that prophet shall be destroyed from among the people." Peter's preaching is quite different front Scofield's notes. Which one is the heretic?
God put the ministry gifts in the church: apostles, prophets, teachers, miracles, gifts of healing, helps, governments, and diversities of tongues. (1Co 12:28) Scofield took it upon himself to remove them, SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917,1967) on 1Co 14:1-2, "Tongues and the sign gifts are to cease." Thus he takes the spiritual equipment that the Holy Spirit provided for Christians to carry on his work and leaves them sitting at a bus stop waiting for the Lord to snatch them out of the mess the world is in by a secret rapture. They forget that Jesus is to sit at the right hand of the Father until all enemies are put under his feet.
There are many more errors in the Scofield notes. He was untaught in the Scriptures before being converted. He was pushed forward and licensed to preach in three years. He pastored and traveled for the Missionary Society and was very busy for years. But in 1901, he told Gaebelein he was thinking of producing a reference Bible. In 1904, he made a trip to England (to the birthplace of John Darby's Dispensationalism) for research. In 1909, the Bible was put on the market with advertising puff extraordinaire. It was swallowed by the Evangelical world and many Bible schools.
It was an absolute impossibility for one man to do the study and research necessary to annotate a whole Bible in seven or eight years. He had to use other men's material and the notes indicate that he must have used work firm John Nelson Darby, James Brookes and J R. Graves whose beliefs were similarly close to the Plymouth Brethren.
We have his own statement in the letter he wrote to Gaebelein, "By all means follow your own views of prophetic analysis. I sit at your feet when it comes to prophecy and congratulate in advance the future readers of my Bible on having in their hands a safe, clear, sane guide through, what to most is a labyrinth." It is noticeable that he avoids notes on subjects where his personal life did not square with the Scriptures.
His followers have a picnic using the captivity promises of the prophets to bring Israel back to Palestine, "Now being fulfilled before your eyes." They ignore Isa 10:22-23; 65:1-15; Gal 4:21-30 and deny the words of Jesus, Mt 8:10-12; Lk 13:24-29; etc.
I love the Jewish people and deeply desire to see them accept Jesus as their Messiah and be born into his Kingdom, but I cannot go beyond Scripture in showing the future of antichrist Israel as a nation. I feel that this Dispensational teaching is giving them false hope and in holding to it they could lose everything as their ancestors did in A.D. 70
. https://www.gospeltruth.net/scofield.htm
Scofield and the Lotos Club
Being a “born again” preacher did not preclude Scofield from becoming a member of an exclusive New York men’s club in 1901, either. In his devastating biography, The Incredible Scofield and His Book, Joseph M. Canfield suggests, “The admission of Scofield to the Lotos Club, which could not have been sought by Scofield, strengthens the suspicion that has cropped up before, that someone was directing the career of C.I. Scofield.”
That someone, Canfield suspects, was associated with one of the club’s committee members, the Wall Street lawyer Samuel Untermeyer. As Canfield intimates, Scofield’s theology was “most helpful in getting Fundamentalist Christians to back the international interest in one of Untermeyer’s pet projects—the Zionist Movement.”
Others have been even more explicit about the nature of Scofield’s service to the Zionist agenda. In “Unjust War Theory: Christian Zionism and the Road to Jerusalem,” Prof. David W. Lutz writes, “Untermeyer used Scofield, a Kansas City lawyer with no formal training in theology, to inject Zionist ideas into American Protestantism. Untermeyer and other wealthy and influential Zionists whom he introduced to Scofield promoted and funded the latter’s career, including travel in Europe.”
On one of these European trips, Oxford University Press publisher Henry Frowde “expressed immediate interest” in Scofield’s project. According to a biography of Frowde, although the OUP publisher was “[n]ot demonstrative in his religious views, all his Christian life he was associated with brethren known as ‘Exclusive.’” The “Exclusive Brethren” refers to the group of Christian evangelicals that, in an 1848 split in the Plymouth Brethren, followed John Nelson Darby, the Anglo-Irish missionary generally considered to have been the most influential figure in the development of Christian Zionism, and a major influence on Scofield.
