$1000.00 For One Scripture That Says…

cashA biblical doctrine is not biblical unless it has biblical passages proving it is biblical fact. That may sound a little simplistic, and maybe even a bit of a tongue twister, but it is still the main rule to follow when rightly dividing God’s Word. Please, keep this in mind when reading through this $1000.00 challenge.

Each of the following eight points are taken from foundational teachings in the prophecy view called “Dispensationalism.” If Dispensationalism is truly biblical then there should be Bible passages that clearly speak of these points. If there are no such scriptures, how then can Dispensationalism be said to be biblical? For this challenge, I am offering $1000.00 to the first person that can give just one Bible verse that actually says any of the following Dispensational teachings:

  1. God delayed His Kingdom because the Jews rejected Jesus.
  2. There is a gap between the 69th and 70th week of Daniel.
  3. There will be a secret pre-tribulation rapture of the Church.
  4. God will require the building of a physical third Jewish Temple.
  5. God will no longer accept grace and Jesus’ blood for salvation but will instead return to the Law and animal blood sacrifices.
  6. An Antichrist will make a seven-year covenant with the Jews.
  7. There will be a future seven-year tribulation period.
  8. A physical Jesus Christ will return to establish a 1000-year reign on earth.

If you’re a Dispensational believer, and if you believe that any or all of the above eight teachings are biblical, would you please give us at least one Bible verse that actually says any of the above? Though Dispensational teachers claim to have much scriptural evidence to support their teachings, you only need one Bible scripture to qualify for the $1000.00.

This $1000.00 offer has been around for many years. To date not even one verse has ever been sent to prove any of these Dispensational teachings are in fact biblical…not one. This silence alone should be enough to prove that these main points in the Dispensational theory are not biblical. However, since Dispensationalism is still claimed by some to be biblical, this $1000.00 is still being offered to the first person that can give such a verse. If you are a Dispensationalist and you cannot find such a scripture, I hope you realize that this means you are missing much more than just $1000.00–you are missing the fullness of God’s Truth.

For continuity, responses to this challenge must use the King James Bible. Use the below “reply” area to send in any Bible verses. Comments concerning the lack of any such scriptural evidence are also welcomed.

50 Replies to “$1000.00 For One Scripture That Says…”

    1. ADAM MAARSCHALK, thank you for the reprint. I responded to Ross Purdy’s comments concerning point #5. There I said that I have in fact talked with Dispensational teachers that do believe that point. However, even if they do not believe the resumption of animal sacrifices do away with Jesus’ blood sacrifice, they still require a future rebuilt temple to fulfill their “end time” Antichrist scenario. And if such an Antichrist did stop a resumed sacrificing of animals, since the Bible clearly states that such sacrifice is no longer used for mankind’s atonement since salvation can now and will forever only come through the sacrifice of Jesus, then, unlike what a Dispensationalist teaches, that antichrist would thereby be doing God’s work and not Satan’s.

  1. It is sheer fantasy to purport today’s “Christian” dispensational mainstream fundamental futurist eschatology; I know there’s a few buzz words in my introduction that people will cling to and say “HA, he’s not talking about me” so please allow me to clarify my meaning, usage and intent in that description.

    All Christian Futurist Eschatological proposals are Dispensational in actuality; they await an end of the current earthly dispensation (age) mankind now dwells in, and they see another earthly dispensation (age) to come with the arrival/coming/return of Messiah.

    Eschatology (the study of the end times/latter days) is the single most chronicled topic in the Bible; many a scholar and/or theologian say the Bible is 30% (or more) latter days focused.

    Futurist interpretation and application is no stranger in Christianity; nor is it absent within the pages of scripture, but such scripture must be read in context with proper attention being paid to the audience relevance, time statements, and the personal pronouns used in the latter days prophecies and scriptures.

    While I realize 10,000 arguments can be presented in accepting this author’s $1,000 challenge, not one is worth a dime of that money. Every single writer in the New Testament: wrote, taught and believed, that the coming/return of Christ would be within their lifetime, their age and their generation. How can I assert this so confidently? Because that is the exact same message he himself spoke of throughout the gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John; and Christ absolutely confirms this on numerous occasions in the Revelation.

    Bravo Mr. Burk, Bravo.

    1. Amen! Jesus said that all He taught about the “last days” would be fulfilled within the same generation that heard His prophecy teachings. Thank you for your input!

  2. If they must convince YOU that the Bible teaches such things, then you will never have to pay out the $1000. If they only need to be convinced themselves that the Bible teaches those things, then you already owe the money.

    1. Anyone claiming to follow the Bible should only be convinced of what to believe from actual Bible teachings, amen? I always tell people I believe what I believe because I can find it in the Bible. But, I also tell them that I will quickly change my beliefs if anyone ever gives me verses proving that what I believe is in error.

      In the case of my $1000.00 challenge, after all the years that this challenge has circulated, I’ve never yet had even one verse sent to support any of the eight Dispensational teachings. Therefore, it isn’t that I have to be convinced; it is instead that those who believe any or all of those eight points I listed need to convince themselves that they are following teachings that is found in the Bible.

  3. Has this been posted anywhere close to where a dispensationalist might see it? Disps do not believe #5 nor would they say God “requires” a temple be built, they would say it just will be built as a matter of fact.

    1. Yes, over the years this challenge has traveled far and wide. Back around 2003 I had an African Bishop email me that he heard of this challenge and decided he would send in his verses to get the money. He said after much looking he could not find any verses to send. He then told me I did not need to worry about ever needing to write a check.

    2. Concerning point #5: sadly I have run into several Dispensationalists that do indeed believe number 5 will happen. They teach that the rapture will remove the current gospel message of salvation from the earth. This will then usher in a time when salvation will come through sacrifices done at a rebuilt temple, or through the sacrifice of your own life for the sake of God. Of course this is the “other gospel” that Paul taught should be accursed. Though these men were reminded of this, they were still blinded by their Dispensational prophecy position.

  4. Mr. Burk,

    I fully believe the Bible clearly teaches that Jesus is God – but please give one single verse that actually says unequivocally that Jesus is God.

    Your $1000 offer is bogus if your standard is a single verse rather than a biblically legitimate exegetical and contextual argument.

