Scofield Bible Damage and Atheist Arguments

[The Gospel of Christ]

I am not a dispensationalist but as a historic premillennialist I do see a nation of Israel in prophecy. Does that, in your opinion, make me some sort of satanic zionist pig?

I do have a scofield by the way, also a Dakes and Bullinger's companion bible. I rarely read the notes.

No, it doesn’t make you a “satanic Zionist pig”.
It just means you’re completely lost — and swimming in a stew of theological confusion that’s been simmering for over a century.

You might not think you’re a dispensationalist, but if your view of Israel (a.k.a. Rothschilds-land) overrides the finished work of Christ, and you’re watching prophecy like it’s a news ticker from Tel Aviv, then yeah —
you’re sipping end-times Kool-Aid out of Scofield’s cracked communion cup, whether you realize it or not.

Owning a Scofield, Dake’s, and Bullinger’s doesn’t damn you — but if those notes have shaped your lens more than the apostles, you’re not reading the Bible…
you’re reading someone else’s script, taped into the margins.

Christians before 1920 would’ve laughed out loud at the idea of “protecting Israel” meaning a patch of land in the Middle East.
To them, Israel meant the Body of Christ — the Church, the flock, the people redeemed by the blood of Jesus Christ.

Anyone today who thinks “protecting Israel” means anything other than guarding the Church, the true Israel of God, is not just confused — they’re completely lost.

 

[talons]

More things to read here .

What is replacement theology / supersessionism / fulfillment theology? | GotQuestions.org

What is replacement theology? What is supersessionism? What is fulfillment theology? How does Israel fit into God’s plan for the church age? Has the church replaced Israel in God’s program?

www.gotquestions.org

Supersessionism - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[shepherdsword]

No, it doesn’t make you a “satanic Zionist pig”.
It just means you’re completely lost — and swimming in a stew of theological confusion that’s been simmering for over a century.

LOL....Historic Premillennialism has been around since the early church, making it one of the oldest eschatological views in Christian history. I don't think you have clue what it means

You might not think you’re a dispensationalist, but if your view of Israel (a.k.a. Rothschilds-land) overrides the finished work of Christ, and you’re watching prophecy like it’s a news ticker from Tel Aviv, then yeah —

Once again...you show your total ignorance of views you critique. There is no way to define me as a dispensationist. You just generalize everything you disagree with under one banner. An amatuer and sophmoric approach.

you’re sipping end-times Kool-Aid out of Scofield’s cracked communion cup, whether you realize it or not.

Owning a Scofield, Dake’s, and Bullinger’s doesn’t damn you — but if those notes have shaped your lens more than the apostles, you’re not reading the Bible…
you’re reading someone else’s script, taped into the margins.

I have every major study bible produced. I compare the notes on various topics and compare them with Green's interlinear (my primary read with the KJV)

Christians before 1920 would’ve laughed out loud at the idea of “protecting Israel” meaning a patch of land in the Middle East.
To them, Israel meant the Body of Christ — the Church, the flock, the people redeemed by the blood of Jesus Christ.

Of course they would. Because it didn't exist. However after 1948 it made obsolete all of the replacement theology eschatological models that were created to explain prophecy after her destruction.

Anyone today who thinks “protecting Israel” means anything other than guarding the Church, the true Israel of God, is not just confused — they’re completely lost.

A statement based on total ignorance. To define someone as "lost" because of an eschatological view shows the utter heretical stupidity of your errant view.

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

LOL....Historic Premillennialism has been around since the early church, making it one of the oldest eschatological views in Christian history. I don't think you have clue what it means

Once again...you show your total ignorance of views you critique. There is no way to define me as a dispensationist. You just generalize everything you disagree with under one banner. An amatuer and sophmoric approach.

I have every major study bible produced. I compare the notes on various topics and compare them with Green's interlinear (my primary read with the KJV)

Of course they would. Because it didn't exist. However after 1948 it made obsolete all of the replacement theology eschatological models that were created to explain prophecy after her destruction.



