For Fair Use Discussion and Educational Purposes
Link: PER EMAIL FROM BRUCE WARNER
Note: Before commenting on any posts please make sure you either watch or read each post in it’s entirety. Before, making a comment, if you don’t have the time to watch or read fully please restrain from commenting. When you do this it will help to reduce confusion.

Thank you for visiting Rapture Bible Prophecy Forum!

Please add us to your favorites!
http://www.rapturebibleprophecyforum.com
Our Facebook page is :
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Rapture-Bible-Prophecy-Forum/362856490414697
Please LIKE our Facebook page! Facebook is growing daily!

PER EMAIL FROM BRUCE WARNER


THEY ARE ALL 'JEWISH SAINTS' ON EARTH DURING THE LAST-HALF OF THE 70th WEEK OF DANIEL, AND AFTER THE RAPTURE OF ALL THE 'GENTILE SAINTS'.....




After the rapture of all the Gentile saints, who are His Church, the only saints left on the earth during the 42 month last-half of the 70th Week are those Jewish saints who are brought to Christ through the evangelism of the 144,000 sealed evangelists during the 1,260 day/42 month last-half of the 70th Week of Daniel. The Scripture tells us that they are the "seed" or "offspring" of the remnant Hebrew woman. The 'offspring" or "seed" of a Hebrew woman does NOT produce Gentile saints.


The following Scripture tells us that Satan is granted authority to make war with these Hebrew saints, and also to have authority over the non-believing Gentiles who were not raptured during his 42 months of authority on earth.


Revelation 13:7
"It was granted to him to MAKE WAR with the saints and to overcome them. And authority was given him over every tribe, tongue, and nation.


Revelation 12:17 KJV
"And the dragon was wroth with the woman, and went to MAKE WAR with THE REMNANT OF HER SEED, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ."




So you see, ALL of the so called 'tribulation saints' AFTER THE RAPTURE are ALL from the 'remnant of the seed of the Hebrew woman' WHICH MAKES THEM ALL JEWISH SAINTS !






According to Your Word, come Lord Jesus !




Bruce Warner, Scripturalist

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Zechariah 12:3,9:
And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people; And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Disclaimer: Rapture Bible Prophecy Forum, ( http://www.rapturebibleprophecyforum.com ) does not necessarily endorse or agree with every opinion expressed in every article posted on this site. We do however, encourage a healthy and friendly debate on the issues of our day. Whether you agree or disagree, we encourage you to post your feedback by using the reply button.

If you are new to this site and would like to post articles, opinions, youtube videos that are appropriate for this site just e mail me at

stevensandiego@ymail.com
I will send you a PASSWORD

Ybic
Steven

FOR FAIR USE AND EDUCATION AND DISCUSSION PURPOSES



I just "happened" on this one. I was interested in the term "Jewish saints"....isn't that another oxymoron?

For those who don't know what an oxymoron is:

wise fool
terribly good
upward fall
steel wool
working vacation

And I will gladly add "Jewish saint" to the mix. Saints are believers in Jesus Christ. Jews don't believe in Jesus Christ...and if they do, they are no longer "Jewish", by definition.

I'm really not out to find arguments, but they just seem to pop up in my path fairly frequently. And since I abhor (hate) lies, I try to bring this to people's attention.

This one interested me!! First of all, I have never heard the title "Scripturualist" used by anybody before today. So, I looked up the definition which is (briefly):


A Scripturalist believes that the Word of God is the sole and sufficient source of wisdom, for in God's Word are hidden all of the treasures of wisdom and knowledge.

Well, here we come up with a "doozy" of a lie!! If a person claims to be a "scripturalist", then by definition, he cannot possibly say that "Jews" are "saints" because THAT IS NOT IN THE BIBLE. If so, scripture and verse, please?

And, he cannot POSSIBLY be a "Scripturalist", which is, by definition, believing ONLY what is written in the Bible, and this does NOT INCLUDE FOOTNOTES BY SOME PERSON OTHER THAN ACTUAL SCRIPTURAL AUTHORS (inspired by God).

Most of this person's doctrines about "Israel" (as the Jews...chosen people of God) come NOT FROM THE BIBLE, but from the FOOTNOTES of Scofield and others who followed him after his death.

Piece of an article:


1. SCOFIELD DOWNGRADES THE CHURCH AND HER ROLE IN GOD'S PLAN.

Historic Christian teaching always has been that the church was the antitype of national Israel. This teaching goes on to say that the church succeeded Israel at the first advent, and that all unfulfilled promises to Abraham will be fulfilled in and through the church.

Scofield admits that this is the historic Christian teaching, then proceeds to teach that it is erroneous. He says: "Especially is it necessary to exclude the notion - a legacy in Protestant thought from post-apostolic and Roman Catholic theology - that the Church is the true Israel, and that the Old Testament foreview of the kingdom is fulfilled in the Church" (p. 989, S.R.B.).

He begins early in his footnotes to lay the groundwork for his teaching that the church will end in failure and be replaced by national Israel, who will succeed where the church failed. On page 8, in footnote I, he states that Eve is a type of the church! Like most of Scofield's "types," this one is arbitrary, artificial, and forced. Any interested reader may turn to the passages given as "proof" that Eve is a type of the church, and he will see that there is no mention whatsoever of this fact. He lists John 3:28,29; 2 Corinthians 11:2; Ephesians 5:25-32; and Revelation 19:7,8. This is typical of Scofield's scriptural references; they rarely say what he says they do. He apparently counted on the fact that his readers would not turn to the passages given. Either that, or he slighted the intelligence of his readers.

On page 9, footnote I, Scofield says: "The Adamic Covenant conditions the life of fallen man - conditions which must remain till, in the kingdom age, 'the creation also shall be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the sons of God' (Rom. 8:21)." Here again the reader will find that the passage given does not even refer to people, but to the creation.

One might ask just what harm could come from fixing in people's minds that Eve and Adamic conditions represent the church. The subtle danger is that when Scofield's disciples think of the church they just automatically think of sinful, fallen, unfaithful children of Satan, and Adam and Eve! Then it is a simple step to teach, without scriptural proof, that the church is destined to end in failure (apostasy).

Coming to the Tower of Babel (p. 1 Scofield continues his slander-by-association. He says that the history of Babel strikingly parallels that of the professing church. He then refers his readers to his footnote on Isaiah 13:1. There he says that Babylon means confusion and is used symbolically to refer ahead to the church. Babylon, he says on page 725, refers to apostate Christianity, destroyed by the nations headed up under the Beast and false prophet (Rev. 17:16).

One could go on piling footnotes on top of each other, showing that Scofield teaches that the church will end in failure, and also showing the type of "reasoning" he uses in arriving at such a conclusion. Let us give one last statement to this effect. "Each of the Dispensations may be regarded as a new test of the natural man, and each ends in judgment - marking his utter failure" (C. 1. Scofield, Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth, p. 13).

In this teaching, as in many others, Scofield unveils his weak Christology. For he admits elsewhere that this church, which he says will end in failure, is the Body and the Bride of Christ! Paul says that the church is destined to glorious victory: "And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the church, which is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all" (Eph. 1:22,23). Should one believe Scofield or the apostle Paul? And what should one do with the statement of our Lord (Matt. 16:1 that not even the gates of hell should prevail against his church?

*************

If we read something written by one who claims to be a "Scripturalist" I think we'd better think twice (or maybe three or four times) about believing their "footnote" doctrines.

Arlene