    Whether or not you agree it is a correct interpretation is different than whether or not it is one of several possibly legitimate ones.

    My guess is that you hold to any number of doctrines that depend on contextual meaning rather than an isolated verse. In fact, I just read your article on the use of “kurios” in the NT and the LXX’s translation of the tetragrammaton – in which you make a thoroughly contextual (both literary and historical) argument – which is, in fact, the only proper way to understand Scripture.

    Many verses have multiple potential meanings in isolation and can only be properly understood in context (both near and far).

    Your offer suggests that dispensationalists are wrong if they can’t produce a verse in isolation – but that is a standard you cannot live up to – and shouldn’t try to live up to.

    And, as you (should) know, untold numbers of volumes have been written demonstrating the biblical validity of dispensational theology. Again, even if you disagree with the interpretive conclusions, that doesn’t mean they haven’t shown the viability of the theological system to the satisfaction of thousands of other scholars who are equally or better-trained than either of us.

    Unfortunately, your offer is both intellectually and biblically dishonest.

    David James
    Director, The Alliance of Biblical Integrity

    1. Mr. James,

      Thank you for your comments.

      I see you list yourself as a director for an organization said to be for “biblical integrity.” I looked on your Website and saw that you teach the Dispensational view of prophecy. I realize you may not teach each of the eight points I listed, but I would think that you still would have some verses that prove the ones you do believe in were in fact taught by Jesus and His apostles. However, instead of listing any passages to support your Dispensational theories, you instead basically argued that it is okay for those who believe as you do to have no such biblical evidence. That’s the same kind of excuse for having no biblical evidence that teachers of Dispensationalism have given me for close to 20 years.

      As you mentioned, taking the whole counsel of God’s Word is a major part of rightly dividing the Word of God. However, as these verses are studied through they still must harmonize with what the Bible actually does teach. The main point my challenge highlights is that Dispensationalism has no scriptures that aligns its teachings with teachings found in the Old and New Testaments. This is why Scofield added study notes to his Bible, because without those notes, no one would get the Dispensational view of prophecy by just reading the scriptures.

      You asked about Jesus being God. We do not have to look far into the Bible to find an ongoing theme stating that there is only One God and that this same One God is to be mankind’s only savior. Then when we get to the teachings of Jesus and His apostles we see that they taught the same about there being only One God, but they added that Jesus is the fulfillment of the prophecies concerning the Messiah, and as a result is thereby God manifest in flesh. This truth is clearly spoken of in the Bible and takes no special study notes to see. But where do we find such clearly worded scriptural evidence for any of the eight Dispensational points I listed? Where is that ongoing theme flowing through the Old Testament and into the New Testament? Bottom line, there is no such biblical evidence. As a result, there is nothing dishonest about my challenge at all, because such evidence is needed if Dispensationalism is to be claimed to have “biblical integrity.”

      Jesus bless you in your studies,
      TK Burk

      1. Mr. Burk,

        The reason I didn’t include specific verses, of which there are many, is 1) this has already been done hundreds of times by dispensational scholars and you already know which those are and 2) knowing the verses / passages used by dispensationalists to develop this theology, you have already rejected them – and won’t even consider them as viable alternatives, so there is no point.

        On the other hand, if you are not familiar with the clearly laid out dispensational arguments because you have not read McClain’s Greatness of the Kingdom, Pentecost’s Thy Kingdom Come and Ryrie’s Dispensationalism, then you’re not being intellectually honest – and if you have read them, you’re not being intellectually honest.

        This is why your offer is neither intellectually or biblically honest – and it very unfortunately appears to be nothing more than a show and a talking point.

        Concerning the deity of Christ – as I said, I firmly believe this is taught in the Bible for precisely the reasons you give. However, you didn’t address my challenge to provide a single verse in isolation that unequivocally demonstrates this, but rather used exactly the same argument to defend the deity of Christ that I and other dispensationalists use to develop and defend dispensational theology.

        So, as I said, you do not adhere to your own standard in developing or defending your Christology. By your own words, surely, if it is biblical, you should at least have a single verse where Jesus said, “I am God” or an apostle said, “Jesus is God.”

        Of course, those don’t exist, which means we must say, “This was the point” – meaning that it is derived from the immediate literary context and the context of the Scriptures as a whole – which is precisely what you won’t accept concerning dispensationalism.

        I have no problem with you disagreeing with dispensationalism – you wouldn’t be alone – even though I would strongly argue that your view doesn’t handle all the relevant passages as consistently and comprehensively as the dispensational model.

        However, if you wish to be intellectually and biblically honest, I think it would be prudent to quietly withdraw your $1000 offer – and be content to make your exegetical case and leave the showmanship out of the picture.

        Dave James
        The Alliance for Biblical Integrity

        1. I just thought of the following to make my point (and will provide a passage that should warrant you writing me a check for $1000).

          My guess is that you would accept that Jesus told the apostles that they would be his witnesses throughout the world after the Holy Spirit comes upon them. The problem is you can’t provide a verse in isolation that teaches that. Acts 1:8 doesn’t teach that when taken in isolation.

          Acts 1:8 “But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.”

          From this verse in isolation we do not know who the speaker is or who the hearers are. Of course this is obviously Jesus and the apostles – but this is only known by considering the context. Context ranges from the verses on either side of a particular verse, through paragraphs, sections, chapters, books, testaments and the entire Bible.

          Similarly, just as someone was speaking in Acts 1:8, someone will make a 7 year covenant with the Jews, which he will break at the mid-point according to Daniel chapter 9. The question is Who will that be? A comprehensive study of the biblical context both in Daniel 9 and other passages when taken together, demonstrate that this will be the Antichrist. We know that Jesus mentions the same abomination of desolation in Matthew 24, that Paul says the lawless one will enter the temple and proclaim himself to be God (2 Thess 2) and that the beast from the earth will cause people to worship the beast from the sea in Rev. 12.

          I have no doubt that you will disagree with this understanding, but that doesn’t mean this isn’t at least one possible way to look at it – no matter how weak an argument you may think it to be.

          So, again, I would suggest that you should either send me a check for $1000 (which I could definitely use) because by adhering to the principles of biblical integrity I can provide verses that support one of the dispensational points in your list – or you should withdraw your $1000 offer because it requires a standard that you yourself are not able to meet concerning any number of things you believe the Bible to teach.

