Results 1 - 4 of 4
|
|
|||||
Results from: Answered Bible Questions, Answers, Unanswered Bible Questions, Notes Ordered by Verse | ||||||
Results | Verse | Author | ID# | |||
1 | What???????????????????????????????????? | Bible general Archive 1 | kalos | 7784 | ||
Someone writes: "I understand that the dispansationalist Christians following Scofield and others believe that the Scriptures teach that New Testament saints are not obligated to keep the Law as summarized in the Ten Commandments." If Scofield teaches that it's OK to break the 10 Commandments, then show me which edition of the Scofield Bible says that. Show me the edition. Show me the page number. Show me the Scofield note that says that. The burden of proof to support such an assertion lies with the one who made the assertion. Somebody show me where it says that in the writings of Dr. Scofield. |
||||||
2 | What???????????????????????????????????? | Bible general Archive 1 | Lionstrong | 7785 | ||
Is what this aurthor writes about dispensationalism, of which Scofield is a representative (is he not?), accurate? Was this ever their view? Or has their view been modified since the days of Scofield to make it more Scriptural?: "It is implied, however, that Adam was to observe the Sabbath day and worship God. And, after the fall at least, he was to offer certain sacrifices. Moreover the story of Cain, and Abel requires us to believe that God had forbidden murder. It would seem likely therefore that God had given Adam all the Ten Commandments. Later, after the flood, these commands were repeated. "Now, unfortunately, among the fundamentalists a certain group talks so as to give the impression that God gave no laws before the days of Moses. These people divide time into several dispensations which are distinguished by different plans of salvation. They speak of a dispensation of conscience, a later dispensation of human government; and only with Moses is the dispensation of law supposed to begin. This dispensational view, in addition to being inconsistent with Genesis, is directly contradicted in Romans 5:13,14. These verses say, "until the law (here Paul refers to the Mosaic law) sin was in the world"; that is to say, people before the time of Moses were sinners. "But," continues Paul, "sin is not imputed where there is no law. Nevertheless (sin very obviously was imputed before the days of Moses because) death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over (infants) that had not sinned (voluntarily) after the similitude of Adam's transgression." Accordingly, there must have been law between Adam and Moses because the penalty for disobedience was exacted.... ................... The dipensationalists go on and place a dispensation of grace after the dispensation of law. In this dispensation, i.e., the present age, law has no place. But once again the Scripture contradicts such a view. The three chapters of Romans where our freedom from the law of sin and death is most emphasized are far from disparaging the law. In addition to the strong insistence on the necessity of a righteous life (Rom. 6:2,6,12,15; 8:1,4,13), Paul asserts that the law is holy and good (Rom. 7:12), spiritual (7:14), a delight to the godly man (7:22), and the rule of service (7:25)." Gordon Clark, "What Do Presbyterians Believe?” p. 181, 182. |
||||||
3 | You answer one question with 3 more? | Bible general Archive 1 | kalos | 7787 | ||
If Scofield teaches that it's OK to break the 10 Commandments, then show me which edition of the Scofield Bible says that. Show me the edition. Show me the page number. Show me the Scofield note that says that. The burden of proof to support such an assertion lies with the one who made the assertion. Somebody show me where it says that in the writings of Dr. Scofield. |
||||||
4 | You answer one question with 3 more? | Bible general Archive 1 | Lionstrong | 7812 | ||
JVH0212, greetings; If Scofield is a representative of dispensationalism (which he is), and if dispensationalism is antinomian, then Scofield is antinomian and no reference is needed. |
||||||