John Nelson Darby vs Baptist Confessions of Faith

[OldRegular]

Let's put your statement in another way that you can't deny.
Darby is the father of pre-trib rapture.

That is the nutshell of the statement of which you have added to and expanded throughout various threads and forums.

Darby is the father of the blasphemous pre-trib, premill dispy position which has spread their poisonous doctrine everywhere.

Darby is the father of the pre-trib rapture and no one has ever shown it to be otherwise.

Or,
Your actual statement:
""NNE has shown that Darby is not the Father pre-trib..."

To the above you have quoted Ice, Sperry, Ryrie, etc., all of whom are not on this board. So, no you weren't referring to those on this board.

I quoted Ice who said Darby was the father of pre-trib-dispensationalis,. I don't know who Sperry is, do you? I have quoted Ryrie, Chafer, and Ironside who said the Church was a "parenthesis" or intercalation in GOD's program for Israel. Also I must give you credit for the useful information about Isaac Watts.

I have never called Pre-trib-doctrine blasphemous. I have called it false doctrine just as you have done for Calvinism or the Doctrines of Sovereign Election and Grace, laying them at the feet of Augustine.

I have said that the doctrine of the "parenthesis" Church for which Jesus Christ shed HIS Blood is a blasphemous doctrine and it is. But why should you care you never heard of it until I brought it up?

When I post something I post to members of this BB, especially to those involved in the debate. No rational person could understand that those posts were directed to the total number of people who ever lived or ever will live. But you believe whatever you choose. As I told Squire I don't care!

 

[DHK]

I quoted Ice who said Darby was the father of pre-trib-dispensationalis,.
When I post something I post to members of this BB, especially to those involved in the debate. No rational person could understand that those posts were directed to the total number of people who ever lived or ever will live. But you believe whatever you choose. As I told Squire I don't care!

Let's see the truth of your statements.

Your OP:
Sadly many if not most Baptists in this country have ignored the Biblical truths of these Confessions, including the Philadelphia and New Hampshire Confessions, and have adopted the new revelation of John Nelson Darby, called pre-trib-dispensationalism. This Darby doctrine is not only unBiblical in its eschatology but even worse concludes that the Church for which Jesus Christ died is a “parenthesis, an interruption, in GOD’s program for ethnic Israel!

post#4 Much of the Bible is devoted to pointing out sin and error among the people of GOD. Pre-trib-dispensationalism is a grievous unBiblical error invented by John Nelson Darby who claimed new revelation so I am obligated to make that point when I can. When a doctrine calls the Church, for which Jesus Christ shed HIS blood, a "parenthesis" in GOD's program for ethnic Israel that is blasphemous to me and should be to every Christian!

Post #9:
It is very sad that so many people on this Forum will accept the "new revelation" claimed by John Darby {A heresy in itself as Baptists are want to accuse Roman Catholicism.} over the teachings of a multitude of Baptists who endured persecution to preach the truth!

Post #14
Darby is not the problem it is Biblically illiterate people who buy his false doctrine! I should also include those who are ignorant of the history of the Church and the struggle of dissenters from Rome to be obedient to the teachings of Scripture. So pray for yourself and others who have been deceived by Darby/Scofield and their disciples!

Classy here. You call all dispensationalists "Biblically illiterate holding to false doctrine and ignorant of church history, etc. That is so nice of you.

Post #16
The doctrine that the Church is a "parenthesis" in God's program begins with Darby's doctrine of the pre-trib-removal of the Church.

Post #18
You post Scripture that prove nothing. Scripture does defend a false doctrine and pre-trib-dispensationalism that teaches the Church is a "parenthesis" in GOD's program for Israel is a gross heresy!

There is no Scripture showing that Jesus Christ died for national Israel and that is a fact. Jesus Christ died for His Church which includes all the redeemed of all time! So pray for yourself and those others who have been seduced by the Darby/Scofield error!

Pretty strong words OR!

Post #54
There will be no removal of the "parenthesis Church" prior to any great seven year tribulation because the Church for which Jesus Christ died is not a "parenthesis"! It is the chaste Bride of Jesus Christ whom ethnic Israel conspired with Rome to slaughter on the Roman Cross. That Bride of Jesus Christ includes all the redeemed of all time because other than through the shed blood of Jesus Christ there is no redemption! You can believe that or not!

