Scofield Bible Damage and Atheist Arguments

[The Gospel of Christ]

Your position is indefensible. I challenge you to actually deal with the scriptures I presented.

Your “scriptures” aren’t the problem. Your interpretation is.

You’re not quoting prophecy through the lens of Christ.
You’re quoting prophecy through Scofield, Darby, and Zionist propaganda.

I’m not ignoring scripture — I’m refusing to twist it into a timeline that contradicts the very Gospel it was meant to reveal.

Let’s be clear:

You cite Amos 9:15 as fulfilled in 1948.
But the New Testament says “All the promises of God are YES in Christ” (2 Corinthians 1:20).
So if you’re placing the “yes” in the U.N. instead of in the cross, you’re not quoting Amos faithfully — you’re just inserting your own eschatology into it.

You cite Zechariah 13 to justify a genocide.
Jesus quotes Zechariah 13:7 as fulfilled in His own crucifixion (Matthew 26:31).
That means the refining fire of the remnant already began — in Him, not in some future war.

You cite Acts 1:6–7 to say the kingdom is coming later.
But Jesus says, “It is not for you to know the times,” and then IMMEDIATELY launches the Great Commission.
That’s not a delay — it’s a redefinition. The Kingdom is now, through the Gospel, not after some Antichrist shows up with tanks.

You cite Romans 11 — but ignore that Paul already defined Israel in Romans 9:6, and tied the inheritance directly to faith in Christ in Romans 11:23.

You’re not defending the Word.
You’re defending a theology built on two covenants, two peoples, and a future kingdom Jesus already inaugurated.

“The Kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed... the Kingdom is within you.” (Luke 17:20–21)
“He has made both one, and broken down the dividing wall.” (Ephesians 2:14)

So if I reject Scofield’s two-track fantasy in favor of Paul’s one-new-man Gospel, I’m not rejecting scripture —
I’m rejecting your misuse of it.

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

My eschatological view is based on scripture alone..I've read and listened to many commentaries; but I always test them with scripture. Why don't you have a quick read? I know you won't agree, but it is right there in scripture. You see the thing you do is if the scripture contradicts your view, then you simply don't take it literally and turn it into something symbolic. But here, take a few minutes ...

Thread 'The Millennial Kingdom' The Millennial Kingdom

The scriptures are in the above thread.

In 1 Cor. 15:25-28, Paul points to Jesus reign on earth, literally putting His enemies under His feet! He will descend from Heaven in the clouds "in the same manner that He ascended". His feet physically will stand on the Mt. Of Olives during the Great Tribulation period. The mountiain will divide in two ... it's all therein scripture - not quotes from Scofield ( whom I am not familiar with).
Then 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. 25 For He must reign till He has put all enemies under His feet. 26 The last enemy that will be destroyed is death. 27 For “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. 28 Now 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.

On that day His feet will stand on the Mount of Olives, east of Jerusalem, and the Mount of Olives will be split in two from east to west, forming a great valley, with half the mountain moving to the north and half to the south". Zech. 14:4

Christ Is Reigning Now — Not Someday

1 Corinthians 15:25–28
“He must reign until He puts all enemies under His feet…”

Yes — and Paul says He’s reigning now.

Not someday. Not after a temple. Now.

“He must reign…”
That’s present tense — not future speculation.

Jesus rose, ascended, and sat down at the right hand of the Father (Hebrews 1:3).
He’s reigning right now — and He’s doing it through His Body, the Church (Ephesians 1:22–23).

You’re turning a victory passage into a delay passage — as if Christ is still waiting around to get started.

Zechariah 14:4 and the Mount of Olives

You say: “His feet will physically touch the Mount of Olives, and it will split.”

Cool story. But read the chapter:
It’s apocalyptic prophetic language.
It uses cosmic war imagery to describe the destruction of Jerusalem and the reign of the Lord over all the earth (Zechariah 14:9).

If you want to be consistent, then you also believe:

The Lord will strike people who don’t attend the Feast of Tabernacles every year (Zechariah 14:16–19)
Animal sacrifices will be reinstituted (Zechariah 14:20–21)

You don’t get to take verse 4 “literally” and then spiritualize the rest.

Jesus already stood on the Mount of Olives — and wept over Jerusalem (Luke 19:41).
He was arrested there. He ascended nearby.
And He fulfilled the prophecies in Himself.

Jesus Didn’t Ascend Just to Wait Around 2,000 years.

“This same Jesus, who was taken up from you… will come in the same way.” (Acts 1:11)

Yes — and He will return.
But again, you assume that means to fulfill Zechariah 14 like a military general rather than to consummate the Kingdom He already started.

Jesus reigns from heaven now.
Paul affirms it. Peter affirms it. Hebrews affirms it.

The mountain-splitting you’re waiting for is symbolic of the judgment that’s already begun — in Christ (1 Peter 4:17), and through the Gospel going out to all nations.

The Real Issue: You Don’t Know Who Israel Is

You keep trying to cram the entire biblical narrative into the modern borders of the State of Israel —
as if salvation history depends on political maps.

But Paul already told you:

“Not all who are descended from Israel are Israel.” (Romans 9:6)
“He is not a Jew who is one outwardly… but inwardly.” (Romans 2:28–29)
“If you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed.” (Galatians 3:29)

You say “literal” means physical.
But Paul says “literal” means fulfilled — in Christ.

Final Thought
You said I “haven’t figured out what my purpose is.”
My purpose is to preach Christ crucified —Not to cheer for war, build timelines, and twist prophecy into a covenant with unbelief.

You worship a future kingdom Jesus already launched.
You expect a geopolitical reset, when God already gave us a new creation.

I’m not “standing in the middle.”

I’m standing in Christ —
And He is the only mountain that will never be moved.

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

I’ve never studied Scofield, so can’t comment on his perspective or intent.