A statement based on total ignorance. To define someone as "lost" because of an eschatological view shows the utter heretical stupidity of your errant view.

You just proved my entire point.
You think quoting Green’s Interlinear and owning a shelf of study Bibles immunizes you from Scofield’s theology — but you just preached every Scofield talking point verbatim.

You defend modern Israel like it’s holy, pretend 1948 rewrote the New Testament, and accuse anyone who believes the Church is the true Israel of “replacement heresy.”
That’s Scofield 101 — whether you want the label or not.

Historic premillennialism didn’t teach what you just did. The early Church didn’t glorify a land that rejected Christ — they glorified the Body of Christ, which is the Israel of God (Galatians 6:16).

And calling 2,000 years of New Testament doctrine “obsolete” because of a political event in 1948?
That’s not theology — that’s delusion.
The Cross didn’t get cancelled when the Rothschilds planted a flag.
Jesus didn’t die so your eschatology could revolve around Tel Aviv.

And let’s be clear:
Christians born before 1920 would’ve laughed at the violent Rothschild-backed annexation of that land in 1948.
They would’ve laughed at the idea of calling it “Israel.”
They knew that Christ’s followers are Israel — not a secular state filled with unbelieving Eastern Europeans claiming to be ethnic Biblical Israelites while rejecting the Messiah.

Your rebuttal of — “Israel didn’t exist before 1948” — means the point flew over your head at 36,000 feet.
The term “Israel” was never about borders and barbed wire.
It was about covenant and Christ.
And if you don’t see that, you’re not reading scripture —
you’re reading a Cold War pamphlet with Bible verses taped to it.

You’re not comparing notes. You’re just picking the ones that let you worship a nation that denies the Messiah — and pretending it's still "chosen".

You don’t need a new Bible.
You need a new lens — one that wasn’t taped into the margins by Scofield, Darby, or the State Department.

 

[shepherdsword]

Historic premillennialism didn’t teach what you just did. The early Church didn’t glorify a land that rejected Christ — they glorified the Body of Christ, which is the Israel of God (Galatians 6:16).

You just proved my entire point.
You think quoting Green’s Interlinear and owning a shelf of study Bibles immunizes you from Scofield’s theology — but you just preached every Scofield talking point verbatim.

You defend modern Israel like it’s holy, pretend 1948 rewrote the New Testament, and accuse anyone who believes the Church is the true Israel of “replacement heresy.”
That’s Scofield 101 — whether you want the label or not.

Historic premillennialism didn’t teach what you just did. The early Church didn’t glorify a land that rejected Christ — they glorified the Body of Christ, which is the Israel of God (Galatians 6:16).

And calling 2,000 years of New Testament doctrine “obsolete” because of a political event in 1948?
That’s not theology — that’s delusion.
The Cross didn’t get cancelled when the Rothschilds planted a flag.
Jesus didn’t die so your eschatology could revolve around Tel Aviv.

And let’s be clear:
Christians born before 1920 would’ve laughed at the violent Rothschild-backed annexation of that land in 1948.
They would’ve laughed at the idea of calling it “Israel.”
They knew that Christ’s followers are Israel — not a secular state filled with unbelieving Eastern Europeans claiming to be ethnic Biblical Israelites while rejecting the Messiah.

Your rebuttal of — “Israel didn’t exist before 1948” — means the point flew over your head at 36,000 feet.
The term “Israel” was never about borders and barbed wire.
It was about covenant and Christ.
And if you don’t see that, you’re not reading scripture —
you’re reading a Cold War pamphlet with Bible verses taped to it.

You’re not comparing notes. You’re just picking the ones that let you worship a nation that denies the Messiah — and pretending it's still "chosen".

You don’t need a new Bible.
You need a new lens — one that wasn’t taped into the margins by Scofield, Darby, or the State Department.

I should have listened to Mark Twain.