Scofield was offered a membership
in the Lotus Club of New York, a prestigious club in the literary
circles of the United States catering to non-Christians. This was not
a club in which one applied for membership, rather, you had to be
invited and have a sponsor. The answer to how Scofield got into the club, Canfield shows, was Samuel Untermeyer (1858-1941).
On pages pages 173 to 175 of The Incredible Scofield, Canfield focuses on the evidence in existence about C.I. Scofield's unlikely membership in the artistic and literary exclusive New York Lotos Club.
"The other act of 1901 was one that, according to the principles of he
Brethren, should have made J.N. Darby spin in his grave. Scofield was
admitted to membership in the Lotos Club in New York City. Now such a
step was in complete conflict with the standard Plymouth Brethren
working interpretation of II Cor 6: 14, "Be ye not equally yoked
together with unbelievers."
The Lotos Club is an exclusive club of a sort more common in London,
as so often described in British literature. The phenomenon, while
present in the United States, has never developed on this side of the
Atlantic to the extent it did in England...The club's purpose as noted
in Article I, Section II of its Constitution, was:
"The primary object of this Club shall be to promote social
intercourse among journalists, artists, and members of the musical and
dramatic professions, and representatives, amateurs, and friends of
Literature, Science, and the Fine Arts..."...
"The Club's Literacy Committee, when Scofield's application was
presented, included Samuel Untermeyer (1858-1941), a notorious
criminal lawyer. Untermeyer's accomplishments, described in Who's Who
in America take up more than two columns. There is not one activity
listed which would suggest that Untermeyer could have appreciated
either Scofield's Bible Correspondence Course or his magazine
The-Believer. Unteremeyer's life was so remote from the circles in
which Scofield normally moved, that we must remain amazed that
Untermeyer would have given Schofield the "white ball" rather than the
"black ball." A possible clue - Schofield's "postponed Kingdom"
theory (of which more anon - many Christians hold that theory to be
without Scriptural basis) was most helpful in Getting Fundamental
Christians to back the international interest in one of Untermeyer's
pet projects - the Zionist Movement...
"It defies understanding that an "obscure" pastor from the
hinterlands, whose literary output up to 1901 consisted of very
sectarian booklets, articles and courses, would be considered
acceptable in the Lotos Club. Indications are that had Reid or Samuel
Untermeyer seen any of Scofield's works, they would have reacted with
raucous laughter. Scofield kept up his membership in Lotis until his
death in 1921. The membership was not referred to in any obituary or
eulogy. (The dispensational community knew nothing of it!) The Club
was given as Scofield's residence in 1912 in Who's Who in America.
The 1905 letter to Gaebelein was written on the Lotis Club
stationery."
Canfield writes, "The selection of Scofield for admission to the Lotos Club, which
could not have been sought by Scofield, strengthens the suspicion
which has cropped up before, that someone was directing the career of
C.I. Scofield. Such direction probably was motivated by concerns
remote from fidelity to the person, work and truth of Jesus Christ."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Untermyer "Samuel Untermeyer[
was a Jewish-American lawyer and civic leader as well as a self-made
millionaire....Untermyer advocated the Zionist liberation movement and
was President of the Keren Hayesod, the agency through which the
movement was then and still is conducted in America.[9]......
Canfield says "...the Bible project was not originally based on the
support of a broad spectrum of the Christian constituency. It was
supported from a select group who were economically able to finance
special ideas and ride ideological hobbies." He is talking about Scofield's Reference Bible.
Again, Canfield says "The selection of Scofield for admission to the Lotos Club, which could not have been sought by Scofield, strengthens the suspicion which has cropped up before, that someone was directing the career of C.I. Scofield. Such direction probably was motivated by concerns remote from fidelity to the person, work and truth of Jesus Christ."
My comment: Without that directing and help, Scofield's probably would not have
gotten his Reference Bible published by Oxford University Press, whose
prestige helped sell the book and its ability to transmit the
dispensationalist man-made theological system to millions of American and English Christians
since 1909. And many American dispensationalist missionaries to other
nations have planted dispensationalist churches in other lands. The
publication of the Scofield Reference Bible in 1909 is one one date in history that
marks the beginning of the spread of dispensationalism, and its process of becoming the dominant theology in the evengelical denominations, a leavening going on over time (Luke 13: 21). Another possible date would be the earlier Niagra Bible Conferences held annually from 1876 to 1897. The Conferences helped to establish dispensationalism in the United States.