Scripture itself Reveals…
God CREATED…His …
Habitats, Estates, Worlds, Kingdoms… (whatever Term one chooses)…BEFORE God Created “Beings” to occupy such Habitats.

The Timeline, Age…of Gods Creation of “Habitats”…Are NOT “expressly” revealed.
(A HINT of sorts IS Revealed, regarding “Time”…in that which for MAN “TIME”, can seem Very Long or Very short…
But for the Eternal God, “TIME” is but a BLIP.)

Man routinely HAS multiple “words” that have “synonymous” (similar meanings) and ARE routinely “inappropriately” used to change “the context”… when a “teaching or conversation or discussion” is in progress.

6,000 year old EARTH?
Who knows?
Who was there?
Angels… their habitat, those beings, Scripturally ARE the “Only” revealed “Witnesses”, regarding “a Specific TIME-Line the Earth was…MADE.

Here, I SEE, an EARLY revealed Difference Between…. Gods CREATION and Gods MAKING (something Unique) Regarding A Specific CREATION.

We know NOT “WHEN” God Created THIS “habitat / World”…
Yet we KNOW…WHO was “Witness” to Gods “MAKING”… of THIS World (habitat being prepared For Specific inhabitants.)

We Know “according to Gods Established TIME segments” FOR “This World Inhabitants”…
An Approximate Date, Age, The First “Inhabitants” of THIS World, were “Created AND Made”…
As well…The express Difference and Meaning…Between God Creating AND God Making”.

6,000 year OLD World/ Earth …?
God Created “In A Beginning”…which beginning is NOT Defined “IN” Gods eternal or Mans limited / specific Time-Line”.

Plausible.
How so?
The Waters…And somewhere in the Waters was Dirt.
Gods “MAKING”… His “Separating” the Waters…Making the Dirt …Have a Form and Dry… God THEN Named, this Made, Formed Dirt….Earth… AND a Description… Being…
Dry Dirt and called Land.

Before Gods Making…Did Unformed WET Dirt Exist? Probably So.
Was that Earth (Dry Land?) No.

Was Dry Land MADE just Pryer to Mans Creation and Making…Likely.

Was First ManKinds Creation and Making approx 6, thousands years Ago..?
I would say Yes.

Does Scripture Reveal The Habitat First, and the Man Created OUT of his intended habitat? Yes.

Can any individual parallel, a Time-Line of Gods Created Habitat with the Creatures creation? Sure.
Does one opinion or opposing opinion MAKE either individual … Wicked or Evil ? No.

You state your opinions.
Apparently Scofield stated his opinions…
So what?

I appreciate your attempt to reflect deeply on Genesis, time, and the language of creation — that’s more than many ever do. But your entire reply unintentionally proves my point:
You’ve never studied Scofield… but you’re still arguing from inside his framework.

That’s the tragedy. Most people who parrot the 6,000-year earth narrative, or insist on hyper-literal “days,” or divorce “creation” from “making” in odd theological wordplay — don’t realize they’re using categories invented by Scofield’s system.

He turned Genesis into a scientific schematic instead of a theological revelation.
He made salvation hinge on believing in a young earth timeline, instead of trusting the Creator revealed in Christ.

And so millions were told:
“Genesis is literal science. If you question it, you’re rejecting the Bible.”

Then when people saw fossils, stars, or physics and realized something was off…
They didn’t just reject Scofield — they walked away from Jesus.

So yes, I’m concerned.
Not because I’m defending “my opinion.”
But because bad theology has consequences. Eternal ones.

Scofield isn’t just “another opinion.”
His commentary hijacked the Word of God, rewrote prophecy into political manifestos, and planted landmines in Genesis that exploded people’s faith 100 years later.

So no — this isn’t just semantics.
It’s a warning flare.
Scofield is responsible for the lie.
We’re responsible for not letting it keep spreading.

And keep this in mind:
This clown wasn’t a biblical scholar.
He wasn’t a theologian.
He was a convicted criminal and a drunk who abandoned his wife and children.
That’s the guy who rewired the minds of 100 million Christians with a fake 6,000-year timeline and a two-track gospel Jesus never preached.

It’s not “just another view.”
It’s a theological virus.
And it’s time we stop letting it infect the Church.

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

Zechariah 14:4 and the Mount of Olives

You say: “His feet will physically touch the Mount of Olives, and it will split.”

Cool story. But read the chapter:
It’s apocalyptic prophetic language.

Apocalypse? Absolutely!
Prophetic? Yes, it will happen in the future.
The phrase apocalyptic language is the peterist's justification to render it mostly symbolic. No, it's just visions describing literal details that will come to be.
Examine all the Messianic scriptures in the OT. Jesus literally fulfilled them. They weren't symbolically fulfilled. Some symbolism in the OT was used to symbolize Christ, we call shadows of Christ. But there are still hundreds of prophecies yet to be fulfilled and there is no reason we should not take them to be literally fulfilled.

My purpose is to preach Christ crucified

That's funny, most of your arguments in this entire thread have nothing to do with His crucifixion. If that was your purpose, we would all be in agreement with you. It's funny, you look in the mirror and see a different image of yourself.

 

[Taken]

I appreciate your attempt to reflect deeply on Genesis, time, and the language of creation — that’s more than many ever do. But your entire reply unintentionally proves my point:
You’ve never studied Scofield… but you’re still arguing from inside his framework.

That’s the tragedy. Most people who parrot the 6,000-year earth narrative, or insist on hyper-literal “days,” or divorce “creation” from “making” in odd theological wordplay — don’t realize they’re using categories invented by Scofield’s system.

He turned Genesis into a scientific schematic instead of a theological revelation.
He made salvation hinge on believing in a young earth timeline, instead of trusting the Creator revealed in Christ.

And so millions were told:
“Genesis is literal science. If you question it, you’re rejecting the Bible.”

Then when people saw fossils, stars, or physics and realized something was off…
They didn’t just reject Scofield — they walked away from Jesus.