 

[Wick Stick]

So here we have a comment from the typical atheist on a university campus these days:

"LOL. Dinosaurs existed, we have SCIENTIFIC (google that word) proof. Earth wasn't created in 6 days NOR as short a time ago as the MAN MADE and HUMAN INVENTED BIBLE wants you to believe! 6000 year old Earth LOL!!!!. Just accept, the Bible was written to stop people killing themselves back before they could handle the reality of life. I'm afraid you lack critical thinking skills if you genuinely think the Bible and organised religion is 'real.'"

The tragedy is, the Bible wasn’t written to “stop people killing themselves” out of ignorance.
It wasn’t “man-made” either — but what was man-made, is the Scofield Bible distortion that people like this atheist are actually reacting to.

In other words:
The Bible they hate isn’t even the real Bible.
It’s a 19th–20th century American cartoon version of it — born from ignorance, sold as Gospel truth, and shoved down the throats of generations who never learned Hebrew, never studied early Church writings, and never questioned the footnotes masquerading as doctrine.

Here’s what really happened:
When the Book of Genesis uses the Hebrew word “yom” (יוֹם) to describe the creation periods, it does not rigidly mean a 24-hour day.
“Yom” can mean a day — but also a season, epoch, or age — depending entirely on the context.

Even Augustine, one of Christianity’s greatest thinkers (writing 1,400 years before Darwin), warned that Genesis was never meant to be read like a literal 6-day chronological account — as if it were a modern historical timeline. He cautioned believers not to turn sacred scripture into a scientific embarrassment — and yet that’s exactly what Scofield’s camp did.

When Scofield and the early fundamentalists slammed “yom” into the rigid box of 6 × 24-hour periods around 120 years ago, they created a fragile theology — one that collapsed the moment it was tested.

They armed the atheists with the weapons to mock Christianity — and then left the battlefield.
Now we have generations of Christians, for over a century, who’ve been totally brainwashed by this Scofield blasphemy — unable to even defend a ridiculous notion that the Bible never asked them to defend in the first place.

And so, when a modern atheist fires shots like the comment above, here’s what’s really happening:
They’re not aiming at the Word of God.
They’re not challenging ancient truth.

They’re taking aim at:
A 20th-century American Sunday School pamphlet,
Mistranslations and theological gimmicks pushed by profit-driven or willfully ignorant men,
A false idol made of paper and ink — not the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

And tragically, most modern Christians can’t tell the difference.
They were raised on Scofield milk and blasphemy — instead of Hebrew meat and truth.
They were never handed the sword — only the sheath.
They were never taught how to wrestle with scripture — only how to parrot dogma.
They were never even given the real thing.

The Bible doesn’t teach 6 literal 24-hour creation days.
Scofield did.
In Biblical Hebrew, the word "yom" (יוֹם) can even mean an epoch or eon — a long, indefinite period of time, especially in poetic or prophetic contexts.

The Bible doesn’t say the Earth is 6,000 years old.
It was Scofield’s system that forced that lie onto the text.

The Bible doesn’t crumble under scientific observation —
Only Scofield’s house of cards does.
Which, tragically, 70% of Western Christians now believe and blindly defend —
man-made, blasphemous notions planted in their minds by a drunk, convicted criminal who hijacked the pulpit with a pen.

They’re not defending the Word of God.
They’re defending Scofield’s heresy — and they don’t even know it.

I'm no fan of Scofield, but...

The problems with the chronology in Genesis go back a lot further. The 17th century Bishop James Ussher is generally credited with creating the chronology you're criticizing. The numbers on which the Bishop based his chronology have issues that go back MUCH FURTHER.

The Hebrew and Greek texts of Genesis have different ages at which the pre-flood patriarchs sired their children. Specifically, it looks like the Hebrew text has subtracted 100 years from each.

The Greek text isn't perfect either - when you "do the math" it results in some patriarchs living through the flood.

And of course, there's the common-sense problem - people don't live that long.

Finally, there's a problem of literature. The genre of chronological history wasn't created til the 7th century BC. But Genesis is said to be written by Moses in the 13th century BC (or earlier). For this reason (and others), most scholars of the Bible think that Genesis was redacted from earlier material between 300-700 BC. The original material probably did not present a chronology.