Many dispensationalists argue for a literalistic hermeneutic based on Christ’s first coming. They state that since his first coming was a literal fulfillment of OT prophesy it serves as evidence that all OT prophecy should be interpreted literally. But when we look into the NT, we find that it can present Christ and his enthronement in a spiritual sense, as well. This undercuts the literalism argument in that it shows that prophecies regarding Christ’s first coming are not always and invariably literalistic.
For instance, in Acts 2 we find a classic and eschatologically relevant spiritual fulfillment of the OT in the apostolic era. Peter interprets the Davidic kingdom prophecies in general (Ac 2:30) and Psalms 16:8–11 (Ac 2:25–28) and 110:1 (Ac 2:34–35) specifically as being fulfilled in Christ’s ascension and session:
Therefore, being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him that of the fruit of his body, according to the flesh, He would raise up the Christ to sit on his throne, he, foreseeing this, spoke concerning the resurrection of the Christ, that His soul was not left in Hades, nor did His flesh see corruption. This Jesus God has raised up, of which we are all witnesses. Therefore being exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He poured out this which you now see and hear. (Ac 2:30–33)
Here Peter declares that David prophesied the enthronement of Christ when he spoke of his resurrection. The resurrection of Christ begins his state of exaltation, which ends his earthly state of humiliation. And it is the beginning of his kingly enthronement. From Pentecost until the end of history Christ is enthroned and reigning as a king. Jesus is not awaiting a future, literal enthronement in a dispensational millennium.
Later, Paul preaches that Christ’s resurrection fulfills David’s promise to Israel: “And we declare to you glad tidings; that promise which was made to the fathers. God has fulfilled this for us their children, in that He has raised up Jesus. As it is also written in the second Psalm: ‘You are My Son, today I have begotten You.’ And that He raised Him from the dead, no more to return to corruption, He has spoken thus: ‘I will give you the sure mercies of David’” (Ac 13:32–34).
Literalism has difficulties in the kingdom preaching passages in Acts.
- As an aside, this passage in Acts 2 led me out of dispensationalism while I was enrolled in Grace Theological Seminary in Winona Lake, Indiana. When I came upon this passage in my research for a class paper, I was startled to see Peter’s point. Not long after this discovery, I left Grace Theological Seminary and transferred to Reformed Theological Seminary in Jackson, Mississippi. There I studied under Greg L. Bahnsen and was startled one more time: this time by his strong affirmation of postmillennialism.)
Jesus Said His Kingdom Was not literal but Spiritual (Luke 24:21), need Christ to open the Scriptures to them to show them their error (Luke 24:25–27, 32, 45). Christ rejects the Jews’ literalistic political Messianism (Matt 23:37–38; Luke 19:41–42; 24:21–27; John 6:15; 18:36).
The Jewish rejection of their Messiah is at least partially due to the problem that “the prevailing method of interpretation among the Jews at the time of Christ was certainly the literal method of interpretation.” [Pentecost] After all, when Christ confronts Nicodemus, he points to this very matter: “Jesus answered and said to him, ‘Are you the teacher of Israel, and do not know these things? . . . If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things?’ “ (John 3:10, 12). Literalism plagued the Jews throughout Jesus’ ministry.
John’s Gospel presents almost a case study in the error of literalism.
In John 2:19–21 Jesus is speaking of his body-temple being destroyed and rising again, but the Jews think he is talking about the literal “temple.”
In John 3:5–7 Nicodemus thinks Jesus’ reference to being “born again” requires that a man literally re-enter his mother’s womb.
In John 4:10–15 is speaking to the woman at the well about spiritual water, whereas the woman thinks he is referring to literal water.
In John 4:31–38 Jesus says he has food to eat, which makes his disciples think he is referring to physical food, not spiritual sustenance.
In John 6:31–35, 51–58 Jesus calls himself “bread” that men must eat and refers to drinking his blood, which his audience thinks are calls to cannibalism.
In John 8:32–36 Jesus talks about being spiritually “free,” but his audience think he is speaking of breaking from physical slavery.