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=2217816&postcount=78

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=2217819&postcount=79

Two entire posts devoted to Darby and "his heresies."

Post #81
That is the reason that I thank GOD I never got a Scofield Bible. That book has done more to spread the false doctrine of Darby among Southern Baptists than any other book. The Bible certainly never led them to pre-trib-dispensationalism with its "parenthesis" Church.

Post #86
I simply understand the source of the pre-trib error and feel compelled to tell my brothers and sisters in Christ of that error. But some simply will not face the truth of History. Darby is the "daddy" of pre-trib-dispensationalism whether you or anyone else on this board will admit it.!

FINALLY, on page 10, you make this post (though there are others still to follow). It is this post that I have been quoting as a Universal Negative

Post #91 No one has shown that Darby is not the father of pre-trib-dispensationalism. You deny it but denial does not history make!

"No one" as in "every one" is "universal" meaning all.
You can't interview "all."
Even if your objection is true: "I just meant everyone on the board," then there are 2,244 members on the board. Did you ask each and every member their eschatological view on the pre-trib rapture?
I think I know the answer to that question.

 

[Iconoclast]

Dhk

Stop adding words to what OR posted in an effort to change what he said. It is dishonest.it is a lie.it is false witness.....stop doing it.


you add blasphemous. .....you add all dispensationalist. .....he did not say that.....you are lying.....you have done it to me....you have done it to OR.....rippon....bosley.....con 1 ....AA....and many others....

stop it......no other moderator does this.....you are not being amoderator but a censor.....you should step down from that position if you cannot stop yourself from abusing it.

 

[revmwc]

It appears this thread is off track as usual.

 

[Iconoclast]

It appears this thread is off track as usual.

It is hard to stay on track when DHK adds words to peoples posts that force responses to correct this.....no other mod does this......

 

[DHK]

It is hard to stay on track when DHK adds words to peoples posts that force responses to correct this.....no other mod does this......

I gave the post #. When something is in quotes it means his exact words are quoted. So why are you saying that I am lying?

 

[OldRegular]

Let's see the truth of your statements.








Classy here. You call all dispensationalists "Biblically illiterate holding to false doctrine and ignorant of church history, etc. That is so nice of you.

When the first Scofield Book came out in 1909 most of the people in Churches were Biblically illiterate. Sadly they still are. I personally have had people tell me: "My Bible says this" when they were reading Scofields notes. Former pre-trib-dispensationalist Dr. John P. Newport, formerly of Southwestern Seminary, and now a Covenant premillennialist, comments in his book The Lion and the Lamb [page 100]:

It is not surprising that some persons find it difficult to remember whether they had read something in the text or at the bottom of the page in the notes. I have personally witnessed this confusion in Bible study classes.

Pretty strong words OR!



http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=2217816&postcount=78

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=2217819&postcount=79

Two entire posts devoted to Darby and "his heresies."

The doctrine of the "parenthesis" Church is heretical!

FINALLY, on page 10, you make this post (though there are others still to follow). It is this post that I have been quoting as a Universal Negative

"No one" as in "every one" is "universal" meaning all.
You can't interview "all."
Even if your objection is true: "I just meant everyone on the board," then there are 2,244 members on the board. Did you ask each and every member their eschatological view on the pre-trib rapture?
I think I know the answer to that question.

Believe what you want DHK. I have explained what I meant. If you think I was addressing the universe of people here on BB so be it. I really don't care. But thank you very much for the link to Isaac Watts.

 

[Iconoclast]

I gave the post #. When something is in quotes it means his exact words are quoted. So why are you saying that I am lying?

Let me show you.....

here was the "quote from OR"....then you comment where you add to his words-

Quote:
Post #14
Darby is not the problem it is Biblically illiterate people who buy his false doctrine!

I should also include those who are ignorant of the history of the Church



Now here you say this;



Classy here. You call all dispensationalists "Biblically illiterate

holding to false doctrine and ignorant of church history, etc.