So yes, I’m concerned.
Not because I’m defending “my opinion.”
But because bad theology has consequences. Eternal ones.

Scofield isn’t just “another opinion.”
His commentary hijacked the Word of God, rewrote prophecy into political manifestos, and planted landmines in Genesis that exploded people’s faith 100 years later.

So no — this isn’t just semantics.
It’s a warning flare.
Scofield is responsible for the lie.
We’re responsible for not letting it keep spreading.

And keep this in mind:
This clown wasn’t a biblical scholar.
He wasn’t a theologian.
He was a convicted criminal and a drunk who abandoned his wife and children.
That’s the guy who rewired the minds of 100 million Christians with a fake 6,000-year timeline and a two-track gospel Jesus never preached.

It’s not “just another view.”
It’s a theological virus.
And it’s time we stop letting it infect the Church.

Again, I don’t know Scofield’s teaching…nor do I know you.
Anyone is free to speak their opinions. As anyone is free to agree or disagree, according to the Limit of their own Knowledge and understanding.

You have a beef with Scofield…and somewhat of a dilemma, since he is Dead, and your attempt to debate the Source moot.

Scofield had volumes of companion books, he is accredited to have authored and edited. He had a STUDY (annotated) Bible accredited to him…which from the get go informs the reader…the authors Personal Opinion and Understanding is Laced into “THAT” Book.

Other “authors” or”Panels of men” have done the Same Thing.
Calling it an annotated Bible, Companion Books, whatever…

The POINT Being…”the Attempt” is Absolutely to Influence the reader, to Consider, Believe, Rely on, Trust, the Authors, “Spiritual Understanding”.

And considering…the CENTURIES, even to this day, of Illiterate, Lazy, Impatient, Too Busy, individuals… “Being Told what to Believe” (without the ability or desire to actually Verify…) … IS promoted, acceptable, good enough, Across the Mind-Set of the Majority of the whole World.

You choosing to spend your time Arguing against a dead persons Works, with living persons who may or may not have some common ground with Scofield's works…is your prerogative…which personally, Carry’s very little interest to me.

Scripture IS “Knowledge”, one can read, learn, study or not.

Scripture IS Expressly Clear…The “Understanding” of Scriptural Knowledge “IS” called; “Spiritual Understanding”…
Spiritual Understanding “IS” Understanding According to God, His Spirit…
And ONLY given A MAN, by, from, through, of…
The Lord God Himself.

That ^ is the Source I rely on and Trust.

My perspective.

God bless you.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[shepherdsword]

Your “scriptures” aren’t the problem. Your interpretation is.

Only because you lack understanding

You’re not quoting prophecy through the lens of Christ.
You’re quoting prophecy through Scofield, Darby, and Zionist propaganda.

I’m not ignoring scripture — I’m refusing to twist it into a timeline that contradicts the very Gospel it was meant to reveal.

Let’s be clear:

You cite Amos 9:15 as fulfilled in 1948.
But the New Testament says “All the promises of God are YES in Christ” (2 Corinthians 1:20).
So if you’re placing the “yes” in the U.N. instead of in the cross, you’re not quoting Amos faithfully — you’re just inserting your own eschatology into it.

You are jerking 2 Cor 1:20 out of context and totally misappropriating it. I am quoting Amos exactly how it was meant to be. In your pseudo theological insanity you fail to comprehend it.

You cite Zechariah 13 to justify a genocide.
Jesus quotes Zechariah 13:7 as fulfilled in His own crucifixion (Matthew 26:31).
That means the refining fire of the remnant already began — in Him, not in some future war.

I am not justifying anything. I am simply quoting it. God is the one who said he will cut them off. This is like saying I am promoting genocide because I quoted Rev 6:8

You cite Acts 1:6–7 to say the kingdom is coming later.
But Jesus says, “It is not for you to know the times,” and then IMMEDIATELY launches the Great Commission.
That’s not a delay — it’s a redefinition. The Kingdom is now, through the Gospel, not after some Antichrist shows up with tanks.

The apostles were still expecting a physical kingdom even though they new the kingdom was within them. This was because they understood the mystery of the two kingdoms.

You cite Romans 11 — but ignore that Paul already defined Israel in Romans 9:6, and tied the inheritance directly to faith in Christ in Romans 11:23.

Yes....faith in Christ ingrafts you into Israel. The fact it is natural Israel is proven by the fact he rebuking foolish and conceited people with no knowledge, who thought Israel was cut off forever,

You’re not defending the Word.
You’re defending a theology built on two covenants, two peoples, and a future kingdom Jesus already inaugurated.

“The Kingdom of God is not coming with signs to be observed... the Kingdom is within you.” (Luke 17:20–21)

He was rebuking those who were seeking after signs.

“He has made both one, and broken down the dividing wall.” (Ephesians 2:14)

So if I reject Scofield’s two-track fantasy in favor of Paul’s one-new-man Gospel, I’m not rejecting scripture —
I’m rejecting your misuse of it.

No...you are rejecting Paul's admonition to not be wise in your own conceit. It's clear that you will reject truth in favor of your own error just like the Pharisees did. You are full of their leaven.

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

Apocalypse? Absolutely!
Prophetic? Yes, it will happen un the future.
The phrase apocalyptic language is the peterist's justification ti render it mostly symbolic. No, it's just vosion describing literal details that will come to be.
Examine all the Messianic scriptures in the OT. Jesus literally fulfilled them. They weren't symbolically fulfilled. Some symbolism in the OT was used to symbolize Christ, we call shadows of Christ. But there are still hundreds of prophecies yet to be fulfilled and there is no reason we should not take them to be literally fulfilled.


That's funny, most of your arguments in thid entire thread have nothing to do with His crucifixion. If that was your purpose, we would all be in agreement with you. It's funny, you look in the mirror and see a different image of yourself.

