OT Prophecies applied to gospel age, the Church

[Edward63]

“Yea and all the prophets from Samuel and them that followed after, as many as have spoken, they also told of these days. Ye are the sons of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with your fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.” (Ac 3:24-25 ASV)

“Concerning which salvation the prophets sought and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that [should come] unto you: searching what [time] or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did point unto, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glories that should follow them.” (1Pe 1:10-11 ASV)

Joel 2:28 see in NT Acts 2:16,17
2 Sam. 7:12 & Psa. 132:11 see in NT Acts 2:30, 31
Zech. 12:9,10 see in NT John 19:36,37
Amos 9:11,12 see in NT Acts 15:13-16
Jer. 31:31 & 33 see in NT Heb. 8:1, 4, 6-8
Mal. 4:5,6 see in NT Lk 1:17; Matt. 11:13, 14

The Church is spiritual Israel:
1 Pet 2:9, 10 and its background in Ex. 19:6; Dt. 7:6; Isa. 61:6
Heb. 12:18, 22-24

I finally threw my old Scofield in the trash when I started studying what the Scripture itself stated and what the body of Christ believed prior to Darby and Scofield.

 

[convicted1]

“Yea and all the prophets from Samuel and them that followed after, as many as have spoken, they also told of these days. Ye are the sons of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with your fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.” (Ac 3:24-25 ASV)

“Concerning which salvation the prophets sought and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that [should come] unto you: searching what [time] or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did point unto, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glories that should follow them.” (1Pe 1:10-11 ASV)

Joel 2:28 see in NT Acts 2:16,17
2 Sam. 7:12 & Psa. 132:11 see in NT Acts 2:30, 31
Zech. 12:9,10 see in NT John 19:36,37
Amos 9:11,12 see in NT Acts 15:13-16
Jer. 31:31 & 33 see in NT Heb. 8:1, 4, 6-8
Mal. 4:5,6 see in NT Lk 1:17; Matt. 11:13, 14

The Church is spiritual Israel:
1 Pet 2:9, 10 and its background in Ex. 19:6; Dt. 7:6; Isa. 61:6
Heb. 12:18, 22-24

I finally threw my old Scofield in the trash when I started studying what the Scripture itself stated and what the body of Christ believed prior to Darby and Scofield.

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

[Greektim]

“Yea and all the prophets from Samuel and them that followed after, as many as have spoken, they also told of these days. Ye are the sons of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with your fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.” (Ac 3:24-25 ASV)

“Concerning which salvation the prophets sought and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that [should come] unto you: searching what [time] or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did point unto, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glories that should follow them.” (1Pe 1:10-11 ASV)

Joel 2:28 see in NT Acts 2:16,17
2 Sam. 7:12 & Psa. 132:11 see in NT Acts 2:30, 31
Zech. 12:9,10 see in NT John 19:36,37
Amos 9:11,12 see in NT Acts 15:13-16
Jer. 31:31 & 33 see in NT Heb. 8:1, 4, 6-8
Mal. 4:5,6 see in NT Lk 1:17; Matt. 11:13, 14

The Church is spiritual Israel:
1 Pet 2:9, 10 and its background in Ex. 19:6; Dt. 7:6; Isa. 61:6
Heb. 12:18, 22-24

I finally threw my old Scofield in the trash when I started studying what the Scripture itself stated and what the body of Christ believed prior to Darby and Scofield.

Absolutely!!! You are only scratching the surface here. But now that you have opened the doors to continuity, you are about to see the story of Scripture come to life in a way that it never has before!

 

[Grasshopper]

http://www.sovereigngracebible.org/

Click articles
then The True Israel of God

One of the best articles I've seen on the subject.