That is so nice of you.

OR no where used the words ALL Dispensationalists....no where here....

There are persons who could be said to be biblically illiterate....that is a true statement.....some of them could be biblically illiterate and dispensational also, that is a true statement.

He did not say......ALL Dispys.....he did not say it.....He is a big boy, he could say it but he did not.....
For you to twist His words is dishonest and a lie.

You might "think" or "speculate" what you think he might be saying...but he himself did not do it.....SO IT BECOMES A MATTER OF TRUTH NOW.


He and others offer correction which you trample over...like here OR says;

I have never called Pre-trib-doctrine blasphemous. I have called it false doctrine just as you have done for Calvinism or the Doctrines of Sovereign Election and Grace, laying them at the feet of Augustine.

That is why what you do everyday is dishonest and should stop....

 

[Iconoclast]

When the first Scofield Book came out in 1909 most of the people in Churches were Biblically illiterate. Sadly they still are. I personally have had people tell me: "My Bible says this" when they were reading Scofields notes. Former pre-trib-dispensationalist Dr. John P. Newport, formerly of Southwestern Seminary, and now a Covenant premillennialist, comments in his book The Lion and the Lamb [page 100]:





The doctrine of the "parenthesis" Church is heretical!


Believe what you want DHK. I have explained what I meant. If you think I was addressing the universe of people here on BB so be it. I really don't care. But thank you very much for the link to Isaac Watts.

He does not want a real explanation...he is trying to misrepresent you as he did to me earlier...McCree caught him then...we all see it now

:applause::applause::applause::thumbsup:

 

[DHK]

When the first Scofield Book came out in 1909 most of the people in Churches were Biblically illiterate. Sadly they still are. I personally have had people tell me: "My Bible says this" when they were reading Scofields notes. Former pre-trib-dispensationalist Dr. John P. Newport, formerly of Southwestern Seminary, and now a Covenant premillennialist, comments in his book The Lion and the Lamb [page 100]:

They were hardly Biblically illiterate. They were some of the most educated minds of the time that educated the people of that era. Why not learn something positive of the Bible before condemning it all the time.
From Beale's "In Pursuit of Purity," chapter four,

The Scofield Reference Bible’s seven original consulting editors were Henry G. Weston, president of Crozer Seminar; James M. Gray, president of Moody Bible Institute; William G. Moorehead, president of Xenia Theological Seminary; Elmore Harris, president of Toronto Bible Institute; William J. Erdman; Arno C. Gaebelein; and Arthur T. Pierson. These men were all speakers at either Niagara or Sea Cliff. Although the precise role that these consulting editors played in the project remains unclear, Scofield held several week-long conferences with these and other men. In his introduction, he disclaims originality and acknowledges the consulting editors, “who have freely given of their time and the treasures of their scholarship to this work.” The fact that two of these editors, Erdman and Moorehead, held the postribulational rapture interpretation indicates Scofield’s desire to keep brethren from dividing on this issue. Of course, that particular view found no expression in Scofield’s reference notes.

Although generally Calvinistic, Scofield’s notes, when discussing the doctrine of election, emphasize a divine election base on (or conditioned by) God’s foreknowledge of man’s choices (e.g., the note at 1Peter 1:20)… In spite of some faults, the Scofield Bible impressed Fundamentalists as a much-needed pioneer work of great sacrifice.
For memorization, most Fundamentalists have preferred the standard King James. Actually, no modern reference Bible, including those of W.A. Criswell and Charles Ryrie (in spite of their recognized merits), has acquired the popularity of the older Scofield Bible.

 

[revmwc]

Post the Scripture.

So the Holy Spirit led those who dissented from Roman Catholicism to erroneously interpret Scripture for 1800 years. The Holy Spirit led those English Baptists who endured tribulation to teach false doctrine. You are beyond ridiculous. You say the Holy Spirit misled Christians for 1800 years and then revealed the truth to Darby who was accused of heresy by Spurgeon. And then the Holy Spirit reveals the truth to you but denies it to the majority of Christians who reject the false doctrine of pre-trib-dispensationalism! :laugh::laugh::laugh::laugh:

Darby is not the problem it is Biblically illiterate people who buy his false doctrine! I should also include those who are ignorant of the history of the Church and the struggle of dissenters from Rome to be obedient to the teachings of Scripture. So pray for yourself and others who have been deceived by Darby/Scofield and their disciples!