In John 8:51–53 promises that those who keep his word will never die, which his hearers interpret to mean they will never physically die.
In John 9:39–40 Jesus speaks of being “blind,” which makes the Pharisees think he is speaking about physical blindness. In John 11:11–14 Jesus states that Lazarus is “sleeping,” but “Jesus had spoken of his death, but they thought He was speaking of literal sleep.”
In John 13:33–37 Jesus informs his disciples that he will soon be leaving (by which he means “dying”), but Peter thinks he is physically traveling somewhere else.
Literalism is literally a fraud. It has no form nor comeliness that we should desire it. To say the least.
CI Scofield
- He put his own name on God’s inspired scriptures and sold it as his Bible and necessary for learning.
- He added his words to the words of God with little or no distinction between them (Rev 22:18).
- He added center-column statements that certain verses of the Bible should be deleted and notes casting doubt on other verses – see Acts 8:37 and Mark 16:9, respectively (Rev 22:19; Gen 3:1).
- He took a Bible without a copyright, added his words, and sold it as a copyrighted book (Titus 1:11).
- His New Scofield Reference Bible (1967) included absurd and unwarranted alterations to the KJV text like the insertion of an ellipsis in I Samuel 13:1 and question marks in Romans 8:33-34.
| Explanation | Scofield | Scripture |
|---|---|---|
| An essential pillar of premillennialism is the Jewish fable that physical Jews must yet possess physical land in the Middle East to fulfill the promises of God. First, and let it be known to all men, Israel already did possess all the land according to the conditional covenant by which God gave it to them, for He is righteous! Second, from Abraham onward, the spiritual seed knew that heaven was the real fulfillment of any land promises, for none of them were seduced by the desert in Palestine (Acts 7:5; Heb 11:8-16). No true Jew would worry about the strip of sand beside the Mediterranean called Israel, when he has already come into union with mount Sion, the city of the living God, and the heavenly Jerusalem above (Heb 12:22-24; Gal 4:21-31). | Scofield, page 250 “The Palestinian Covenant gives the conditions under which Israel entered the land of promise. It is important to see that the nation has never as yet taken the land under the unconditional Abrahamic Covenant, nor has it ever possessed the whole land.” | Joshua 21:43-45 “And the LORD gave unto Israel all the land which he sware to give unto their fathers; and they possessed it, and dwelt therein.” Nehemiah 9:7-8 “Thou are the LORD the God, who didst choose Abram … and madest a covenant with him to give the land of the Canaanites ... and hast performed thy words; for thou art righteous.” See also: Josh 11:23; 23:14-15; I Kgs 8:34,56; Neh 9:22-25; Ex 23:2 7-31; Num 34:1-15; Deut 11:22-25; Ps 44:1-3; 105:43-45; 135:10-12; Acts 7:4 5; Josh 2:24; 3:9-11; 22:4; 24:13; II Chron 6:25; Jer 32:21-23. Compare also: Deut 7:22; II Sam 8:1-6; I Kgs 4:20-21; I Sam 27:8-9. |
| The New Testament uses “kingdom of heaven” and “kingdom of God” as clear synonyms, but Scofield divided them to preserve the Jewish fable of a future kingdom on earth under the Messiah’s reign in Jerusalem. The Holy Spirit’s expressions are wise synonyms, for it was the God of heaven that set up the kingdom, justifying both names (Dan 2:44). John and Jesus used both names to announce the time was fulfilled and Messiah’s kingdom was at hand at the same time. There is only one kingdom, set up by the God of heaven, and it is here to stay (Heb 12:28-29)! Scofield’s fable of a future visible kingdom on earth for Jews is entirely a lie. | Scofield, page 1003 “The kingdom of God is to be distinguished from the kingdom of heaven in five respects.” | Matthew 19:23-24 “Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.” Compare also: Mat 4:17 cp Mark 1:15; Matt 10:7 cp Luke 9:2; Matt 5:3 cp Luke 6:20; Matt 8:11-12 cp Luke 13:28-29; Matt 11:11 cp Luk e 7 :28; Matt 11:12 cp Luke 16:16; Matt 13:11 cp Mark 4:11; Matt 13:31 cp Mark 4:30 cp Luke 13:18; Matt 19:14 cp Mark 10:14 cp Luke 18:16. |
| Scofield presumed the kingdom of heaven to be a future reign of Jesus Christ on earth; but John and Jesus announced the time had been fulfilled, the kingdom was then at hand, men were entering it, and it required conditions of obedience by those entering it. This glorious event of His first advent is now 2000 years past. Glory! The kingdom is here, and you should be part of it! Scofield is not just confused; he blasphemes by denying the King of the kingdom His rightful place at the right time! | Scofield, page 1010 “John Baptist was as great, morally, as any man ‘born of woman,’ but as to the kingdom, he but announced it at hand. The kingdom did not then come, but was rejected, and John was martyred, and the King presently crucified.” Scofield, page 999 “Whenever the kingdom of heaven is established on earth ….” | Luke 16:16 “The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom o f God is preached, and every man presseth into it.” Matthew 11:12 “And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force.” Compare also: Matt 16:19; 18:1-4; 19:12; 23:13; 25:1,14; Heb 12:28-29. |