 

[agedman]

“Yea and all the prophets from Samuel and them that followed after, as many as have spoken, they also told of these days. Ye are the sons of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with your fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.” (Ac 3:24-25 ASV)

“Concerning which salvation the prophets sought and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that [should come] unto you: searching what [time] or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did point unto, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glories that should follow them.” (1Pe 1:10-11 ASV)

Joel 2:28 see in NT Acts 2:16,17
2 Sam. 7:12 & Psa. 132:11 see in NT Acts 2:30, 31
Zech. 12:9,10 see in NT John 19:36,37
Amos 9:11,12 see in NT Acts 15:13-16
Jer. 31:31 & 33 see in NT Heb. 8:1, 4, 6-8
Mal. 4:5,6 see in NT Lk 1:17; Matt. 11:13, 14

The Church is spiritual Israel:
1 Pet 2:9, 10 and its background in Ex. 19:6; Dt. 7:6; Isa. 61:6
Heb. 12:18, 22-24

I finally threw my old Scofield in the trash when I started studying what the Scripture itself stated and what the body of Christ believed prior to Darby and Scofield.

There is one issue, though, that the modern and ancient believers confused.

That is that some promises made to the Hebrew people, were NOT applicable to the church.

I have heard many sermons built upon some OT passage that applied to Israel, and was misapplied to the church.

For instance, in the Psalms (see 112) it speaks how the person will become healthy and wealthy in this world system. Yet, Christ spoke that the believer is not to expect anything but rebuke, persecution, and slander from the world.

Not "all the promises in the book are mine" as the children's song goes.

But there WILL be a time when the political, social, spiritual Israel and the political, social, spiritual believer will be one and the same group.

Until then, the believer is "grafted into" and not replacing Israel.

It is in the millennium when the "grafted into" and the vine become one in the same.

To bad you threw out Scofield, he didn't get it all wrong, just a bit.

 

[AresMan]

There is one issue, though, that the modern and ancient believers confused.

That is that some promises made to the Hebrew people, were NOT applicable to the church.

I have heard many sermons built upon some OT passage that applied to Israel, and was misapplied to the church.

For instance, in the Psalms (see 112) it speaks how the person will become healthy and wealthy in this world system. Yet, Christ spoke that the believer is not to expect anything but rebuke, persecution, and slander from the world.

Not "all the promises in the book are mine" as the children's song goes.

But there WILL be a time when the political, social, spiritual Israel and the political, social, spiritual believer will be one and the same group.

Until then, the believer is "grafted into" and not replacing Israel.

It is in the millennium when the "grafted into" and the vine become one in the same.

To bad you threw out Scofield, he didn't get it all wrong, just a bit.

Are you an historic premil?

 

[agedman]

Are you an historic premil?

By "historic premil" I assume the definition that one does not see a distinction between Israel and the church.

I reject that view as holding to the most truthful structure of Scriptures.

I also reject some of the teaching of the typical dispensation view - such as the thinking by some that God saved man in different ways according to what economy was being used at that time.

I do consider that the OT prophets did not see (at least not in a particular way) the "church age." Rather, they saw Christ's suffering and kingship as one - which also confused the Jewish folks in the time Christ was on this earth.

I can just imagine some of the discussions that raged on the "Jewish Board" of those days over how the messiah was both to suffer and to reign on the throne of David.


I look for the rapture to happen before the second coming and do hold that there will be an actual millennial reign. Therefore, I reject as inaccurate any view that does not read as literal the millennial reign of Christ.

I do hold that there will be a world covenant with the antiChrist in which Israel will join during the first three years of the tribulation and the series of waring will culminate in Armageddon - which is stopped by the appearance of Christ were "all eyes shall see Him."

I also hold that at the time of the second coming, "they (political/physical Israel) shall look upon Him ..." and at that time (the physical/political) Israel and the believers shall be united under the original covenant that God established and he promised would never be broken by Him and to which Paul states the believers are "grafted." Jesus shall truly rule over the whole earth while sitting on the throne of David.

That is a long answer to your short question, but because there are so many "variations on the theme" I figured it would be wise to be a bit more precise.