          Dave James
          The Alliance for Biblical Integrity

          1. Mr. James,

            Your responses are becoming more and more concerning.

            You asked me to prove who spoke the words in Acts 1:8. Again, the Bible interprets itself. Look at the following verses:

            Acts 1:6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?

            So, the apostles asked the post-resurrected Jesus, the Lord, if He’d then restore a physical kingdom. How do we know it was the apostles He was speaking to? Look at this:
            Acts 1:10-13 And while they looked stedfastly toward heaven as he went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; (11) Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven. (12) Then returned they unto Jerusalem from the mount called Olivet, which is from Jerusalem a sabbath day’s journey. (13) And when they were come in, they went up into an upper room, where abode both Peter, and James, and John, and Andrew, Philip, and Thomas, Bartholomew, and Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus, and Simon Zelotes, and Judas the brother of James.
            Instead of answering them about a physical kingdom, which is a kingdom that Jesus never said He would establish, He answered them this:

            Acts 1:7-8 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. (8) But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

            How we know this is still Jesus talking is that this conversation ends with this verse:

            Acts 1:9 And when he had spoken these things, while they beheld, he was taken up; and a cloud received him out of their sight.

            “He” being “taken up” would be Jesus in His Ascension.

            The Apostles obeyed Jesus and returned to Jerusalem to await the outpouring of God’s Spirit. Remember this occurrence was to enable those men to be the witnesses to “all Judea, Samaria, and the uttermost part of the earth.” Where we see this is in Acts 2.

            Acts 2:1-5 And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place. (2) And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting. (3) And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them. (4) And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance. (5) And there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, out of every nation under heaven.

            Did you see it? The Holy Ghost feel and the apostles had an audience of Jews from “every nation under heaven.”

            Then toward the end of Peter’s Holy Ghost anointed message he said this:

            Acts 2:36-39 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ. (37) Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? (38) Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. (39) For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.

            So, when they saw they were guilty of crucifying Jesus, their God, they asked what to do. Jesus said that His salvation message is to be available then to “For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.” This is synonymous to “Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.” How so, watch this: “For the promise is unto you, and to your children [those in Judea], and to all that are afar off [those in Samaria], even as many as the Lord our God shall call [those in the uttermost part of the earth].” This was first fulfilled on the Day of Pentecost as the 3,000 converted “devout men, out of every nation under heaven” went home to their lands. This is then followed by Ethiopians, Samaritans, (Acts 8) and gentiles (Acts 10) receiving this same witness.

            Evidence for the fulfillment of Acts 1:8 does not stop there however. The following verses speak of this same witness of the gospel throughout the world. Look again at how clearly the Bible speaks of these prophecies and of their fulfillments:

            Acts 1:8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.
            Romans 10:18 But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world.

            Matthew 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
            Romans 10:18 But I say, Have they not heard? Yes verily, their sound went into all the earth, and their words unto the ends of the world.

            Mark 13:10 And the gospel must first be published among all nations.
            Romans 16:26 But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:

            Mark 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
            Colossians 1:23 If ye continue in the faith grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;

            Did you see how the Bible says the following prophecies were fulfilled during the same generation (30 AD to 70 AD) that Jesus Christ said would see all things fulfilled? Again, clear wording for each prophecy and their fulfillment.

            The remainder of your response is based on your opinion of what you believe will take place. There is no scripture that says there will be a gap between Daniels 69th and 70th weeks. Every other week in Daniels’ 70 Weeks followed each other with a any gap. Therefore there is no reason—without scriptural support stating otherwise—to expect those important weeks to do differently.

            There is also no scripture that says any of Matthew 24 is for a time in the future. We do have a verse that states when everything Jesus said there was to be fulfilled. That verse says:

            Matthew 24:34 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled.

            When His hearers that day heard Jesus say, “this generation,” what generation do you think they thought He meant? Of course they took it as being their generation—the same one to whom He was addressing then. This agrees with what Jesus said in the closing verses of Matthew 23 and the opening verses of Matthew 24. There He spoke of a destruction that was coming against the Temple and surrounding buildings that were standing then…during that generation.

            So, again, Mr. James, do you have any verses that actually do speak of any of the eight Dispensational points or not?

          2. In reply to David James.

            That is just the point. A comprehensive study of biblical context does not lead to the Antichrist being the covenant maker because “the other passages” you speak of are not in context. Nowhere in the text is there a mention of an antichrist, and peace treaty that brings a temporary false peace, a tribulation period, or an abomination.

            What the author is saying is that there are clear passages which contradict the passages dispensationalist take out of context or spiritualize. Dispensationalist claim to use a consistent literal hermeneutic. They do this…unless the passage contradicts what they believe, and then all of a sudden 1) John represents the raptured Church (even though there is not rising of the dead in Christ first), 2) the Holy Spirit is the restrainer (nowhere stated in the text), 3) suddenly in Revelation the elect are not the elect (even though the elect are defined as the Church throughout the New Testament), but some imaginary people called “tribulation saints” who are neither “in Adam,” nor “in Christ”, 4) the gathering of the elect is not the gathering of the elect (but the gathering of this imaginary category of people outside of Christ’s Body), 5) there is somehow salvation outside of being in Christ, being baptized into His death (outside of Christ’s body, the Church), 6) that the New Covenant has not been made with Israel yet, (even though “not all who are descended from Israel are Israel, and there is even now a remnant chosen by grace, into which the Gentiles are ingrafted…in other words, the Church is not a parenthesis in the middle of dealing with Israel), 7) that the Church is called to overcome, but then is raptured before facing that which they are called to overcome…the antichrists and false prophets.

            So until you can provide a clear passage supporting dispensationalist that DOES NOT CONTRADICT the plain words of Scripture, then I don’t think he owes you that check.

          3. Thank you for your thorough reply! You made some excellent points.

            Your response further underlines the weakness in the Dispensational position, thus showing why no Dispensationalist has ever met the criteria for receiving that $1000.00 check. You’d think if their doctrine was so “biblical” that they’d be able to show where it’s found in the Bible. But, to date, none have ever submitted actual scriptural evidence.

            Jesus’ best to you and yours!