| God foretold Elijah would come with a preparatory ministry for the Messiah in the final words of the Old Testament, and Jesus confirmed him as John the Baptist (Mal 4:5-6). Scofield denied Jesus Christ’s plain doctrine and promoted the well-known Jewish fable that Elijah would literally return (Matt 16:14; 17:10; John 1:21). Babes with hearing ears easily see the fulfillment, as Jesus plainly declared, but Scofield revealed his depraved thinking and rebellion against scripture. He further corrupted this prophecy to make Elijah one of the two witnesses of Revelation 11:3-6, though Elijah fits it no better than Jonathan and his armor bearer, Jacob and Esau, or Haggai and Zechariah! https://www.letgodbetrue.com/questions/elijah.php | Scofield, page 984 “Elijah to come again before the day of the LORD. (Cf. Rev. 11.3-6.) Scofield, page 1023 “Christ confirms the specific and still unfulfilled prophecy of Mal. 4.5,6: ‘Elias shall truly first come and restore all things.’” | Matthew 11:14-15 “And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come. He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.” Matthew 17:12-13 “But I say unto you, That Elias is come already, and they knew him not, but have done unto him whatsoever they listed. Likewise shall also the Son of man suffer of them. Then the disciples understood that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.” Luke 1:17 “And he shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children , and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.” |
| Jesus promised to take the kingdom from the Jews and give it to the Gentiles, and Paul declared that both Jews and Gentiles make up the body of Christ (Eph 2:11-22; 3:1-13; Gal 3:28; Col 3:11). Nowhere is an earthly kingdom offered, especially to Jews! When Paul wrote to Israel, he told them the gospel kingdom was all they could expect (Heb 12:22-29). And Abraham declared total disdain for any such Scofield fable of an earthly kingdom (Heb 11:8-16). | Scofield, page 1206 “According to the prophets, Israel, regathered from all nations, restored to her own land and converted, is yet to have her greatest earthly exaltation and glory.” Scofield, page 1204 “Israel as a nation always has its own place, and is yet to have its greatest exaltation as the earthly people of God. | Matthew 21:43 “Therefore I say unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof.” Hebrews 12:28-29 “Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear: For our God is a consuming fire.” |
| The prophecies of David’s son sitting on David’s throne forever were fulfilled in Jesus Christ at His ascension into heaven, where He was highly exalted and sat down on the throne of David as the blessed and only Potentate (Heb 1:1-9; 2:5-13). Peter declared unequivocally that David’s prophecy was fulfilled at the resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ, which all the hearing Jews understood. There is not a reason in the world to think there is any difference between Jesus Christ’s throne and God’s throne in Revelation 3:21, since Jesus and His Father are one, as He declared repeatedly. What was the glorified Christ doing with the key of David, if He had no right to his throne (Rev 3:7)? What were the apostles building up the tabernacle of David for through the gospel, if the throne over the kingdom was empty (Acts 15:14-16)? The sure mercies of David, a king on his throne forever, were realized at Christ’s resurrection (Acts 13:33)! | Scofield, page 1334 “This passage [Rev 3:21], in harmony with Lk. 1.32,33; Mt. 19.28; Acts 2.30,34,35; 15.14-16, is conclusive that Christ is not now seated upon His own throne. The Davidic Covenant, and the promises of God through the prophets and the Angel Gabriel concerning the Messianic kingdom await fulfillment.” | Acts 2:30-36 “Therefore being a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn wit h an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins, according to the flesh, he would raise up Christ to sit on his throne; He seeing this before spake o f the resurrection of Christ, that h is soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. For David is not ascended into the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou o n my right hand, Until I make thy foes thy footstool. Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.” |