Those you are talking about "the Holy Spirit led those who dissented from Roman Catholicism to erroneously interpret Scripture for 1800 years"
The Waldenses and other groups who were persecuted for their faith in most cases looked for Christ return for the church prior to the rapture. I need to dig my notes out from my college courses on their history. From Church History 1 and 2 as well as Baptist History 1 and 2. To really delve into those groups.

Baptist History 2 "Dr. Lovelace takes the student on a whirlwind tour of groups that have held Baptistic principles throughout the ages, such as: The Way, Christians, Novatians, Donatists, Paulicians and Waldenses."

While they didn't fully hold some of the doctrines we do today these groups came through the 1st century till the ana-baptist formed and we studied that group too.

Which brings us to your next point, "the problem it is Biblically illiterate people who buy his false doctrine! I should also include those who are ignorant of the history of the Church and the struggle of dissenters from Rome to be obedient to the teachings of Scripture."

Just because you feel anyone who holds the pre-trib view is illiterate of church History doesn't mean they are. I have had extensive studies and I have studied the early church and I still find that these groups believed in the return of Christ for His church before the tribulation and they believed it was to be literal. Have you studied these groups? Have you studied the guys I listed their writings on? Evidently not you didn't recognize their writing.

 

[DHK]

Let me show you.....

here was the "quote from OR"....then you comment where you add to his words-



OR no where used the words ALL Dispensationalists....no where here....

There are persons who could be said to be biblically illiterate....that is a true statement.....some of them could be biblically illiterate and dispensational also, that is a true statement.

He did not say......ALL Dispys.....he did not say it.....He is a big boy, he could say it but he did not.....
For you to twist His words is dishonest and a lie.

You might "think" or "speculate" what you think he might be saying...but he himself did not do it.....SO IT BECOMES A MATTER OF TRUTH NOW.


He and others offer correction which you trample over...like here OR says;




That is why what you do everyday is dishonest and should stop....

Post #18
You post Scripture that prove nothing. Scripture does defend a false doctrine and pre-trib-dispensationalism that teaches the Church is a "parenthesis" in GOD's program for Israel is a gross heresy!

There is no Scripture showing that Jesus Christ died for national Israel and that is a fact. Jesus Christ died for His Church which includes all the redeemed of all time! So pray for yourself and those others who have been seduced by the Darby/Scofield error!

Here it is called "gross heresy," and those who believe in it, "seduced."
Perhaps it was in another thread you called it blasphemous. Anyway, this is bad enough, don't you think?

 

[Iconoclast]

Here it is called "gross heresy," and those who believe in it, "seduced."
Perhaps it was in another thread you called it blasphemous. Anyway, this is bad enough, don't you think?

DHK......he has a right to express what he believes as much as you do to us about God's grace.....no one is forcing you to believe what he or I or anyone else believes:thumbsup:

The problem is when we answer you and you do not agree, you change what we say, try and bait us, then give out infractions.....

if you are that into the issues discussed then let other moderators handle these threads because you are abusing your position.

NTHER MODERATOR DOES THIS.....

When do you see any other moderator mentioned???

 

[DHK]

DHK......he has a right to express what he believes as much as you do to us about God's grace.....no one is forcing you to believe what he or I or anyone else believes:thumbsup:

The problem is when we answer you and you do not agree, you change what we say, try and bait us, then give out infractions.....

if you are that into the issues discussed then let other moderators handle these threads because you are abusing your position.

NTHER MODERATOR DOES THIS.....

When do you see any other moderator mentioned???

You have expressed this same view before. I have told you that every person has to abide by the rules. Do you think that freedom of speech or "expressing one's view includes profanity and taking the Lord's name in vain? Really Icon?
There is no total freedom of speech anywhere on earth, not even in this nation, and especially on this board.
He is never at liberty to call anyone on this board a heretic. Neither are you.