 

[RLBosley]

“Yea and all the prophets from Samuel and them that followed after, as many as have spoken, they also told of these days. Ye are the sons of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with your fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the families of the earth be blessed.” (Ac 3:24-25 ASV)

“Concerning which salvation the prophets sought and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that [should come] unto you: searching what [time] or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did point unto, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glories that should follow them.” (1Pe 1:10-11 ASV)

Joel 2:28 see in NT Acts 2:16,17
2 Sam. 7:12 & Psa. 132:11 see in NT Acts 2:30, 31
Zech. 12:9,10 see in NT John 19:36,37
Amos 9:11,12 see in NT Acts 15:13-16
Jer. 31:31 & 33 see in NT Heb. 8:1, 4, 6-8
Mal. 4:5,6 see in NT Lk 1:17; Matt. 11:13, 14

The Church is spiritual Israel:
1 Pet 2:9, 10 and its background in Ex. 19:6; Dt. 7:6; Isa. 61:6
Heb. 12:18, 22-24

I finally threw my old Scofield in the trash when I started studying what the Scripture itself stated and what the body of Christ believed prior to Darby and Scofield.

:thumbsup::thumbsup: Amen!

 

[Edward63]

There is one issue, though, that the modern and ancient believers confused.

That is that some promises made to the Hebrew people, were NOT applicable to the church.

I have heard many sermons built upon some OT passage that applied to Israel, and was misapplied to the church.

For instance, in the Psalms (see 112) it speaks how the person will become healthy and wealthy in this world system. Yet, Christ spoke that the believer is not to expect anything but rebuke, persecution, and slander from the world.

Not "all the promises in the book are mine" as the children's song goes.

But there WILL be a time when the political, social, spiritual Israel and the political, social, spiritual believer will be one and the same group.

Until then, the believer is "grafted into" and not replacing Israel.

It is in the millennium when the "grafted into" and the vine become one in the same.

To bad you threw out Scofield, he didn't get it all wrong, just a bit.

Respectfully, brother, I must put the statements of Scripture over Scofield and the Dispensationalists. The Psalms were written before Israel was destroyed off the land, after God fulfilled ALL his promises and nothing was lacking that they were promised:

“So Jehovah gave unto Israel all the land which he sware to give unto their fathers; and they possessed it, and dwelt therein. And Jehovah gave them rest round about, according to all that he sware unto their fathers: and there stood not a man of all their enemies before them; Jehovah delivered all their enemies into their hand. There failed not aught of any good thing which Jehovah had spoken unto the house of Israel; all came to pass.” (Jos 21:43-45 ASV)

“And, behold, this day I am going the way of all the earth: and ye know in all your hearts and in all your souls, that not one thing hath failed of all the good things which Jehovah your God spake concerning you; all are come to pass unto you, not one thing hath failed thereof. And it shall come to pass, that as all the good things are come upon you of which Jehovah your God spake unto you, so will Jehovah bring upon you all the evil things, until he have destroyed you from off this good land which Jehovah your God hath given you. When ye transgress the covenant of Jehovah your God, which he commanded you, and go and serve other gods, and bow down yourselves to them; then will the anger of Jehovah be kindled against you, and ye shall perish quickly from off the good land which he hath given unto you.” (Jos 23:14-16 ASV)

In Romans 11, I understand the Gentile believers being grafted into the people of God, not grafted into Old Covenant Israel. As complex as that passage is, I do not see an Old Covenant style imagery such as a "throne", a "temple" or any "sacrifices".

 

[Edward63]

I also hold that at the time of the second coming, "they (political/physical Israel) shall look upon Him ..." and at that time (the physical/political) Israel and the believers shall be united under the original covenant that God established and he promised would never be broken by Him and to which Paul states the believers are "grafted." Jesus shall truly rule over the whole earth while sitting on the throne of David.

Brother, when I was struggling out of the Dispensational errors, I searched the books of Pentecost, Ryrie and others for an answer of how they ignore the following Holy Spirit inspired statement on the fulfillment of the promise to David, and found no answer:

“Brethren, I may say unto you freely of the patriarch David, that he both died and was buried, and his tomb is with us unto this day. Being therefore a prophet, and knowing that God had sworn with an oath to him, that of the fruit of his loins he would set [one] upon his throne; he foreseeing [this] spake of the resurrection of the Christ, that neither was he left unto Hades, nor did his flesh see corruption. This Jesus did God raise up, whereof we all are witnesses. Being therefore by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, he hath poured forth this, which ye see and hear. For David ascended not into the heavens: but he saith himself, The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, Till I make thine enemies the footstool of thy feet.” (Ac 2:29-35 ASV)

 

[kyredneck]

Excellent post Edward!

http://www.sovereigngracebible.org/

Click articles
then The True Israel of God

One of the best articles I've seen on the subject.