Zechariah 14:4 and the Mount of Olives — Again

You say: “It’s a vision describing literal details that will come to be.”
No — it’s a prophetic oracle, rich with apocalyptic symbolism, just like Isaiah 13, Ezekiel 32, or Revelation. The imagery is cosmic, not cartographic.

Zechariah 14 also says:

The Lord will strike nations that don’t celebrate the Feast of Tabernacles (vv.16–19)

Animal sacrifices will be offered again (vv.20–21)

So — are you taking those literally too?

Are you lining up your calendar to fly to Jerusalem every year for a booth party?
Are you prepping lambs for a Levitical priesthood?
If not, then let’s be honest — you’re cherry-picking.
You cherry-pick the parts that match your Scofield timeline —
and spiritualize or ignore everything else.

Literal Fulfillment? Already Happened — In Christ

You said Jesus fulfilled Old Testament prophecy “literally.”

Correct — and every one of those fulfillments pointed to spiritual realities:

He wasn’t literally a lamb — but “the Lamb of God.”
He wasn’t literally a branch — but “the Righteous Branch.”
He wasn’t literally a temple — but “destroy this temple, and I will raise it in three days.”

He fulfilled the Law and the Prophets — not by reenacting every shadow, but by embodying the substance.
(Hebrews 10:1, Colossians 2:17)

And as for the Mount of Olives? It’s already played its prophetic role:
Jesus wept over Jerusalem there
He was betrayed and arrested there
He ascended near there

And yes — He will return.
But not to build another temple or reinstitute sacrifices.
He will return to judge the living and the dead — and to reveal what He already reigns over.

You Mocked Me for Saying “Preach Christ Crucified”

You said if I really preached Christ crucified, you’d agree with me.

Okay. Then explain Paul.
He preached Christ crucified — and then wrote:

“He broke down the dividing wall.” (Ephesians 2:14)
“There is no Jew or Gentile.” (Galatians 3:28)
“If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed.” (Galatians 3:29)

If Paul posted that today, you’d probably call him a “replacement theologian” and accuse him of not understanding his purpose.

But you forget — Paul also said this about unbelieving Israel:

“They were broken off because of unbelief… and God is able to graft them in again — IF they do not continue in unbelief.” (Romans 11:20–23)

So let’s be crystal clear:
According to Paul, no one is “chosen” apart from Christ.

Not by blood. Not by ancestry.
Not by borders, DNA tests or national history.

No Messiah = No covenant.
Full stop. The End.

Anyone who says otherwise isn’t defending the Gospel —
they’re rewriting it.

If you're still calling people “chosen” while they reject the Son of God,
then you’ve abandoned Paul, contradicted Christ,
and built your theology on unbelief with a flag on top.

That’s not just ignorance.
That’s heresy — with Scofield footnotes.

They can run around all day shouting, “We’re the chosen people!”
And you can echo back, “Yea! They’re the chosen people!”
But according to Paul?
That’s fantasyland.

The covenant is Christ — and there is no Plan B.
No dual covenant.
No national exceptions.
No free passes for Christ-rejecting nations — Jew or Gentile. Period The End.

I’m not preaching Christ like He’s still hanging on a cross, waiting for Israel to sign a treaty.
I’m preaching Him crucified, risen, reigning, and returning —
Not to build a third temple, but to judge the world in righteousness.

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

Again, I don’t know Scofield’s teaching…nor do I know you.
Anyone is free to speak their opinions. As anyone is free to agree or disagree, according to the Limit of their own Knowledge and understanding.

You have a beef with Scofield…and somewhat of a dilemma, since he is Dead, and your attempt to debate the Source moot.

Scofield had volumes of companion books, he is accredited to have authored and edited. He had a STUDY (annotated) Bible accredited to him…which from the get go informs the reader…the authors Personal Opinion and Understanding is Laced into “THAT” Book.

Other “authors” or”Panels of men” have done the Same Thing.
Calling it an annotated Bible, Companion Books, whatever…

The POINT Being…”the Attempt” is Absolutely to Influence the reader, to Consider, Believe, Rely on, Trust, the Authors, “Spiritual Understanding”.

And considering…the CENTURIES, even to this day, of Illiterate, Lazy, Impatient, Too Busy, individuals… “Being Told what to Believe” (without the ability or desire to actually Verify…) … IS promoted, acceptable, good enough, Across the Mind-Set of the Majority of the whole World.

You choosing to spend your time Arguing against a dead persons Works, with living persons who may or may not have some common ground with Scofield's works…is your prerogative…which personally, Carry’s very little interest to me.

Scripture IS “Knowledge”, one can read, learn, study or not.

Scripture IS Expressly Clear…The “Understanding” of Scriptural Knowledge “IS” called; “Spiritual Understanding”…
Spiritual Understanding “IS” Understanding According to God, His Spirit…
And ONLY given A MAN, by, from, through, of…
The Lord God Himself.

That ^ is the Source I rely on and Trust.

My perspective.

God bless you.

Glory to God,
Taken

Understood.
But just remember — error doesn’t become truth just because the person who spread it is dead. And truth doesn’t become optional just because we’re uncomfortable with it.

Jesus didn’t say, “Each their own.”
He said, “You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” (John 8:32)

Paul didn’t say, “Ignore the false teachers once they die.”
He said: “A little leaven leavens the whole lump.” (Galatians 5:9)
And “Mark those who cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine which you learned, and avoid them.”(Romans 16:17)

Scofield isn’t just a footnote in history.
His warped, blasphemous theology isn’t dead — it’s alive and well — infecting pulpits, hijacking prophecy, and brainwashing millions into confusing modern nationalism with the eternal Gospel. Scofield isn’t a relic — he’s a virus still running rampant in the background of the Church. And the worst part? Most don’t even realize they’re infected.

To ignore that isn’t spiritual maturity.
It’s spiritual negligence.
We’re not called to bury our heads in the sand —
We’re called to “contend for the faith that was once for all delivered to the saints.” (Jude 1:3)

So no — this isn’t just about a dead man.
It’s about living deception.
And if we don’t confront it, we’re complicit in it.