 

[PS95]

STOP…Do not Gaslight and attempt to MAKE “you or any human being”…My God!!

Yep. You are right to say that. I should not have gotten that upset. my apologies.

“Unity”…”OF”…whom United?
Of “THIS” WHOLE WORLD?
…Has Jesus’ “prayer been Answered”?
…No.

“Unity”…”OF”…whom United?
Of “THOSE” ( we )IN CHRIST?
…Has Jesus’ “prayer been Answered”?
…Yes.

“Believers”… routinely “disagree”.
“Believers”…ARE different; ages, maturity.
“Believers”…ARE different; stages / distances on their “personal walk” on the Narrow path.
“Believers”…ARE different; doubt, wonder, believe, deny, doubt, stumble, believe, day to day.

“CONVERTED BELIEVERS”..NEVER…trip, stumble, doubt, fall, deny, fail.

“CONVERTED “IN CHRIST” BELIEVERS” “ARE United”, “ARE the YES Answer to Jesus’ UNITY Prayer.”

Glory to God,
Taken

Ok. That's an interpretation. I am just asking you to have a look at Matthew 10 in it's context. At least start at Matt 10:16-28
Then you will have a different view of what Jesus meant!

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

I should have listened to Mark Twain.

You should’ve listened to Jesus.

Because He’s the one who said:

“The kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits.” (Matthew 21:43)

Not Scofield.
Not your stack of study Bibles.
And definitely not a Rothschild/U.N. charter.

Jesus didn’t die to bless a nation that rejected Him.
He didn’t go to the cross to redeem two separate peoples.
He died to create one Body — one family — bound by faith, not by flesh.
In Christ, there is no Jew or Gentile — only those who belong to Him…
and those who don’t.

And as Paul said — no exceptions.
(Galatians 3:28, Romans 9–11, Ephesians 2:14–16)

The only “chosen people” now are those in Christ —
Not those waving a passport.
Not those flying a flag.
Not those sitting in a Knesset seat denying His resurrection and spitting on the cross.

You don’t need a study note.
You need repentance.

And invoking Mark Twain? Hilarious.
You’re out of arguments and hiding behind sarcasm.

You know who would’ve loved the Scofield Bible?

P.T. Barnum.

It’s the greatest religious con ever pulled —
A theological sideshow where the footnotes became the Gospel,
and suckers lined up to pay for their own deception.

“There’s a sucker born every minute.” — Barnum.

And Scofield proved it.
He sold Christians a Zionist rewiring of scripture, taped into the margins —
and they swallowed it like revelation.

They’re not waiting for Christ’s return…
They’re waiting for a political drama — where Jesus shows up to validate unbelief.

Scofield didn’t write a study Bible.
He launched a death cult.
And most of the Church is still in the audience —
staring at the sky,
cheering for collapse,
and calling it faith.

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

I'm no fan of Scofield, but...

The problems with the chronology in Genesis go back a lot further. The 17th century Bishop James Ussher is generally credited with creating the chronology you're criticizing. The numbers on which the Bishop based his chronology have issues that go back MUCH FURTHER.

The Hebrew and Greek texts of Genesis have different ages at which the pre-flood patriarchs sired their children. Specifically, it looks like the Hebrew text has subtracted 100 years from each.

The Greek text isn't perfect either - when you "do the math" it results in some patriarchs living through the flood.

And of course, there's the common-sense problem - people don't live that long.

Finally, there's a problem of literature. The genre of chronological history wasn't created til the 7th century BC. But Genesis is said to be written by Moses in the 13th century BC (or earlier). For this reason (and others), most scholars of the Bible think that Genesis was redacted from earlier material between 300-700 BC. The original material probably did not present a chronology.

“I’m no fan of Scofield, but…”
That’s the evangelical version of “I don’t support war, but let’s bomb them anyway.”
What follows proves Scofield is exactly the problem.