        2. Mr. James,

          So, your argument is that because I have no verses that speak of my beliefs (your claim, not mine) its okay for you to have no verses that speak of yours? Isn’t that an odd stance for a director of a center devoted to biblical integrity to take?

          Again, you’re clinging to an argument that a person does not have to have clear biblical verses to prove what they claim to be biblical in biblical. If your argument were correct it would nullify Jesus’ promise that His followers would be able to “know the truth.” Jesus did not leave His Church without a clear direction. He is not the “author of confusion.” Personally, I do not—will not—believe what I believe about the Bible unless I can see it clearly taught in Scripture. However, because there are no actual verses that teach any of the eight Dispensational doctrines I listed this does proves that it these prophecy doctrines—your prophecy doctrines—are intellectually and biblically dishonest. Clear biblical evidence gives biblical integrity to any such claim of biblical truth.

          I am a bit confused why you keep claiming there are no verses that mention that there is only One God. I will give you an example of how this clarity and harmony works from Old to New Testament.

          First, there are several verses that clearly state that there is only One God and that Jesus is that One God. This 15-point list is just some of them:

          1. There is One God: Exo 20:3; Deu 6:4-9; Mark 12:28-34; Gen 1:1; Mal 2:10; Isa 44:6-8; Isa 45:2-6, Isa 45:21-23; Isa 46:8-9 / John 1:1-2, 14; John 14:9, John 14:17-18; 1 Cor 8:4-6; Eph 4:5-6; 1 Tim 1:17, 1 Tim 2:5; Jude 1:25; James 2:19; Rev 4:2-3
          2. God/Jesus is the Great “I Am”: Exo 3:14; Isa 43:10-11, Isa 43:25 / John 18:5-8
          3. God/Jesus is Mankind’s Savior: Isa 43:10-11,25 /Mat 1:21; Luke 2:11
          4. God/Jesus is the “Rock”: 2 Sam 22:1-3,32; Psa 78:34-35 / Mat 16:15-18, Mat 7:24; 1 Cor 10:4
          5. God/Jesus is the One Who Was to Come: Zec 14:4-5 / 1 The 3:11-13
          6. God/Jesus is “Immanuel, God with Us”: Isa 7:14, Isa 9:6-7; Mic 5:2 / Luke 1:26-35; Mat 1:23; John 1:1-2, 14
          7. God/Jesus is the First and the Last: Isa 44:6, Isa 46:9 / Rev 1:17-18
          8. God/Jesus is the Creator: Gen 1:1 / John 1:1-3,10,14
          9. God/Jesus has “All Power”: 1 Chr 29:11-12 / Mat 28:18
          10. God/Jesus is the “Good Shepherd”: Psa 23 / John 10:8-15
          11. God/Jesus is the King: Psa 24 / Mat 2:1-6
          12. God/Jesus is “the First and the Last”: Isa 41:4 / Rev 1:17
          13. God/Jesus is “LORD of lords and KING of kings”: Deu 10:17 / Rev 17:14; Phi 2:10-11
          14. God/Jesus is the “Lamb of God”: Gen 22:8 / John 1:29
          15. God/Jesus is the Blood Atonement: Lev 17:11 / Acts 20:28

          Please, notice how each of these verses clearly speaks of these facts. Their language is not hidden in some type of code that would make their correct interpretation difficult to see. They do not require study notes in a specially made Study Bible to tell you what each of these verse say. No, they plainly state what they mean, which makes their interpretation quite simple.

          Now, Mr. James, would you please list the Old and New Testament verses that you have, which clearly speak of any or all of the eight Dispensational teaching points I listed?

          1. I don’t understand how you keep missing the point.

            The verses I use are the same as those of many, many other dispensationalists, so they aren’t difficult to find.

            Not only that, I’m totally blown away that you used exactly the method I said you must use to know that Jesus is speaking in Acts 1:8. You spent paragraphs saying exactly what I did in a couple of sentences – and somehow you tried to use that to show me I’m wrong. That’s just strange.

            Also, I didn’t ask you to prove there is one God with a single verse – so I don’t know why you went to such great lengths to show me that is true. I did exactly what you did and asked for a single verse in isolation that demonstrates unequivocally that Jesus is God. You haven’t done that, nor can you. (Although, as I said, I do believe he is.)

            So, all you have done is prove exactly what I suggested – you can’t meet your own demands.

            And finally, I did very clearly provide the passages that support the idea of the Antichrist entering a 7-year covenant with Israel (which is also one Mr. Bowers listed) – which I did just as an example. There is not point in my reproducing the work that has been done hundreds of times both by myself and other dispensatoinalists if you’re going to ignore it when I briefly produce the support for just one of your points.

            I’m not asking you to accept my interpretation – that is a different question entirely. However, I did show the biblical basis for the belief in precisely the same way you did for your two points.

            To another of Mr. Bowers’ points: Christ will reign for 1000 years – Revelation 20:1-6. I don’t know how verses 4 and 6 could be any clearer.

            So, whether or not you accept my interpretation, I’ve met the challenge.

            Should I also go around proclaiming that your offer is a sham?

            David James
            The Alliance for Biblical Integrity

          2. Mr. James,

            You are still not seeing the issue, which is that teachings such as Acts 1:8 are clearly spoken of. Again, such teachings contain no mystery language, but instead speak directly as to what to expect, and in this case, clearly how the prophecy was fulfilled. This is not the case with the teachings found in Dispensationalism. It is instead an eschatology view that is laden with mystery language and surmised theories, most of which (if not all) have no actual scriptural evidence.

            You have not given any verses that actually mention what you claim. You instead cite a verse and then claim it says the antichrist will do such and such, or whatever you decide it to say. But—again—nowhere in the verse you site does it actually say what you are claiming is said there.

            The Bible is not a book of personal interpretations. It is a book that is the message of God for His people. So, how about this? Why not give us a verse that says there will be a gap between the 69th and 70th Weeks of Daniel. This is the pivotal teaching necessary for every Dispensational theory. So, since this event is so vital to everything you believe about the “last days, you should surely have at least one verse that says there is to be such a gap, right? Now, please, don’t go and use your study Bible notes and say there has to be a gap because it’s necessary for the Antichrist or the tribulation or some other hullabaloo. Just give us one verse that actually says there is to be such a gap.