 

[Taken]

Understood.
But just remember — error doesn’t become truth just because the person who spread it is dead. And truth doesn’t become optional just because we’re uncomfortable with it.

Truth is Set by God.
Individuals “Truths”… change routinely as they are born, learn, experience, mature, understand.

Jesus didn’t say, “Each their own.”
He said, “You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free.” (John 8:32)

Correct; Jesus did Not use your quote.
However Scripture DOES Teach, each individual shall Make his Own “choices / elections” / and that individual be accountable For his own choices / elections…
And the widely revealed “consequences”… for his choices / elections…favorable or not.

So no — this isn’t just about a dead man.
It’s about living deception.
And if we don’t confront it, we’re complicit in it.

Have you actually Read “All” of Scofield’s works? His Own words in his published volumes?
Or blips and 3rd, 4th, etc. hand retelling and opinions?

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

Only because you lack understanding

You are jerking 2 Cor 1:20 out of context and totally misappropriating it. I am quoting Amos exactly how it was meant to be. In your pseudo theological insanity you fail to comprehend it.

I am not justifying anything. I am simply quoting it. God is the one who said he will cut them off. This is like saying I am promoting genocide because I quoted Rev 6:8

The apostles were still expecting a physical kingdom even though they new the kingdom was within them. This was because they understood the mystery of the two kingdoms.

Yes....faith in Christ ingrafts you into Israel. The fact it is natural Israel is proven by the fact he rebuking foolish and conceited people with no knowledge, who thought Israel was cut off forever,

He was rebuking those who were seeking after signs.

No...you are rejecting Paul's admonition to not be wise in your own conceit. It's clear that you will reject truth in favor of your own error just like the Pharisees did. You are full of their leaven.

You're not quoting scripture.
You're weaponizing it.

You're not defending prophecy.
You're defending a geopolitical theology wrapped in Scofield’s footnotes and baptized in national idolatry.

Let’s go point by point:

> "You lack understanding."
That’s rich coming from someone who thinks “natural Israel” means “unchanging covenantal priority” — when Paul explicitly redefines Israel as those in Christ (Romans 9:6–8, Galatians 3:28–29).
Paul didn’t call that “allegory.” He called it the mystery revealed in Christ.
You don’t see it, not because it isn’t written — but because you’re still wearing Scofield-colored glasses.

> "You're jerking 2 Cor. 1:20 out of context."
Really? Because the verse literally says:
“For all the promises of God find their Yes in Him.”
Not “in Tel Aviv.”
Not “in a U.N. vote.”
Not “in a secular regime that rejects the Messiah.”

If Jesus is the fulfillment of every promise, then stuffing Amos 9:15 into a 1948 Rothschild-funded real estate deal is not exegesis — it’s prophecy repackaged as propaganda and sold to the Church like a timeshare in Armageddon. That’s not "reading scripture" — that’s force-feeding it into a Zionist Mad Libs and calling it theology. Claiming Amos 9:15 was fulfilled in 1948 is like saying Taco Bell fulfills the manna from heaven — cheap, man-made, and full of things God never signed off on.

"You’re twisting Zechariah 13!"
No — I’m reading it the way Jesus did.
He quoted Zechariah 13:7 at the Last Supper and applied it directly to His crucifixion (Matthew 26:31).
That’s not my interpretation — that’s Christ fulfilling prophecy.

But you reject His reading — in favor of a Scofieldized war map that sees “refinement” as justified genocide.
You don’t see the cross as the climax of redemption — you see it as a preview to an ethnic purge.

Congratulations — you just turned the blood of Jesus into a trailer for military carnage.
You turned the Gospel into a war drum.
You turned Christ’s suffering into an excuse for future slaughter.
You turned the Prince of Peace into a mascot for mass murder — all while pretending it’s “biblical prophecy.”

That’s not faith.
That’s blasphemy in camouflage.

> "The apostles expected a physical kingdom."
Yes — and Jesus corrected them.
“It is not for you to know the times… but you will receive power… and be My witnesses.” (Acts 1:6–8)
They asked for land.
He gave them the Gospel.
They asked for a throne.
He gave them the cross.

You keep reading Acts 1 like it’s a prophecy chart. But Jesus redefined the mission on the spot — from physical conquest to spiritual commission.

> "Faith in Christ ingrafts you into natural Israel."

Stop.

Paul calls unbelieving Israel “broken off because of unbelief” (Romans 11:20).
He says Gentiles are grafted in by faith — not blood (Romans 11:23).
And he makes this crystal clear:

“Not all who are descended from Israel are Israel.” (Romans 9:6)
“If you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed.” (Galatians 3:29)

Not by blood.
Not by ancestry.
Not by borders, DNA tests, or national history.

No Messiah = No covenant.
Full stop. The end.

There is no such thing as ‘natural covenantal priority’ apart from Christ.

You don’t get to wave a flag that says “chosen” while rejecting the One who chooses.
And Paul directly warns:

“They were broken off because of unbelief… and God is able to graft them in again — IF they do not continue in unbelief.” (Romans 11:20–23)

So no — being “ethnically Israel” doesn’t give anyone a spiritual pass.
Without faith in Jesus, the covenant is broken. Period.

> "The kingdom is still future."

Wrong again.

Jesus says:

“The Kingdom is not coming with signs to be observed… the Kingdom is within you.” (Luke 17:20–21)
He says:
“All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me.” (Matthew 28:18)
He says:
“Some standing here will not taste death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.” (Matthew 16:28)

If you’re still waiting for tanks and temples, you’ve missed the Gospel — and replaced it with a Marvel movie.

> "You reject Paul like the Pharisees."
Actually, I quote Paul.
You just don’t like it when Paul contradicts your Scofield Study Bible.
You say I’m conceited?
Paul warned you not to be arrogant toward the branches (Rom. 11:18).
And you are the one boasting in bloodlines and timelines instead of the finished work of Christ.