You’re talking about Ussher’s 17th-century dating and minor inconsistencies between the Masoretic, Septuagint, and Samaritan genealogies — and you’re not wrong. But here’s the part you’re missing:

No early Christian in history built doctrine on those genealogies.
The Church Fathers didn’t die on the “6,000-year-old Earth” hill — Scofield’s followers did.

You’re actually supporting my point:
The idea that Genesis was a modern-style chronology or scientific account is a completely anachronistic reading of the text. The early Church knew that. Augustine knew that. Even the Jewish sages knew that.
It wasn’t until Scofield (and yes, Ussher's timeline got dragged in with him) that this rigid, literalist framework was used to build an entire theology of fake “fundamentals” that the Bible itself never teaches.

You said:
“Genesis was redacted between 300–700 BC.”

Exactly. You’re admitting it was compiled in its current form during a time of prophetic and theological development — not as a scientific textbook, but as a sacred story of origins with symbolic depth, spiritual hierarchy, and cosmic meaning.
That’s the opposite of how Scofield’s system taught Christians to read it.

You even said:
“The original material probably did not present a chronology.”

Exactly again.

So let’s be honest:
The atheist mockery about the 6,000-year-old Earth, 24-hour creation days, and dinosaur denialism?
They’re not mocking Genesis.
They’re mocking Scofield’s weaponized illiteracy.

This is the tragedy:
Instead of being taught the nuance of Hebrew poetry, the richness of ancient cosmology, or the spiritual symbolism embedded in Genesis… millions of Christians were given Scofield’s dumbed-down, weaponized timeline and told: “Believe this or you hate the Bible.”

And when it collapsed?
People didn’t just question Scofield — they threw out Jesus with him.

So no — you don’t need to defend Ussher’s math or the Masoretic birthdates.
You need to burn down the Scofield-shaped strawman that atheists (and most American churches) are still reacting to.

If anything, your rebuttal just showed how deep this deception runs.
We’ve all been infected by Scofield’s virus — whether we realize it or not.
But now we know.
And now we fight.

 

[shepherdsword]

You should’ve listened to Jesus.

Because He’s the one who said:

“The kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits.” (Matthew 21:43)

You are very ignorant. The nation will go through a series of successful judgements that will eradicate all non believing jews and restore faith to the elect jews. Two thirds of Israel will be destroyed by judgement.(Zech 13:8) The remaining elect will cry "blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord" (Matt 23:39) and so all Israel shall be saved (Rom11:26)

Not Scofield.
Not your stack of study Bibles.
And definitely not a Rothschild/U.N. charter.

You need to read any bible because your errant swill is full of deception

Jesus didn’t die to bless a nation that rejected Him.
He didn’t go to the cross to redeem two separate peoples.
He died to create one Body — one family — bound by faith, not by flesh.
In Christ, there is no Jew or Gentile — only those who belong to Him…
and those who don’t.

And as Paul said — no exceptions.
(Galatians 3:28, Romans 9–11, Ephesians 2:14–16)

The only “chosen people” now are those in Christ —
Not those waving a passport.
Not those flying a flag.
Not those sitting in a Knesset seat denying His resurrection and spitting on the cross.

You don’t need a study note.
You need repentance.

Once again: The nation will go through a series of successful judgements that will eradicate all non believing jews and restore faith to the elect jews.Two thirds of Israel will be destroyed by judgement.(Zech 13:8) The remaining elect will cry "blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord" (Matt 23:39) and so all Israel shall be saved (Rom11:26)

And invoking Mark Twain? Hilarious.
You’re out of arguments and hiding behind sarcasm.

I was referring to Twain's warning about arguing with idiots.

You know who would’ve loved the Scofield Bible?

P.T. Barnum.

I happy for him, I never cared for it much

It’s the greatest religious con ever pulled —
A theological sideshow where the footnotes became the Gospel,
and suckers lined up to pay for their own deception.

“There’s a sucker born every minute.” — Barnum.