Thanks for that article grasshopper. The True Israel of God:

Yet the number of the children of Israel shall be as the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured nor numbered; and it shall come to pass that, in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people, it shall be said unto them, Ye are the sons of the living God. Hos 1:10

....It behoveth you to be born from above Jn 3:7 YLT

But the Jerusalem that is above is free, which is our mother. Gal 4:26

3 Glorious things are spoken of thee, O city of God. Selah
4 I will make mention of Rahab and Babylon as among them that know me: Behold, Philistia, and Tyre, with Ethiopia: This one was born there.
5 Yea, of Zion it shall be said, This one and that one was born in her; And the Most High himself will establish her.
6 Jehovah will count, when he writeth up the peoples, This one was born there. Selah Ps 87

 

[Aaron]

I finally threw my old Scofield in the trash when I started studying what the Scripture itself stated and what the body of Christ believed prior to Darby and Scofield.

:thumbs:A Scofield Bible is a corrupted bible, and worthy of burning.

 

[agedman]

:thumbs:A Scofield Bible is a corrupted bible, and worthy of burning.

That is a very strong statement, and it shows the mind of one who lacks understanding.

I am not defending Scofield. All he did was add marginal notes - some good, some mistaken and just as others have done through commentary. Scofield included the commentary within the pages of the Bible was somewhat unusual in that day, but has been repeated by many.

But for you to drop the Word of God into the fire and call it good is very troubling.

Perhaps you would then state, "A King James Bible is a corrupted bible, and worthy of burning."

 

[agedman]

...

All that is fine, Edwards.

But, there are those who disagree with your view, who do not accept how you discern the events described.

That doesn't make you wrong, nor does it make you right.

If you want to view the church as replacing Israel rather than as Paul stated as "grafted into" that is fine.

I don't. Which is why I expressed in a bit more detail what I view as correct.

Romans 11 seems opposed to what the amil or covenant view folks hold:

7 But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker with them of the rich root of the olive tree, 18 do not be arrogant toward the branches; but if you are arrogant, remember that it is not you who supports the root, but the root supports you. 19 You will say then, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” 20 Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith. Do not be conceited, but fear; 21 for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either.

25 For I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this mystery—so that you will not be wise in your own estimation—that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in;26 and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written,

“The Deliverer will come from Zion,
He will remove ungodliness from Jacob.”
27 “This is My covenant with them,
When I take away their sins.”

​

28 From the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of God’s choice they are beloved for the sake of the fathers; 29 for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.

​

The church and Israel will one day be united. Until then, Paul expresses the relationship between the two in Romans 11 but he also in the same passage shows the relationship as temporary, that the promise made to Abraham and David will be fulfilled.

Perhaps you can have a different rendering than that given by Paul.

 

[Edward63]

All that is fine, Edwards.

But, there are those who disagree with your view, who do not accept how you discern the events described.

That doesn't make you wrong, nor does it make you right.

If you want to view the church as replacing Israel rather than as Paul stated as "grafted into" that is fine.

I don't. Which is why I expressed in a bit more detail what I view as correct.

Romans 11 seems opposed to what the amil or covenant view folks hold:

7 But if some of the branches were broken off, and you, being a wild olive, were grafted in among them and became partaker with them of the rich root of the olive tree, 18 do not be arrogant toward the branches; but if you are arrogant, remember that it is not you who supports the root, but the root supports you. 19 You will say then, “Branches were broken off so that I might be grafted in.” 20 Quite right, they were broken off for their unbelief, but you stand by your faith. Do not be conceited, but fear; 21 for if God did not spare the natural branches, He will not spare you, either.