Finally
I’m not the one twisting scripture to fit a Zionist war map.
I’m not the one ignoring Jesus to chase prophecy headlines.
And I’m definitely not the one preaching a two-track salvation plan that makes the cross optional for certain nationalities.

You call it “truth.”
But if it contradicts Christ — it’s not the truth.
It’s a heresy in blue and white camo.

And if Paul posted this today?

You wouldn’t “agree” with him.
You’d flag him as a danger to dispensational theology.

 

[Sister-n-Christ]

You googled something huh? Thats cute.

Scofield + Zionism + Rockefeller = Theological Mind Bomb

1. Scofield’s Zionist agenda was backed by Oxford and British-Israel financial interests.
He was not a theologian. He was a disgraced lawyer, convicted of forgery, and abandoned his family. Yet somehow his reference Bible magically became the most influential in America?
Why? How?
Because he had help.

Joseph Canfield’s biography “The Incredible Scofield and His Book” (1974) is the smoking gun.
It details Scofield’s ties to Samuel Untermeyer, a prominent Zionist lawyer who also helped draft the Federal Reserve Act — yes, that Untermeyer.
Untermeyer and others helped Scofield get connected to Oxford University Press, which published the Scofield Reference Bible — despite him having no theological training, no scholarly background, and no credibility whatsoever.
(Well... unless you count a criminal record and abandoning his family as “credentials.”)

2. The Rockefeller Foundation directly funded seminaries that pushed Scofield.
In the early 20th century, the Rockefellers bankrolled Union Theological Seminary, and poured money into “modernizing” Christianity — and this included getting Scofield’s Bible into circulation.

See: “Spiritual Warfare: The Hidden Rockefeller Influence on American Christianity”
Also: “The Rockefeller File” by Gary Allen – documents the funding of churches, seminaries, and missionary boards
Public historical archives from the Rockefeller Foundation list religious "modernization" grants

They weren't trying to spread Christ —
They were trying to reshape the American church to support Zionist politics and Western imperial ideology.

Let’s break it down in plain terms:
Scofield’s Bible wasn’t popular because it was accurate —
it was popular because it was mass-distributed, promoted, and funded by powerful people with political motives.

His notes introduced dispensationalism, a theology no one in the early Church ever taught — and linked “Israel” to modern land, war, and politics.

Millions of pastors were trained in Scofield’s framework from 1910 onward — not because it was sound, but because it was available and institutionally backed.

Scofield’s heresy was bankrolled, distributed, and institutionally embedded in the church by Zionists, industrialists, and globalists —not prophets, not saints, not Spirit-led teachers.

And here’s the part that really destroys Scofield’s credibility:
No one — and I mean no one — in the early Church taught what Scofield taught.

The Apostles didn’t teach a secret rapture.
Irenaeus, disciple of Polycarp (who was discipled by John), didn’t teach it.
Justin Martyr, Origen, Tertullian, Clement, Athanasius, Augustine — none of them.
Not a single Church Father interpreted “Israel” as a future geopolitical state.
Not one claimed the Church would be “raptured” out before tribulation.
Not one used Daniel’s 70 weeks to invent a gap for a future 7-year tribulation or rebuilt temple.

How did this modern nightmare happen? Because Scofield’s system didn’t exist until the 1800s — and was spread in America only after being bankrolled and institutionally forced into seminaries.

Even John Nelson Darby, who first invented dispensationalism in the 1830s, was rejected by most of Europe.
But in America? He found hungry industrialists and empire-minded evangelicals who saw his “future Israel” theology as a political tool.

What Scofield did was fuse Darby’s British dispensationalism with American Zionism and slap it into the margins of the Bible.
Then Rockefeller-funded networks made sure every young pastor would be taught to preach it as if it came from God.

This is historical fact — not theory.

So when someone says "this is just what the Bible teaches," they’re really just repeating a 20th-century propaganda program with a leather binding.

After reading the thread title I was going to ask,what's wrong with the Scofield Bible?

Now,after reading your answer before I could ask that I'll ask instead,what Bible do you suggest? One that is accurate to the original oral teachings of Jesus and his Apostles.

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

After reading the thread title I was going to ask,what's wrong with the Scofield Bible?

Now,after reading your answer before I could ask that I'll ask instead,what Bible do you suggest? One that is accurate to the original oral teachings of Jesus and his Apostles.

If you're looking for a Bible faithful to the teachings of Jesus and the Apostles, start with any accurate translation — ESV, NASB, NKJV, or KJV — but skip the Scofield commentary.

The real problem isn’t just owning a Scofield Bible — it’s that his warped theology has already permeated American Christianity like black mold behind drywall. Even if you toss the book, the damage is still in the studs. It’s everywhere: in pulpits, seminaries, Christian TV, and the foreign policy platforms of entire political parties. Televangelists parrot it like scripture. Politicians legislate it like doctrine. And most believers don’t even realize they’re quoting a 19th-century con man.

Trying to fix it now is like pulling weeds with tweezers — after Scofield landscaped the whole country in dispensational dandelions.

It’s like bringing a squirt gun to a forest fire — after Scofield doused the whole place in prophetic kerosene.

It’s like patching a canoe — while Scofield’s at the back drilling holes and yelling, “God wills it!”

It’s like sweeping up confetti — after Scofield threw a century-long heresy parade and trampled the Gospel in the process.

The Scofield system hijacked the American Church, rewired prophecy, and replaced Christ-centered hope with a doomsday countdown cult — funded by weapons contractors and broadcast on Christian TV.

At this point, we’ve got Christians cheerleading World War III in the Middle East, risking global annihilation and the death of everyone on earth — all based on a doctrinal fairy tale cooked up by a convicted fraud who abandoned his wife and kids, got arrested for forgery, and somehow rebranded himself as a Bible scholar without ever earning the title. With the financial backing of Rockefeller & Friends — a cozy cabal of bankers, elites, and global manipulators — he stapled a political war agenda onto the back of your Bible and convinced an entire generation it was “God’s prophetic plan.”