As a anti-semantic hater of Israel who has opinions based on jewish mysticism you should know

And Scofield proved it.
He sold Christians a Zionist rewiring of scripture, taped into the margins —
and they swallowed it like revelation.

They’re not waiting for Christ’s return…
They’re waiting for a political drama — where Jesus shows up to validate unbelief.

They are waiting for a messiah and will be deceived by antichrist. This is part of their cleansing and chastisement. Only the believing elect will remain

Scofield didn’t write a study Bible.
He launched a death cult.
And most of the Church is still in the audience —
staring at the sky,
cheering for collapse,
and calling it faith.

The vile deception you vomit can only lead people astray. You are the one who needs to repent...of your hellish and satanic position

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

You are very ignorant. The nation will go through a series of successful judgements that will eradicate all non believing jews and restore faith to the elect jews. Two thirds of Israel will be destroyed by judgement.(Zech 13:8) The remaining elect will cry "blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord" (Matt 23:39) and so all Israel shall be saved (Rom11:26)

You need to read any bible because your errant swill is full of deception

Once again: The nation will go through a series of successful judgements that will eradicate all non believing jews and restore faith to the elect jews.Two thirds of Israel will be destroyed by judgement.(Zech 13:8) The remaining elect will cry "blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord" (Matt 23:39) and so all Israel shall be saved (Rom11:26)

I was referring to Twain's warning about arguing with idiots.

I happy for him, I never cared for it much

As a anti-semantic hater of Israel who has opinions based on jewish mysticism you should know

They are waiting for a messiah and will be deceived by antichrist. This is part of their cleansing and chastisement. Only the believing elect will remain

The vile deception you vomit can only lead people astray. You are the one who needs to repent...of your hellish and satanic position

You just proved everything I said.

You don’t realize it, but you just preached Scofield’s theology down to the punctuation — complete with cherry-picked prophecies, misapplied timelines, and a two-covenant gospel Jesus never taught.

Lets be clear:
1. Matthew 21:43 doesn’t say “after judgment the land will be restored.”

It says:
“The kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a people producing its fruit.”
That’s not temporary relocation.
That’s transfer of covenant authority — from national Israel to the Body of Christ.

Jesus didn’t say, “You’ll get it back after 2/3 of you die.”
He said the kingdom would be given to others.
Namely, to those in Christ. Period.

2. “All Israel shall be saved” (Romans 11:26) — but not how you think.
You pretend that means national Israel will be saved as a nation.
But Paul already defined Israel:

“Not all who are descended from Israel are Israel.” (Romans 9:6)
“If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed.” (Galatians 3:29)
“There is no Jew or Gentile… you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28)

There is one olive tree, not two.
There is one covenant, not two.
There is one Bride, not two.

You’re not defending prophecy.
You’re defending a false gospel that says people can reject Christ and still be “chosen.”

3. You keep preaching judgment and war like it’s a prerequisite for revival.
You literally said 2/3 of Israel must be wiped out before “the elect” will believe.

Jesus said:

“Repent, for the kingdom of God is at hand.”
Not: “Cheer for war so the remnant will repent after destruction.”

Your “good news” sounds like a nuclear countdown.

4. Let’s talk about what Christians actually believed before Scofield.

You said: “Well, Israel didn’t exist before 1948.”
Exactly.
Because biblically, “Israel” was never a land charter.
It was a people of covenant — those united to God through faith.

The apostles didn’t glorify a patch of land.
They glorified the Body of Christ.

And Christians born before 1920?
They would’ve laughed at the idea that Rothschild-funded secularists could rename a British colonial zone “Israel” and that the Church should treat it as holy.
They didn’t worship flags.
They followed Christ.

5. What you preach isn’t from Jesus Christ.

It’s not historic premillennialism.
It’s not apostolic doctrine.
It’s not the Gospel.

What you’re preaching — whether you admit it or not — is a Zionist end-times death cult built by Scofield and Darby, weaponized by televangelists, and now recycled by Christians too scared to let go of prophecy charts and political idols.