            Concerning your “Mr. Bower’s points” on a supposed Millennial reign of Jesus Christ, please show us where such a reign is spoken of as you or Mr. Bowers claims. Where are those verses in the Old Testament and where do Jesus and His apostles refer to them in the New Testament?

            So far you are not giving even one verse that mentions what you’re claiming is biblical. Instead you keep referring to commentaries written by men that believe as you. Myself, I prefer the writings of the prophets and of the apostles. Their writing is what gives any biblical teaching its integrity.

            TK Burk

          3. How could Revelation 20 be any more clear about a 1000 year reign?

            It is after the 2nd coming in chapter 19. And after the first resurrection.

            And then it says: “And they lived and reigned with Christ for a thousand years.”

            This is #8 in your challenge.

            Let me guess – you’re not going to write me a check.

            I see the issue very clearly.


          4. Also, do you agree that Genesis 3:15 is a reference to Christ?

            If so, where does it say that there will be a multi-millennium gap between God’s statement and the birth of Eve’s son?

            The most obvious reading of the verse would suggest that it will be one of her immediate offspring who will crush the serpent – but that’s not the case – and we don’t find out until much, much later that a gap of that length exists.

            I’ll say it again, it doesn’t bother me that you have a different understanding of certain passages. The problem is that 1) you won’t acknowledge that Rev 20:6 could very legitimately be understood to be speaking of a millennial reign on the earth and 2) you use exactly the same methodology that dispensationalists use to come to your conclusions.

            However, you can’t both acknowledge those to things and keep from writing the check, without calling your own integrity into question.

            This is why I suggested that you just drop the charade.

          5. I must confess this is one of the silliest responses I’ve ever received from a Dispensationalist. I am still shaking my head…

            So, you are going to use Genesis 3:15 as your excuse for NOT having a verse to support your gap theory between Daniel’s 60th and 70th weeks? Seriously?

            Well, now we know why no Dispensationalist has ever gotten this $1000.00.

          6. Now you’re being silly. Obviously you’re now dancing around the issue. I clearly wasn’t defending not providing a verse by going to Genesis 3:15 – but rather demonstrating that you also believe in a gap of time that isn’t completely obvious in the text.

            Concerning Revelation 19 – he is seen in heaven, then the armies of the earth fight against him. Once again, talk about silly arguments.

            Concerning Revelation 20. Now you’ve moved the goal post. Your standard for the $1000 was not to find a verse that you agreed with, but rather to find a verse / passage to support the teaching. The passage unequivocally suggests that a 1000 year reign is at least one potentially viable interpretation.

            So, you have proven exactly what I charged – that you never had any intention to pay out $1000. That being the case the offer is nothing more than grandstanding and your integrity is in shambles.

            I didn’t have to prove my point. You did it for me.

            So sad – because you’re going to go on keeping the offer up – and telling others that you defeated another dispensationalist.


          7. Again you are NOT reading what the offer says. I never asked for passages that “support” your teachings. What I said is this: If you’re a Dispensational believer, and if you believe that any or all of the above eight teachings are biblical, would you please give us at least one Bible verse that actually says any of the above? Though Dispensational teachers claim to have much scriptural evidence to support their teachings, you only need one Bible scripture to qualify for the $1000.00.

            Did you see it? That “actually says.” Of course you can find verses you claim “supports” your theories. But that is not how correct biblical interpretation is achieved. If I followed the same interpretive rule as you I could make up any sort of teachings and then find verses I claim supports those views.

            When I was a young minister a West Virginia pastor took me aside to tell me something he claimed would change my life. He simply told me: “Preach from your study, don’t study to preach.” I did not understand what he meant, so I asked him to explain. In response he said that a preacher should first ground himself in God’s Word before talking about any subject from the pulpit. That way, he explained, as he preaches the Word he has grounded himself in will flow out naturally. He then told me that many preachers instead think of a subject to speak on, and then they look for scriptures that seem to support their thought. That later type message can—and often does—lead to a wrong interpretation of Scripture. Then when he preaches his wrong interpretation of Scripture it becomes false doctrine spoken from the pulpit.

            Mr. James, I am not being dishonest here, you are. You claim that Genesis 3:15 is a time text, which it is not, and then you use it to prove that there is a gap of time between Daniel’s 69th and 70th Weeks. Again, the challenge is verses that “actual say” what you teach on Dispensationalism. You have failed at this task, which is no surprise.

            The only one here that needs to be honest is you. You need to come to grips with the fact that your emperor has no clothes. You have no verses that actually mention any or all of the eight Dispensational points I asked about…not one.

            When I discovered I could not find verses to prove the Dispensational teachings I had been taught were biblical, I looked to my Bible to see what it actually did say. I sincerely hope you can overcome your cognitive dissonance and look to your Bible too.

          8. Once again you didn’t respond to the point about Jesus’ millennial reign in Rev. 20.

            And as I pointed out it doesn’t just “support it,” it literally says it.

            It’s your point #8 – so how can you possibly say that there are no verses that support it?

            My guess is that you will say that it doesn’t literally mean what it says – and you’ll move the goalpost again.

            And, neither have you supplied one Scripture that *says* (not just *supports,* by your own standard) that Jesus is God. (And I will re-iterate, I believe he is God).

            So, I can meet your test with Rev 20:6, but you cannot meet a similar test for something you believe.

            Also, there’s no need to be condescending. You and I were saved within a year of each other and I’ve been studying and teaching the Bible for 25 years. That doesn’t mean I’m right on everything I’m teaching – but it does mean that I work hard to be right – and don’t simply rely on someone else’s commentary or study Bible notes.

            It just doesn’t get anymore condescending than to tell a Bible teacher “you need to look to your Bible” when the implication is that the reason he doesn’t believe something you believe is because he’s relying more upon what others say than the Word of God.

            This is simply arrogance – and flows from the same spirit as the $1000 offer.

            You also hold to doctrines that I believe are based on your misunderstanding of the Scriptures, but I would never suggest that this is because you’re intentionally being dishonest in the way you handle Scripture itself. The dishonesty comes from not applying the same standard to your own teaching that you apply to others’.

            The dishonesty also comes from not acknowledging that my understanding of Rev 20:6 (as just one example) is a verse that actually does say what I believe it does – even if you believe it is the wrong interpretation.