| James, inspired by the Holy Ghost, declared that the conversion of the Gentiles fulfilled the prophets, and he applied Amos 9:11-12 to prove that David’s kingdom was being rebuilt by Gentile converts. It is profane heresy for Scofield to take this inspired fulfillment of the first century and throw it into the distant future, and to take a spiritual fulfillment in Christ and pervert it for a carnal kingdom on earth. His perversion of this passage totally destroys James’ argument and the true fulfillment of Amos. As promised earlier, Jesus Christ transferred the kingdom from the Jews to the Gentiles (Mat 21:43). | Scofield, page 1169 “Dispensationally, this is the most important passage in the N.T…. ‘After this [viz. the outcalling] I will return .’ James quotes from Amos 9.11,12. The verses which follow in Amos describe the final regathering of Israel, which the other prophets invariably connect with the fulfillment of the Davidic Covenant (e.g. Isa.11.1,10-12; Jer. 23.5-8). ‘And will build again the tabernacle of David,’ i.e. re-establish the Davidic rule over Israel (2 Sam. 7.8-17; Lk. 1.31-33).” | Acts 15:14-18 “Simeon hath declared how God at the first did visit the Gentiles, to take out of them a people for his name. And to this agree the words of the prophets; as it is written, After this I will return, and will build again the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down; and I will build again the ruins thereof, and I will set it up: That the residue of men might seek after the Lord, and all t h e Gentiles, upon whom my name is called, saith the Lord, who doeth all these things. Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world.” |
| Abraham understand God’s covenant with him far better than Scofield ever dreamed. He rejoiced to see Jesus Christ (John 8:56), and he sought heaven, not the sandy wasteland by the Mediterranean (Heb 11:8-16). Paul told the Gentiles of Galatia that they were the true seed of promise of Abraham and that physical Jews were to be connected to the rejected Hagar and Ishmael (Gal 4:21-31). Jesus told the Jews trusting in Abraham that they were the children of the devil (John 8:44; Rev 2:9; 3:9). | Scofield, page 1204 “That the Christian now inherits the distinctive Jewish promises is not taught in Scripture.” | Galatians 3:16 “Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.” Galatians 3:27-28 “For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female: for ye are all one in Christ Jesus. And if y e be Christ’s, then are ye Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.” |
| Scofield assigned Israel’s salvation to a future work of Jesus coming out of Zion; but Paul quoted Isaiah 59:20, where the future tense is Isaiah’s, not Paul’s! Jesus Christ finished the work of salvation in 30 A.D., and He immediately took the news to the Jews. Only part of the nation will be saved anyway, the elect remnant within the nation (Rom 9:6-8,24). | Scofield, page 1204 “The promised Deliverer will come out of Zion and the nation will be saved (vs. 25-29).” | Matthew 1:21 “And she shall bring forth a so n , an d thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.” Acts 3:26 “Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.” |
| Scofield’s “great tribulation” is a perversion of the 70th week of Daniel (Dan 9:24-27). There is not a word in the Bible about Jewish missionaries coming out of it. Consider! The “great tribulation” was fulfilled in 70 A.D. according to our Lord! And the robed multitude that came out of great tribulation were Gentiles – out of the nations (Rev 7:9-14)! | Scofield, page 1205 “During the great tribulation a remnant out of all Israel will turn to Jesus as Messiah, and will become His witnesses after the removal of the church (Rev. 7.3-8).” | Matthew 24:21 “For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be.” Matthew 24:34 “Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.” |
| Here is another example of Scofield’s blasphemy against Jesus Christ. The great mystery of godliness is God’s manifestation in human nature in the person of Jesus Christ (Is 9:6; Col 2:9; etc.). But Scofield presumes to identify the great mystery as the processes by which men are restored to godlikeness?! When were men ever like God? And when shall they ever be like God again? What in the world is this heretic talking about from this text? | Scofield, page 1014 “A ‘mystery’ in Scripture is a previously hidden truth, now divinely revealed, but in which a supernatural element still remains despite the revelation. The greater mysteries … the mystery of the processes by which godlikeness is restored to man (1 Tim. 3. 16).” | I Timothy 3:16 “And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.” John 1:14 “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.” |