Christ didn’t die so unbelievers could inherit promises apart from Him.
He died to make one new man — Jew and Gentile reconciled in His Body. (Ephesians 2:14–16)

So no — I don’t hate Israel.
I just love Jesus more than a flag.

And if that makes you mad, it’s not me you’re fighting —
It’s the Gospel.

You're like a walking case study in Scofield brainwashing:
Twisting Paul’s words to mean the opposite of what Paul preached
Elevating unbelief into a future blessing
Cheering on judgment and war like it's a gospel strategy
Worshiping land and lineage instead of the cross
Calling the Body of Christ a "parenthesis" while treating a secular, Christ-rejecting nation as God’s favorite child

 

[shepherdsword]

You just proved everything I said.

You don’t realize it, but you just preached Scofield’s theology down to the punctuation — complete with cherry-picked prophecies, misapplied timelines, and a two-covenant gospel Jesus never taught.

Lets be clear:
1. Matthew 21:43 doesn’t say “after judgment the land will be restored.”

It says:
“The kingdom of God will be taken from you and given to a people producing its fruit.”
That’s not temporary relocation.
That’s transfer of covenant authority — from national Israel to the Body of Christ.

Jesus didn’t say, “You’ll get it back after 2/3 of you die.”
He said the kingdom would be given to others.
Namely, to those in Christ. Period.

2. “All Israel shall be saved” (Romans 11:26) — but not how you think.
You pretend that means national Israel will be saved as a nation.
But Paul already defined Israel:

“Not all who are descended from Israel are Israel.” (Romans 9:6)
“If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed.” (Galatians 3:29)
“There is no Jew or Gentile… you are all one in Christ Jesus.” (Galatians 3:28)

There is one olive tree, not two.
There is one covenant, not two.
There is one Bride, not two.

You’re not defending prophecy.
You’re defending a false gospel that says people can reject Christ and still be “chosen.”

3. You keep preaching judgment and war like it’s a prerequisite for revival.
You literally said 2/3 of Israel must be wiped out before “the elect” will believe.

I didn't say that...Zechariah the prophet did. Learn the bible:

Zec 13:8-9
And it shall come to pass, that in all the land, saith the Lord, two parts therein shall be cut off and die; but the third shall be left therein.And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried: they shall call on my name, and I will hear them: I will say, It is my people: and they shall say, The Lord is my God.

Jesus said:

“Repent, for the kingdom of God is at hand.”
Not: “Cheer for war so the remnant will repent after destruction.”

He also said:

Mt 10:34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.

Your “good news” sounds like a nuclear countdown.

4. Let’s talk about what Christians actually believed before Scofield.

You said: “Well, Israel didn’t exist before 1948.”
Exactly.
Because biblically, “Israel” was never a land charter.
It was a people of covenant — those united to God through faith.

Man...you ignorance of the scripture is epic:

Ge 15:18 In the same day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying, Unto thy seed have I given this land, from the river of Egypt unto the great river, the river Euphrates:

The apostles didn’t glorify a patch of land.
They glorified the Body of Christ.

And Christians born before 1920?
They would’ve laughed at the idea that Rothschild-funded secularists could rename a British colonial zone “Israel” and that the Church should treat it as holy.

It's fact based on scripture. It wasn't the Rothschild that brought Israel back into the land. It was this:

Am 9:14-15 And I will bring again the captivity of my people of Israel, and they shall build the waste cities, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and drink the wine thereof; they shall also make gardens, and eat the fruit of them. And I will plant them upon their land, and they shall no more be pulled up out of their land which I have given them, saith the Lord thy God.

Christ didn’t die so unbelievers could inherit promises apart from Him.
He died to make one new man — Jew and Gentile reconciled in His Body. (Ephesians 2:14–16)

Of course...and we are grafted INTO Israel.

Ro 11:17-18 And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou, being a wild olive tree, wert graffed in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree; Boast not against the branches. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee.

So no — I don’t hate Israel.
I just love Jesus more than a flag.