This wasn’t divine revelation — it was religious laundering.
A baptized blueprint for global instability.

And now?
That spiritual Ponzi scheme is still cashing in, one confused believer at a time.

That’s not faith.
That’s a geopolitical death cult wearing a Jesus T-shirt.

 

[Wick Stick]

“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.

Oh, I agree that Scofield was a heretic. I just think the problem goes back further. I wasn't trying to contradict you on that.

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 right. No early CHRISTIAN built doctrine on genealogies. But the Pharisees who opposed them did. The Jews to this day place great importance on membership in the Tribe.

This is actually one of the most ignored doctrines of the New Testament - that the genealogies are worthless, and heredity is determined by looking at behavior. There are multiple chapters in the gospels and Romans dedicated to the idea.

So much of the church places undue importance on the genealogies, and they snub their nose at Jesus' doctrine when they do so (and Paul's, and John the Baptist's).

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.

Right, but... at least one of those Jewish "sages" edited the texts they received from Moses into something that portrays itself as a chronological history. They made Scofield's error, but it was 2000 years before Scofield was born.

That is going to make a lot of Christians uncomfortable, because they were taught that everything is either 100% literal or 100% false, 100% inspired or 0% inspired.

That isn't true at all, of course. The Bible doesn't say anything like that. The Bible tells us that the prophets are inspired, and the priests who wrote the histories... were mostly bad dudes who worshiped idols and pandered to apostate kings. Even the priests agree that the priests were bad! No wonder God did away with the Levitical priesthood.

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.”

The greatest sales technique of all time is to boil everything down to 2 options and make the buyer choose one of them. If someone is presenting a dichotomy and asking you to choose sides... you're being sold something.

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.

Oh... Ussher's math is bad. It ignores co-regency, and makes the bad assumption that Genesis genealogies are both complete and trustworthy. They are neither.

Likewise, NEITHER version of the ante-diluvian genealogies is trustworthy. Paul literally tells us in the New Testament to ignore them... twice.

 

[PS95]

After reading the thread title I was going to ask,what's wrong with the Scofield Bible?

Now,after reading your answer before I could ask that I'll ask instead,what Bible do you suggest? One that is accurate to the original oral teachings of Jesus and his Apostles.

It's not the scriptures themselves. That's ok. It's the cross references and the study notes- Ignore those. the cross references will take you where they want you to go only, and ignore verses they don't want you to see . Nasty thing to do. Cults do that too.
I really like using cross references, so I use an NASB with full cross references and NKJV with them and a few others.
Sometimes I see some cross ref that were missed while reading the bible. So, I jot them down in a little notebook just for that.

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

Oh, I agree that Scofield was a heretic. I just think the problem goes back further. I wasn't trying to contradict you on that.

You're right. No early CHRISTIAN built doctrine on genealogies. But the Pharisees who opposed them did. The Jews to this day place great importance on membership in the Tribe.

This is actually one of the most ignored doctrines of the New Testament - that the genealogies are worthless, and heredity is determined by looking at behavior. There are multiple chapters in the gospels and Romans dedicated to the idea.

So much of the church places undue importance on the genealogies, and they snub their nose at Jesus' doctrine when they do so (and Paul's, and John the Baptist's).

Right, but... at least one of those Jewish "sages" edited the texts they received from Moses into something that portrays itself as a chronological history. They made Scofield's error, but it was 2000 years before Scofield was born.

That is going to make a lot of Christians uncomfortable, because they were taught that everything is either 100% literal or 100% false, 100% inspired or 0% inspired.

That isn't true at all, of course. The Bible doesn't say anything like that. The Bible tells us that the prophets are inspired, and the priests who wrote the histories... were mostly bad dudes who worshiped idols and pandered to apostate kings. Even the priests agree that the priests were bad! No wonder God did away with the Levitical priesthood.

The greatest sales technique of all time is to boil everything down to 2 options and make the buyer choose one of them. If someone is presenting a dichotomy and asking you to choose sides... you're being sold something.

Oh... Ussher's math is bad. It ignores co-regency, and makes the bad assumption that Genesis genealogies are both complete and trustworthy. They are neither.

Likewise, NEITHER version of the ante-diluvian genealogies is trustworthy. Paul literally tells us in the New Testament to ignore them... twice.

You’re one of the rare ones who sees through the Scofield fog — not just reacting to his nonsense, but tracing the deeper rot that enabled it. Respect.

We’re not in disagreement — we’re just mapping the same battlefield from different angles:

Yes — Scofield didn’t invent the obsession with bloodlines.
The Pharisees beat him to it.

But he did something even worse:

He baptized that obsession in prophecy charts and sold it to the modern Church as if it were Gospel truth —
despite the fact that Jesus and Paul both torched that entire foundation:

“Do not think to say to yourselves, ‘We have Abraham as our father.’ For I tell you, God is able from these stones to raise up children for Abraham.”
— Matthew 3:9

“Not all who are descended from Israel are Israel.”
— Romans 9:6

“If you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed.”
— Galatians 3:29

“There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise.”
— Galatians 3:28–29

No Christ = No covenant.
No exceptions.
No prophetic loopholes.
No ethnic passes.
No “divine blindness” clause.
If you reject the Son, you are outside the promise.
Period.

“He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.”
— 1 John 5:12

The true Gospel isn’t powered by bloodlines — it’s powered by the blood of Christ.
And if your theology worships DNA instead of the Cross, it’s already under judgment.

Any theology that puts ancestry back on the throne doesn’t just contradict Paul —
it resurrects the very system Christ came to destroy.

Scofield (and his international banker backers) didn’t create a literalist framework out of thin air —
but he industrialized it, codified it, and shipped it to 100 million pews through a study Bible
with footnotes louder than scripture.