25 For I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this mystery—so that you will not be wise in your own estimation—that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in;26 and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written,

“The Deliverer will come from Zion,
He will remove ungodliness from Jacob.”
27 “This is My covenant with them,
When I take away their sins.”

​

28 From the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of God’s choice they are beloved for the sake of the fathers; 29 for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.

​

The church and Israel will one day be united. Until then, Paul expresses the relationship between the two in Romans 11 but he also in the same passage shows the relationship as temporary, that the promise made to Abraham and David will be fulfilled.

Perhaps you can have a different rendering than that given by Paul.

I find that Paul has already settled the question for me:

“For he is our peace, who made both one, and brake down the middle wall of partition, having abolished in his flesh the enmity, [even] the law of commandments [contained] in ordinances; that he might create in himself of the two one new man, [so] making peace; and might reconcile them both in one body unto God through the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: and he came and preached peace to you that were far off, and peace to them that were nigh: for through him we both have our access in one Spirit unto the Father. So then ye are no more strangers and sojourners, but ye are fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God,” (Eph 2:14-19 ASV)

When I rid myself of the Scofield, I bought a KJV Cambridge Pitt: Minion with nothing but the text of the Scripture, no concordance or cross references. With a Young's Analytical Concordance and a Thesaurus and then other study aids, I began my struggle out of Dispensationalism. The big problem, I found, when anyone wished to show me a verse, my mind thought of a contradicting belief as if it were Scripture. But, what was conflicting in my mind was not from Scripture, but from Scofield footnotes that had so ingrained into my mind it was as if it were true, the gospel. For years I sat under Pastors who from the pulpit would say, "Turn to Isaiah 3:12, page .... in your Bibles." We ALL had Scofields for it was a sign of the true 'student of prophecy'! I just found too many Scofield notes directly contradicted by the word of God. Actually, the suggestion by another may have been better, "burn the Scofield". That way we honor the Scripture like honoring the worn American flag and ridding ourselves of the error in the Scofield notes attached.

 

[Aaron]

That is a very strong statement, and it shows the mind of one who lacks understanding.

I am not defending Scofield. All he did was add marginal notes - some good, some mistaken and just as others have done through commentary. Scofield included the commentary within the pages of the Bible was somewhat unusual in that day, but has been repeated by many.

But for you to drop the Word of God into the fire and call it good is very troubling.

Perhaps you would then state, "A King James Bible is a corrupted bible, and worthy of burning."

Let me rephrase it then. A Scofield Bible is too corrupted not to burn.

 

[agedman]

I find that Paul has already settled the question for me:

“For he is our peace, who made both one, and brake down the middle wall of partition, having abolished in his flesh the enmity, [even] the law of commandments [contained] in ordinances; that he might create in himself of the two one new man, [so] making peace; and might reconcile them both in one body unto God through the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: and he came and preached peace to you that were far off, and peace to them that were nigh: for through him we both have our access in one Spirit unto the Father. So then ye are no more strangers and sojourners, but ye are fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God,” (Eph 2:14-19 ASV)

Ephesians does not support your claim that the church replaced Israel.

Look at the passage with these points highlighted:

1 Therefore remember that formerly you, the Gentiles in the flesh, who are called “Uncircumcision” by the so-called “Circumcision,” which is performed in the flesh by human hands— 12remember that you were at that time separate from Christ, excluded from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers to the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world.

​

Here Paul shows the state of the Gentiles before the Crucifixion - they were excluded. Not only that but this verse suggests that they actually had NO hope and without God

13 But now in Christ Jesus you who formerly were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ.

​

This is important - Paul doesn't state that the gentiles REPLACED, but were brought near.

14 For He Himself is our peace, who made both groups into one and broke down the barrier of the dividing wall, 15 by abolishing in His flesh the enmity, which is the Law of commandments contained in ordinances, so that in Himself He might make the two into one new man, thus establishing peace, 16 and might reconcile them both in one body to God through the cross, by it having put to death the enmity.