He is not at liberty to say things like this when it speaks of the beliefs of about half the posters here.

But folks on this BB get really steamed. Can't say I blame them. It seems blasphemous to me!

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=2218799&postcount=55
Dispensationalism is not a blasphemous doctrine.

The rules are posted on every page. Read them if you have to.
It seems that you have forgotten them.

 

[OldRegular]

You have expressed this same view before. I have told you that every person has to abide by the rules. Do you think that freedom of speech or "expressing one's view includes profanity and taking the Lord's name in vain? Really Icon?
There is no total freedom of speech anywhere on earth, not even in this nation, and especially on this board.
He is never at liberty to call anyone on this board a heretic. Neither are you.

He is not at liberty to say things like this when it speaks of the beliefs of about half the posters here.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=2218799&postcount=55
Dispensationalism is not a blasphemous doctrine.

The rules are posted on every page. Read them if you have to.
It seems that you have forgotten them.

I have never said that Pre-trib dispensationalism is blasphemous. I have said and will say that the doctrine of the Church as a "parenthesis" in GOD's program for Israel is blasphemous. Go back and read some of your remarks about Calvinism or the doctrines of Sovereign Election and Grace to get a little perspective of your attitude!

 

[DHK]

I have never said that Pre-trib dispensationalism is blasphemous. I have said and will say that the doctrine of the Church as a "parenthesis" in GOD's program for Israel is blasphemous. Go back and read some of your remarks about Calvinism or the doctrines of Sovereign Election and Grace to get a little perspective of your attitude!

Now you are back tracking. Or at least it is hypocritical double-speak.
First, no one here has admitted to believing "a parenthesis Church" of which you accuse us all of believing.
And then you accuse us all, not only of believing it but believing a blasphemous doctrine.
That is very kind of you. It is even worse then first posted.

 

[OldRegular]

Now you are back tracking. Or at least it is hypocritical double-speak.
First, no one here has admitted to believing "a parenthesis Church" of which you accuse us all of believing.

I don't blame you for denying you believe that blasphemy but it is the doctrine of pre-trib-dispensationalism. I expect a lot of Roman Catholics, particularly in this country, don't believe the heretical doctrines of Roman Catholicism, may be ignorant of some of them, but that does not mean that they are not Roman Catholic doctrines.

And then you accuse us all, not only of believing it but believing a blasphemous doctrine.
That is very kind of you. It is even worse then first posted.

You are inventing nonsense, DHK, in an attempt, I suppose, to get me banned. That is sort of like shoot the messenger! You should be ashamed!

 

[Iconoclast]

You never addressed the issue of you adding words to the posts to change the meanings. I did not think you would but I wanted to give you the opportunity.

No one is speaking of free speech or whatever smokescreen you offer.
It is about what has been posted.
I will let the readers see it for themselves.

 

[DHK]

I don't blame you for denying you believe that blasphemy but it is the doctrine of pre-trib-dispensationalism. I expect a lot of Roman Catholics, particularly in this country, don't believe the heretical doctrines of Roman Catholicism, may be ignorant of some of them, but that does not mean that they are not Roman Catholic doctrines.

I noticed in reading some of those that you quoted, that Walvoord said:
"one's ecclesiology determine's one's eschatology." Since that is from memory it may be off a bit. However, since you don't know my ecclesiology you cannot know my eschatology. The one does affect the other. I can believe in a pre-trib rapture without believing in your "parenthesis Church." And there is no need to call it blasphemy. Perhaps you should look that word up in the dictionary. I don't think you know what it means.

You are inventing nonsense, DHK, in an attempt, I suppose, to get me banned. That is sort of like shoot the messenger! You should be ashamed!

I am not inventing anything. I made direct quotes. You should be ashamed of the things that you have said. Period!

 

[DHK]

You never addressed the issue of you adding words to the posts to change the meanings. I did not think you would but I wanted to give you the opportunity.

No one is speaking of free speech or whatever smokescreen you offer.
It is about what has been posted.
I will let the readers see it for themselves.

I have no idea what you are talking about.
Do you know what a "quote" function is Icon?
Do you know how to use it?
I used it. I did not add anything.