| The blessed God of heaven shook the religious world in the time of reformation (Heb 9:10), the days beginning with John and ending with the apostles (Luke 16:16), when He replaced Old Testament worship with New Testament worship (John 4:20-24). Paul declared plainly that God had shaken away the Old Testament and the New was now in place to never be shaken or removed. The future tense was Haggai’s, not Paul’s (Heb 12:26- 27). The event was past to Paul and the Hebrews, leaving a kingdom which would never be altered! | Scofield, page 963 “[Haggai] Verse 7: ‘I will shake all nations,’ refers to the great tribulation and is followed by the coming of Christ in glory, as in Mt. 24. 29, 30.” | Hebrews 12:26-29 “Whose voice then shook the earth: but now he hath promised, saying, Yet once more I shake not the earth only , but also heaven. And this word, Yet once more, signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken, as of things that are made, that those things which cannot be shaken may remain . Wherefore we receiving a kingdom which cannot be moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear: For our God is a consuming fire.” |
| There are only two Jerusalem temples – Solomon’s and Zerubbabel’s. They are called the former and the latter by Haggai. They are called the first house and this house by Ezra. Scofield is wrong for an evil purpose, because he must have a temple in some imagined future tribulation period. But God has already sent the Desire of all Nations to Zerubbabel’s temple in the person of Jesus Christ, Who made peace with God in that place and tore the temple veil in two from top to bottom! Glory! | Scofield, page 963 “In a sense all the temples (i.e. Solomon’s; Ezra’s; Herod’s; that which will be used by the unbelieving Jews under covenant with the Beast [Dan. 9. 27; Mt. 24. 15; 2 Thes. 2. 3,4]; and Ezekiel’s future kingdom temple [Ezk. 40.-47.]), are treated as one ‘house’ – the ‘house of the Lord,’ since they all profess to be that.” | Haggai 2:9 “The glory of this latter house shall be greater than of the former, saith the LORD of hosts: and in this place will I give peace, saith the LORD of hosts.” Ezra 3:12 “But many of the priests and Levites and chief of the fathers, who were ancient men, that had seen the first house, when the foundation of this house was laid before their eyes, wept with a loud voice; and many shouted aloud for joy:” |
| Any child, especially a God-fearing one, knows the 70th week began right after the end of the 69th! Scofield fusses that the length of a “week” must be seven years based on the other weeks, but he inserts a 2000-year gap, though there were no other gaps! Since 69 weeks only brought us to Messiah, all His works were in the 70th! Jesus Christ confirmed the covenant with many for one week, and He died in the midst of that 70th week for others – even the elect, ending the sacrificial system and bringing in everlasting righteousness (Dan 9:24-27)! Glory! | Scofield, page 914 “When the Church-age will end, and the seventieth week begin, is nowhere revealed. Its duration can be but seven years. To make it more violates the principle of interpretation already confirmed by fulfillment.” | Mark 1:15 “And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.” Luke 2:25 “And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name was Simeon; and the same man was just and devout, waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the Holy Ghost was upon him.” Luke 2:38 “And she coming in that instant gave thanks likewise unto the Lord, and spake of him to all them that looked for redemption in Jerusalem.” |
| The prophecy says nothing about ending national chastisement or re-establishing the nation in everlasting righteousness, but it does describe in six phrases the salvation work of the Lord Jesus Christ, Whose death on the cross made an end of sins, made reconciliation for iniquity, and brought in everlasting righteousness, among other glorious results (Dan 9:24). And when was Messiah cut off for others to accomplish these things? In the 70th week, of course! Shame on Scofield and his dupes! | Scofield, page 914 “Within these ‘weeks’ the national chastisement must be ended and the nation re-established in everlasting righteousness (v. 24).” | Hebrews 10:12 “But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;” Colossians 1:20 “And, having made peace through t he blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself.” II Cor 5:21 “For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.” |