The real danger isn’t just Scofield.
It’s the mindset that allowed this cancer to spread through the Body of Christ for over a century without resistance —
a mindset that confuses faith with tribalism, inspiration with infallibility,
and redemption with nationalism.

So no — this isn’t about the age of the earth.
It’s about detoxing a theology that turned the Living Word into a geopolitical blueprint.
It’s about rejecting the system that made Jesus the footnote and ethnic timelines the headline.

The more people who speak like you just did, the better chance we have
of waking the Church up — before it sleepwalks into World War III over a misquoted prophecy.

Because make no mistake:
This isn’t just bad doctrine.
It’s an eschatological death cult wrapped in a flag and baptized in oil money.

And if we don’t wake up soon,
it won’t just be faith that burns —
it’ll be the whole world.

And that is absolutely not what God wants:

“Blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall be called sons of God.”
— Matthew 5:9

“Put your sword back into its place. For all who take the sword will perish by the sword.”
— Matthew 26:52

“My kingdom is not of this world. If My kingdom were of this world, My servants would have been fighting...”
— John 18:36

Jesus made it clear:
Land is not the goal — He is.

He preached a Kingdom not tied to borders or dirt,
but to hearts transformed by grace.

So this obsession with annexing land, redrawing maps, and launching wars in God’s name
isn’t just bad theology — it’s anti-Christ at the root.

God’s will is not for believers to escalate conflict in the name of nationalism, Zionism, or Scofield’s prophecy charts.

His will is that:
“The kingdoms of this world have become the Kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ,
and He shall reign forever and ever.”
— Revelation 11:15

Scofieldism doesn’t just twist scripture —
it glorifies war, idolizes nations, and drags the Prince of Peace behind a tank.

It doesn’t lift up Christ — it sidelines Him.
It doesn’t preach the Cross — it buries it under flags, bloodlines, and bombs.

This isn’t prophecy.
It’s anti-Christ blasphemy wrapped in military camouflage and sold as holy war.

Christ didn’t die to launch a war in the Middle East.
He died to tear down walls — not build new ones with barbed wire and eschatology.

He calls us to unity in Him — not in tribes, timelines, or Scofield’s fantasy maps.

If your “theology” needs a flag to stand, it’s not Christianity —
it’s political idolatry draped in a cross, quoting scripture it doesn’t obey.

 

[talons]

The greatest sales technique of all time is to boil everything down to 2 options and make the buyer choose one of them. If someone is presenting a dichotomy and asking you to choose sides... you're being sold something.

Indeed ! So have you bought the Replacement Theology that is being sold here ?

 

[The Gospel of Christ]

To any lurkers still ignorant of the openly Satanic, anti-Christ lie known as “Replacement Theology” — allow me to explain the insanity.

“Replacement Theology,” as they smear it, isn’t about replacing Israel.
It’s about fulfilling what Israel always pointed to: Christ.

But in Scofield World, the real blasphemy is daring to say Jesus is the fulfillment.
In their twisted framework, it’s somehow evil to believe:

That Jesus is the Seed of Abraham (Galatians 3:16)

That all are one in Christ Jesus (Galatians 3:28)

That the Church is the true Israel of God (Galatians 6:16)

That God’s promise was always about faith — not bloodlines (Romans 4:16)

Say “There is no salvation apart from Christ” — and they'll scream “Replacement Theology!!!”
As if the Gospel itself is evil & antisemitic.

But it’s not “replacement.”
It’s fulfillment.

Jesus didn’t cancel the covenant —
He completed it, embodied it, and offered it to the whole world.

Scofieldism doesn’t “defend” Israel.
It denies Christ — by making the Gospel optional for one ethnic group.
And if that’s not anti-Christ, I don’t know what is.

Because Christians are Israel.
Not by blood.
Not by borders.
But by faith in Jesus Christ, the true Seed of Abraham.

Every Christian born before 1920 knew this full well.
Only now — thanks to Scofield insanity — we’ve got a blasphemous clown circus
where Christians don’t even realize they are the Israel God intends to protect.

They’re too busy waving flags, worshiping DNA,
and defending a nation that rejects the very Messiah who fulfilled the covenant.

The real Israel isn’t geopolitical.
It’s spiritual — and it wears a cross, not a uniform.

You can’t find the "real Israel" on a map.
You’ll find it in the Body of Christ — not in the Rothschild charter, not in a UN vote, and not in a nation-state built in 1948.

You can call that patch of land whatever you want —
but if it rejects Christ, it is not the Israel God protects.

The true Israel is made of living stones — not political ones.

“If you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, heirs according to the promise.”
— Galatians 3:29

No flag.
No bloodline.
Just the Cross.

 

[Wick Stick]

Indeed ! So have you bought the Replacement Theology that is being sold here ?

Don't take this the wrong way, because I don't mean to be antagonistic to you. But... labeling what I wrote as "replacement theology" is a lazy argument. It doesn't actually address any of the arguments. It simply seeks to condemn everything through guilt-by-association.

And if that's the standard we're using for it, then Paul belongs in that category, along with most of the New Testament writers. Let's test a few statements.

• God didn't get rid of Israel. But He did get rid of the Levitical priesthood.
• God didn't get rid of Judah. But He did merge it back into Israel... as foretold by the prophets.
• God sifted Israel, keeping the grain and burning the tares. The tares were those who claimed to be Israel but were imposters. They were actually Edomites and Ishmaelites pretending to be Israelites.
• Did God adopt many Gentiles into Israel? Yes... just as He promised Abraham to make him a father of Gentiles.

Do you think those are "replacement theology" as well? They come straight out of the Bible.

 

[talons]

But... labeling what I wrote as "replacement theology" is a lazy argument.

I was asking a simple question , no argument offered .

 

[talons]

For lurkers reading along here is a good write up .

VARIOUS FORMS OF REPLACEMENT THEOLOGY