            As an aside, I’m very thankful that you’re at least willing to allow my comments and our discussion to post – and I will leave it to the reader to decide.

            I didn’t enter this discussion thinking I would change your mind – or get the $1000 – but to allow others to see what you’re really doing.

            So, going back to the point – are you going to say that Rev 20:6 does not say that Jesus will reign with the saints for 1000 years (which happens after fighting the armies of the world on the earth in Rev 19)?

            Rev 20:6 – “Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and shall reign with him a thousand years.”

            Again, the standard you’ve set is whether or not it says it – not what you interpret it to mean.

          9. But I did respond with an entire study. Did you ever follow the link I gave you? Did you read what is found there?

            Why do you persist in ignoring the fact that you have NO verses that actually say what you teach?

            You claim your gap between Daniel’s 69th and 70th Weeks is answered by Genesis 3:15, which makes absolutely no sense at all. Then you offer NO VERSES that speak of any such gap between those weeks.

            Then once you’ve exhausted your argument about that gap you jump to your Millennial theory, which, again you have no passages that actually say what you claim is found in Revelation 20.

            I regret you cannot see the fallacy of your position, but you are just one more Dispensationalists that believes imaginary theories that you cannot prove are biblical. You teach more from your commentaries than you do from your Bible.

            I do hope you come to see the truth about this.

          10. How does Rev. 20:6 not say what it clearly says?

            In fact I did read your article, which would take an article of equal length to respond to biblically.

            However, I just went back through it again, because I didn’t remember you mentioning Revelation 20 at all – and I did a search and went through the article several times – and you do not deal with that passage at all that I can find.

            Again, your challenge was not an interpretation of a passage, but whether or not a passage says something – which it does – namely: Jesus reigning for 1000 years.

            Does Revelation 20:6 say that or not? It’s not a difficult question.

            I could go through all 8 points – and have already answered 2 of them – but still no $1000 forthcoming.

            Furthermore, you continue to ignore my challenge concerning the deity of Christ – but you cannot answer that because you know that it pulls the curtain back on the nature of your sham challenge.

            So, why don’t you just admit there isn’t such a passage – and that you use the same methodology as dispensationalists to arrive at some of your own theological positions.

            Unless you deal directly with Revelation 20:6 and providing a verse that says clearly, “Jesus is God” (and I believe he is) – then any further responses are just attempts at redirection – and the truth is clear.

          11. So my study, The Hyper-Eisegesis on the Millennium, does not address what you believe about Revelation 20? Okay, which of the following do you teach will happen during your supposed 1,000-year earthly reign of Jesus Christ?

            1. a second coming of Christ
            2. a bodily resurrection of the saints
            3. a destruction of the antichrist
            4. an earthly reign of Jesus on earth for 1000-years
            5. mortals alive after the Great Tribulation, will live on into this 1000-year millennium
            6. people dying at 100 years old will be considered the equivalent age of a child
            7. resurrected immortals will be reigning over mortals
            8. resurrected immortals will be able to disappear and reappear at will
            9. resurrected immortals will have access to the expanse of the universe
            10. ALL carnivores animals will become vegetarians
            11. children will play with vipers
            12. Jesus will sit on the physical throne of David to reign as the millennial King
            13. the New Covenant of Jeremiah 31:31-34 and Hebrews 8:6-13 is finally accessible to man
            14. a central location in Jerusalem will be the location of Jesus’ earthly reign
            15. a physical Christ will return to establish a 1000-year earthly reign

            That above is the list used in that study. The problem is, though you claim these things are spoken of in Revelation 20, there is in fact NOT ONE verse in Revelation 20 that actually mentions them…not one. Revelation 20 is the only chapter in the entire Bible that mentions a 1,000-year reign. But the Book of Revelation is laden with time text verses that tells its readers the time in which its prophecies were to be fulfilled. And, to the dismay of a Dispensationalist, it says it was to happen close the time of its writing, not over two thousand years later. This study explains that biblical expectancy in detail: The Time of Revelation: Part 1 , Part 2 , Part 3. These biblical time indicators alone prove that Revelation 20 is not speaking of a 2,000 plus year future fulfillment, but is instead one that was to occur within the generation of those who crucified Christ. That is the same timeframe in which Jesus gave for the fulfillments for all He prophesied in His Matthew 24, Mark 13, and Luke 21 Mount Olivet Discourses (See Matthew 24:34; Mark 13:30; Luke 21:32).

          12. By the way – you’re absolutely wrong about using commentaries more than the Bible. You know so very little about me, yet you continue to make these sorts of personal accusations.

            The fact is I VERY RARELY ever consult commentaries and do almost all of my work directly in the Scriptures.

            Perhaps it would be better to just ask, rather than repeatedly make unfounded statements – something as simple as “Let me ask you a question….”

            Common courtesy is just not that difficult.

          13. You are correct. I do not know you. But what you have shown me of yourself is that you repeatedly refer me to commentaries and you offer very little Bible in your arguments. Therefore, I only know what I see.

            Oh, and while we are talking about not knowing someone and common courtesy, maybe you could refrain from accusing me of being dishonest and closed minded to correction. Because, as you say: you do not know me.

          14. Revelation 20: I knew it would happen – and even predicted it – you moved the goalpost again.

            Your offer does not mention any of these things. #8 is very simple – is there a verse that mentions a 1000 year reign of Christ?

            Rev 20:6 does say that – and there are exegetical reasons for my other conclusions based on the text alone – however, that is not what your offer calls for.

            I have met your offer and you have refused to acknowledge it – or actually you have acknowledged it by tacitly admitting the text does say it, but your interpretation is different – but that is YOUR interpretation, which was not the standard in the offer – AND you base your interpretation on the context – the very thing you will not allow dispensationalists.

            Once again, you have proven my point.

            At least it’s out in the open.

          15. Mr. James,

            You again err not reading what is actually written.

            Please read #8 again: A physical Jesus Christ will return to establish a 1000-year reign on earth.

            So, the only one moving any goalpost here is you.

            So, how about it? Do you believe #8?
            Do you have a verse that actually says #8?