| Scofield’s confusion here is beyond comprehension. There is nothing in Matthew 12:1-7 about a rejected Saviour or a rejected King. There is an object lesson of the true Lord of the Sabbath (12:8), and there is the defense of His disciples’ eating on the Sabbath by David’s example of eating the shewbread on the basis of God’s greater love of mercy than sacrifice! | Scofield, page 1012 “Jesus’ action (Mt. 12. 1-7) is highly significant. ‘What David did’ refers to the time of his rejection and persecution by Saul (1 Sam. 21. 6). Jesus here is not so much the rejected Saviour as the rejected King; hence the reference to David. | Matthew 12:3-4 “But he said unto them, Have ye not read what David did, when he was an hungred, and they that were with him; How he entered into the house of God, and did eat the shewbread, which was not lawful for him to eat, neither for them which were with him, but only for the priests?” |
| There is no point of change in the ministry of our Lord at this time, let alone a pivotal point! John and Jesus announced the kingdom, and men pressed into it throughout their ministries (Luke 16:16). The kingdom message of the gospel was not interrupted at any point in time, for our Lord continued to preach the kingdom, and His apostles took it to the whole world after He ascended into heaven (Matt 22:1-7; 25:14; Luke 22:16,29-30; John 18:36; Acts 1:3; 14:22; 19:8; 20:25; 28:23,31; Rom 14:17; I Cor 15:24; Heb 12:28; Jas 2:5; Rev 1:9; etc. etc.)! | Scofield, page 1011 “The new message of Jesus. The rejected King now turns from the rejecting nation and offers, not the kingdom, but rest and service to such in the nation as are conscious of need. It is a pivotal point in the ministry of Jesus.” | Matthew 24:14 “And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.” Matthew 24:34 “Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.” Acts 8:12 “But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.” |
| C.I. Scofield held to the “gap theory.” God created the heavens and the earth in the distant and undated past, and then there was an indeterminate gap of time until He created the things expressly stated as created in Genesis chapter 1. This is heresy for all young-earth Bible believers based on what the Holy Spirit declared in other places. Whatever is intended by the heaven and earth of Genesis 1:1 was created or made in the six days of creation and no more. | Scofield, page 1 “Scripture gives no data for determining how long ago the universe was created. “The first creative act refers to the dateless past.” | Exodus 20:11 “For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day : wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.” Exodus 31:17 “It is a sign between me and the children of Israel for ever: for in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, and on the seventh day he rested, and was refreshed. |
| Once a person concocts a manmade scheme of prophecy, he must alter the word of God to agree with it, as Scofield does here by adding an unknown concept to the Bible of a third coming of Jesus after His second coming! The Bible order of events is very plain – first, there must be a great falling away, or apostacy (I Tim 4:1-3); second, the man of sin would be revealed; third, Jesus would come the second time for His own and to pour out vengeance on the wicked (II Thess 1:7-10). https://www.letgodbetrue.com/bible/prophecy/which-comes-first.php | Scofield, page 1294 “The theme of Second Thessalonians has, unfortunately, been obscured by a mistranslation in the KJV of 2:2, where ‘day of Christ is at hand’ should be ‘day of the Lord is present.’ “The present letter, then, was written to instruct the Thessalonian Christians that ‘our gathering together unto him [Christ]’ will precede the Day of the Lord.” | II Thessalonians 2:1-3 “Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him, That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand. Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; |
https://letgodbetrue.com/sermons/index/year-2013/scofield-lies/
http://www.intercontinentalcog.org/bibleclassspecificstudies25pf.php
https://www.stephensizer.com/articles/irving1.html
https://www.upwardcall.net/rapture.html
https://bjorkbloggen.com/2011/10/18/history-of-the-very-recent-origin-of-the-pretribulation-rapture-and-dispensationalism/
http://son-of-encouragement.blogspot.com/2015/12/edward-irving-vs-john-darby-by-dave.html
http://poweredbychrist.homestead.com/Pretrib_Rapture_Diehards.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_cVXdr8mVs
https://www.leftbehindorledastray.com/articles/answering_our_critics/the-great-rapture-debate-my-completely-biased-review/