And if that makes you mad, it’s not me you’re fighting —
It’s the Gospel.

You don]t understand the gospel of the kingdom. If you did you would understand what this meant:

Ac 1:6-7 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.

Notice how Jesus didn't say that the kingdom would never be restored to Israel? No, this something YOU say...not Jesus. if that makes you mad take it up with him. The current state of Israel is fulfilling this promise. I challenge you to show where else it has been fulfilled if not here.

Am 9:14-15 And I will bring again the captivity of my people of Israel, and they shall build the waste cities, and inhabit them; and they shall plant vineyards, and drink the wine thereof; they shall also make gardens, and eat the fruit of them. And I will plant them upon their land, and they shall no more be pulled up out of their land which I have given them, saith the Lord thy God.

You're like a walking case study in Scofield brainwashing:
Twisting Paul’s words to mean the opposite of what Paul preached

And you are a walking case study in being wise in your own conceit but you fail to understand the mystery of the two kingdoms.

Ro 11:25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.

Paul soke of their restoration:

Ro 11:15 For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?

These aren't "cherrypicked verses out of context. They deal with the heart of the matter. However , you are so wise in your own eyes that you reject the truth.

Elevating unbelief into a future blessing

This is either a lie or you ignored my previous posts entirety. I showed from the scripture how two thirds of Israel will be destroyed and the remaining third will be believers in Jesus

Cheering on judgment and war like it's a gospel strategy

It is a strategy. Read Rev 19 at the rejoicing over the destruction of the harlot.

Worshiping land and lineage instead of the cross

You need to google what worship means. It isn't worship to present the prophecies that detail the future of Israel as a nation. It's true, I don't worship the cross, I simply carry mine in worship to the Father, Son and Holy Spirit.

Calling the Body of Christ a "parenthesis" while treating a secular, Christ-rejecting nation as God’s favorite child

When did I ever say the body was a parenthesis? I think you argue with so many people you get them mixed up. What "I" said is that the gentiles have been grafted into Israel as Paul said. You make it sound as if Israel is grafted into the gentile church....the opposite of what Paul said. Your entire position, a mixture of amillennial metaphoric convolution and mystical kabbalic nonsense has shown to be false. REPENT!

 

[Taken]

Yep. You are right to say that. I should not have gotten that upset. my apologies.

Ok, thank you.

Ok. That's an interpretation. I am just asking you to have a look at Matthew 10 in it's context. At least start at Matt 10:16-28
Then you will have a different view of what Jesus meant!

Conclude a different view …How so?

*Jesus chose a Few….12
*Jesus gave them, His Word and “Direction”….
* 12 …”Chose” to follow Jesus’ Directions.
* 11 …”accomplished” Jesus’ “Directions”.
* 11 …reaped the reward of “Salvation”.
(Conversion)
* 1 ….HAD the Truth, HAD the Direction…and “CHOSE” …
to ignore Jesus’ Directions”…

Matt 10:
[13] And if the house be worthy, let your peace come upon it: but if it be not worthy, let your peace return to you.

[14] And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.

[16] Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves: be ye therefore wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.

Judas was the (one) “appointed” of the 12, as Treasurer.
* Inanutshell,
I see the Primary Appointment, for the 12, was ABOUT the Word of God…
And once ONE (Judas’) was given an appointment over the MONEY…Judas’ paradigm “of his primary appointment regarding the Word of God (Jesus)”…became Secondary… made him “unwise”; made him unwilling “to walk away”…
but RATHER …
Stay, Listen, Consider, Agree, to increase MONEY for the TRADE OFF, of REJECTING Jesus’ Direction…and Accepting “their Directions”.

And Further…Realizing his “error”… Use Wisdom to correct his “error”? Nope.
Killed himself…
Yet HAD opportunity to Admit his Error and ASK Jesus’ Forgiveness. But didn’t CHOOSE that “option”.

Does this scenario “change” my understanding of the difference Between “Believer and Converted Believer”? No.

Glory to God,
Taken