          16. Also, if you had read what I wrote about the study questions I included, I asked if you believed any of those points were in your Revelation 20 1,000 year Millennium. I did not say that those points were in my $1,000.00 challenge. Please, try to read what is actually written…

          17. I think I said your offer was not intellectually or biblically honest – and then I proceeded to show you why – as noted above.

            Your failure to write a check for $1000 to someone who met your challenge – exactly what is that?

            Honestly, I don’t care about the money and I don’t want it. I’m suggesting that you withdraw the challenge because it is nothing more than grandstanding and a sham – and I’ve shown over and over that you do not, will not and cannot meet the standard for developing your own theological positions by the same standard you require of dispensationalists. Neither will you acknowledge that any interpretation that doesn’t correspond to your own is at least an exegetically possible one – whether or not you agree that it is correct – which is a different question.

            Again, the question of being intellectually and biblically honest raise its ugly head again.

            Concerning commentaries, etc. – Have you even engaged with the exegetical arguments of dispensationalists? You act like you’re not even familiar with those from responsible biblical scholars.

            They agree, not because they rely on each other, but rather on the biblical text. The same is true for me. And, as I said, I’m not going to waste my time laying out the biblical case in this forum, because you have seem to have no intention of taking it seriously anyway.

            If you’re making the assumption that I can’t, simply because I won’t re-invent the wheel here in this discussion, that would be foolish.

            Besides that, you’ve already demonstrated you won’t acknowledge any interpretation but your own as even a possibility based on the text – then why would I go beyond the two points I’ve already dealt with that you have rejected out of hand.

            I’m not trying to convince you of my position. If I were, then I would get deeper into these.

            I’m only trying to show your readers the problem with the way you’re handling the whole thing so that maybe you will do the right thing concerning the offer.

            I don’t plan to continue this much longer, if at all, because you’ve already shown your true colors.

            Only you can change the perception.

          18. So, again, instead of you providing scriptural evidence for your Dispensational theories you choose to attack me for asking you (or any other Dispensationalist) for biblical evidence?

            Wouldn’t the best way to show the world that I am in error be to simply provide Bible passages to prove your “end time” theories are actually in the Bible?

            Why waste such an opportunity? Unless, of course, you have no such evidence…

            Yours is just another Dispensationalist crying foul that they were asked to prove their theories are in the Bible. You are turing out to be like every other Dispensationalist I have ever talked with (and I’m not just referring to this challenge now), they quickly ran out of Bible when they were asked to biblically prove their theories too. Many instead use newspaper clippings or magazine articles to “prove” what they say is in the Bible. What they should be able to do is prove that their theories are in the Bible with verses that actual teach what they claim…which they’re never able to do.

            I am so thankful that I saw the fallacies of Dispensationalism so many years ago. The very issue that I could not find biblical support for what I had been taught is what freed me from its unbiblical doctrines. My journey began when I could not find any verses from Jesus or His apostles where they taught about a future rebuilt third Temple. I could find where Jesus fulfilled everything about that system. I could find verses where He is said to be greater than the Temple. I could find verses where His believers are said to now be the Temple of God. But nowhere could I find any mention of a future rebuilt Temple. The teachings about such a future Temple are created to support Dispensational theories, but these theories are not based on scriptures that actually mention such a Temple will ever be built.

            So, Mr. James, I appreciate your interest in my challenge. I also appreciate your help highlighting the fact that Dispensationalism is not founded on God-inspired biblical evidence, but is instead a theory from man-inspired predictions.

          19. Once again, you ignore the substance of my reply – and instead created a long reply to a very minor point.

            You’re making the mistake of thinking I can’t provide an exegetical basis, just because I won’t indulge you in the midst of your dancing around the issues. I’m not going to play your game.

            The substance that you failed to address at all is:

            1. Does, or does not Rev. 20:6 speak of Jesus reigning for 1000 years – no matter how you choose to interpret it based on context? Your challenge was to provide a supporting passage, which I did – and yet you try to make it sound as if I haven’t. That is dishonest no matter how you slice it.

            2. You have yet to provide a single verse that unequivocally states that Jesus is God – which is much harder to find than a verse that says Jesus will reign for 1000 years.

            3. In reference to both cases, you use exactly the same methodology that you reject when used by dispensationalists – contextual analysis, both near and far.

            I could still use the $1000 – as I have met your challenge.

          20. Mr. James,

            I tire of you accusing me of “ignoring” you. Please, remember that you have more than once admitted that you are NOT providing “exegetical” responses. Yet, we are supposed to be discussing biblical issues for which an exegetical response is required. So, it is not that I am ignoring your responses; it’s that your responses are absent what the Bible says.

            Now to your point #1: “Does, or does not Rev. 20:6speak of Jesus reigning for 1000 years”?

            My response: nope, not as you claim. Here is what it DOES say:

            (4) “…they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.”
            (6) “…shall reign with him a thousand years.”

            Again, no mention of your claim that there will be a second coming of Christ, or a bodily resurrection of the saints, or a destruction of the antichrist, or an earthly reign of Jesus on earth for 1000-years, or that mortals alive after the Great Tribulation, will live on into this 1000-year millennium, or that people dying at 100 years old will be considered the equivalent age of a child, or that resurrected immortals will be reigning over mortals, or that resurrected immortals will be able to disappear and reappear at will, or that resurrected immortals will have access to the expanse of the universe, or that all carnivores animals will become vegetarians, or that children will play with vipers, or that Jesus will sit on the physical throne of David to reign as the millennial King, or that the New Covenant of Jeremiah 31:31-34and Hebrews 8:6-13is finally accessible to man, or that a central location in Jerusalem will be the location of Jesus’ earthly reign, or that a physical Christ will return to establish a 1000-year earthly reign…none. You do believe that these things do happen in Revelation 20, right? And yet Revelation 20 does not speak of these situations happening during its 1,000 year period.

            More about you question #1: “Your challenge was to provide a supporting passage, which I did – and yet you try to make it sound as if I haven’t. That is dishonest no matter how you slice it.”

            My response: there you go grandstanding again. Mr. James you have not given any verse that states what I ask in my question #8. Have you already forgotten again what it actually does ask? Or are you just hoping you can make us all believe it is what you claim it to be…which seems to be a common trait among Dispensational teachers.