​

Nowhere is it stating that Christ made null the promises of the old covenant. Rather, this section is specific that Paul is discussing the Law versus Grace. That ALL come to salvation in the same manner - no more barrier exists, the curtain has been torn in two from top to bottom.

17 And He came and preached peace to you who were far away, and peace to those who were near; 18 for through Him we both have our access in one Spirit to the Father. 19 So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God’s household, 20 having been built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner stone, 21 in whom the whole building, being fitted together, is growing into a holy temple in the Lord, 22 in whom you also are being built together into a dwelling of God in the Spirit.

​

These verses are consistent with when Paul states that the Gentiles are "grafted into." The Romans 11 passage pretty much disputes those who think that the church replaced Israel. Perhaps someone who does will create a thread in which they can show how Paul didn't mean what he most clearly stated and even quoted other Scriptures for support. That is double validation of the truth.

The current political/religious Israel is estranged from God (having been temporarily blinded) that the Gentiles might be also heirs of the promise.

But there is no reason from the Ephesians passage to consider that God has broken His promise to Israel.

 

[agedman]

Let me rephrase it then. A Scofield Bible is too corrupted not to burn.

I think it is important, that you show proof that the Scriptures of the Scofield are heretical. Remember they are KJ and NKJ versions (and I don't know if the notes were added to other versions).

I am not saying take the notes, but the actual scriptures.

I hold that you have asked for destruction of the very Word of God, and that is unsupportable.

If YOU cannot show the heretical evidence to support your statement, then you are certainly in error. I hold that your statement is pure reactionary and unsupportable.

I am somewhat dismayed that others haven't stepped up and condemned your statement as inappropriate, but some actually rejoiced in it.

That is MOST troubling.

Prove that the Scriptures are heretical, and I will be happy to join your effort.

But unless you can show by actual scriptures the truth of what you say, you have not just stepped over the line but made a great leap over the line of appropriateness.

 

[Edward63]

Ephesians does not support your claim that the church replaced Israel.


But there is no reason from the Ephesians passage to consider that God has broken His promise to Israel.

First, I did not use Paul in Ephesians 2 to say the church replaced Israel, though I see it there clearly. I was showing that in the present tense in Paul's day, and I'll try a more expanded version on the main point:

“You are therefore no longer mere foreigners or persons excluded from civil rights. On the contrary you share citizenship with God’s people and are members of His family.” (Eph 2:19 Wey)

It is now one people, God's people! Members of God's family, no more Jew and Gentile, but citizens in the family of God, the one church.

Now, God fulfilled his promises and Israel got it all as I have already quoted from Josh. 21:43-45 and 23:14-16. That was another point I had been taught that Scripture contradicted, that some promises of land remained for Israel to possess. Another is that Jesus is to sit on the throne of David in Jerusalem in our future. Peter said David spoke of the resurrection as I pointed out in Acts 2. I'm still waiting to hear why the Scripture does not mean just what it states there.

 

[Edward63]

I think it is important, that you show proof that the Scriptures of the Scofield are heretical. Remember they are KJ and NKJ versions (and I don't know if the notes were added to other versions).

I am not saying take the notes, but the actual scriptures.

I hold that you have asked for destruction of the very Word of God, and that is unsupportable.

If YOU cannot show the heretical evidence to support your statement, then you are certainly in error. I hold that your statement is pure reactionary and unsupportable.

I am somewhat dismayed that others haven't stepped up and condemned your statement as inappropriate, but some actually rejoiced in it.

That is MOST troubling.

Prove that the Scriptures are heretical, and I will be happy to join your effort.

But unless you can show by actual scriptures the truth of what you say, you have not just stepped over the line but made a great leap over the line of appropriateness.

Respectfully, Agedman; with my OP and the flow of the thread, it is extreme to say Aaron was referring to God's word, the Scriptures. Just as me he was referencing the Scofield notes in that particular study Bible. I would truly be interested in how you do explain Acts 2:29-35 and still try to apply that to some future kingdom? On Josh. 21:43-45 and 23:14-16 my Scofield toting Pastor just laughed when I asked him how he explained that.