            You are the one being dishonest—again. You keep using the wording: “supporting passage.” I have made it abundantly clear in my challenge, and in more than one of my responses to you, that this is about providing clearly worded scriptures that actually state what you claim they say. Why is that challenge so difficult to understand? Why do you keep wanting that fact to go away? More importantly, why can’t you do it?

            Your point #2: “You have yet to provide a single verse that unequivocally states that Jesus is God – which is much harder to find than a verse that says Jesus will reign for 1000 years.”

            My response: So, again you go back to the argument that if you can show that I am wrong then you can be wrong too? Really?

            And, since you seem to enjoy ignoring my posts, I did give you several verses that verbatim state that Jesus is God. Old Testament verses that state who God is, and New Testament verses that state the same about Jesus. Things like God will be the savior, and then Jesus is the savior. Or that God is our shepherd, and then that Jesus is our shepherd. This is plain clear language that flows from the Old Testament to the New Testament. So to see that Jesus completes what is said in the Old Testament about God is as simple as reading the one verse alongside the other. Such interpretation requires no study notes or commentaries; just a good old KJV Bible…it can’t get any easier or clearer than that.

            But you cannot do the same with your Dispensational teachings, can you? You don’t have Old Testament verses that speak of a 1,000 year earthly reign of God, and then New Testament verses that agree with what you claim is found in Revelation 20, do you? You don’t have Old Testament verses that speak of a gap of time between the 69th and 70th Weeks of Daniel and similar verses that speak of the same in the New Testament either, do you? No, you claim such-and-such is found in Revelation 20, and then you find verses that you claim agree with your such-in-such claims. But, again, THERE ARE NO VERSES in the Old Testament that agree with what you claim if found in Revelation 20…none! As a matter of fact, you cannot even produce verses in Revelation 20 that say what you claim is found in Revelation 20…now THAT is a far cry from biblical integrity.

            Your point #3: “In reference to both cases, you use exactly the same methodology that you reject when used by dispensationalists – contextual analysis, both near and far.”

            My response: No, as I explained in my #2 response, I use clearly worded Bible verses, not Dispensational study notes or commentaries.

            Your closing statement: I could still use the $1000 – as I have met your challenge.

            My response: Met it? With what verse(s)?

            As an observation here: I do hope everyone reading through Mr. James’ responses noticed how quickly he got away from talking about your Daniel’s 69th and 70th Week gap theory. He only used one verse to support his teaching about such a gap, which was Genesis 3:15. I would guess that the majority of Bible scholars would agree that Daniel’s 70 Weeks is a prophecy talking about a given space of time. Genesis 3:15 is a prophecy about the promise of a redeemer. Daniels’s 70 Weeks speaks of a timeframe in which Daniel’s prophecies would be fulfilled. Genesis 3:15 gives no time indicators, but instead speaks only of the promise that there would be a redeemer one day. Once I pointed this out, Mr. James ran away to his Millennium…and yet he still acts as if his gap theory is biblical fact. This, sadly, is the way most discussions go with those who can only see the emperor’s clothes….

          21. I thought you did not like it when I mentioned your overuse of commentaries. Now you want me to read commentaries? Why? So I can see Dispensationalism?

            Remember what I said about how a person cannot find Dispensationalism in their Bibles without the help of Dispensational commentaries or the study notes in a Dispensational Study Bible? Well, you asking me about McClain, Pentecost, and Ryrie just confirmed that further…

            Just so you know, I was the assistant editor and an article contributor for an internationally known Dispensational prophecy ministry for several years. This ministry has a magazine, and is broadcast worldwide on “Christian TV,” AM and FM Radio, and shortwave. It was while I was working there that I started seeing that many of the things they taught was not in the Bible. I had no one tell me this. I did not read it in a commentary or in the study notes of my Bible. Instead I saw this fact while praying and studying my Bible. Sometime later I met other ministers who believed like myself. So, to ask me if I’ve studied the tenets of Dispensational dogma; yes, I certainly did.

          22. I already told you that I seldom use commentaries – and do most of my work directly in the text – so, now I’m a liar? You must be a real fun guy.

            I’ve been at this for 30 years – and it is incumbent on both those who are for and against a particular position as rabidly as you are to at least be familiar with the most standard works on the subject.

            Otherwise, you’re just guessing or relying on those who don’t really know what they are talking about for your information.

            So, I’ll ask once more: Are you familiar with any of the exegetical work done by respected biblical scholars who are dispensationalists. What dispensational books / authors have you read?

            What ministry were you with? Not all dispensational or prophetic ministries are created equal – and not all do good work with the biblical text.

          23. Mr. James,

            Please, do not add words to my mouth. I never said you are a liar. I only pointed out the inconsistency in your claim that you use more Bible than commentaries. If you’ll look through your responses and see all your references to commentaries you’ll see why I say that.

            And–AGAIN–I was a Dispensationalist working at a Dispensational ministry for many years, so, YES, I am very–VERY–familiar with the tenets of Dispensational theories.

            Also, as far as “respected scholars,” that title would only hold true if they can prove their claims are in fact in the Bible. Nothing personal against those men or their zeal. I only say this about the biblical evidences for their findings. So far your reading after them has not helped you to accomplish such evidences. Therefore, I do not see how they are going to give me any more information then they evidently have given you.

    2. David James

      Your arguments were anything but intellectual.

      I’ll go one step further than Mr. Burk

      God delayed His Kingdom because the Jews rejected Jesus.

      Show me any verses that support this.

      There is a gap between the 69th and 70th week of Daniel.
      Show me any verses that support this.

      There will be a secret pre-tribulation rapture of the Church.
      Show me any verses that support this.

      God will require the building of a physical third Jewish Temple.
      Show me any verses that support this.

      God will no longer accept grace and Jesus’ blood for salvation but will instead return to the Law and animal blood sacrifices.
      Show me any verses that support this.

      An Antichrist will make a seven-year covenant with the Jews.
      Show me any verses that support this.

      There will be a future seven-year tribulation period.
      Show me any verses that support this.

      A physical Jesus Christ will return to establish a 1000-year reign on earth.
      Show me any verses that support this.


      Yet Futurist Eschatology in Christianity can only be supported by puling numerous words and phrases from their originating context.

      A simple question to ask yourself is why does your Eschatology require this?

Comments are closed.