How can I teach someone who subscribes to Richard Jordan’s “Grace School of the Bible” that his entire framework for interpreting the Bible is wrong? He put out a pamphlet called “The Key to Understanding the Bible” that is astonishing, really. He insists on the King James version of the Bible being the only correct one and then uses 2 Tim 2:15 and a really strange interpretation of the word “divide” to claim that the Bible is divided into three parts: time past, but now, and the ages to come. He claims that time past was speaking to the Jews and covers from Genesis through the beginning of Acts. He claims the gospels speak to non-Gentiles and not to us. That does away with a lot of pesky contradictions to common Protestant beliefs, right? He says Romans through Philemon speaks to us and Hebrews through Revelations are written for the people that are left after the so-called rapture. I did manage to have discussion with her on purgatory, baptism and solo fida, but it was an odd discussion as I'm not used to the GOSPELS being off-limits to teach what Jesus wanted to teach us! I want to back up and discuss Jordan's framework for the Bible as I think that will make all other discussion flow much more smoothly. Any ideas? Links to already posted information would also be appreciated. Probably anything addressed to Dispensationalism in general would be good. Thank you so much for your help!!!

I thought I'd post a reply to my own post because I called in to speak to John Martignoni when he was on EWTN radio and he gave a great answer.posting.php?mode=reply&f=70&t=143549&sid=e92c717cea20d288e70c68cf5f9f9319# If anyone has anything to add to this, please do!!! This Grace School of the Bible only accepts the King James version of the bible as an authoritative source.

He gave me four points of reply.
1.) Ask her if the Church of England, who wrote the King James version of the bible, believed in dividing the bible into three parts.
2.) Ask her if she can give me any early church father who believed this way.
3.) Point out that Jesus often spoke in Gentile territory to Gentiles. (Can anyone give me quotes for this?)
4.) Tell her that Luke was, himself, a Gentile.
5.) Peter was writing to the same folks as Paul so how could Peter's Words not apply to us?

Please let me know if anyone has anything to add to this!

Ooops... sorry. My clapping smiley face came out as an address I now see because I didn't mark the post icon button. Sorry.

Hopefully someone will weigh in on this topic.

So only Paul's letters are addressed to the Church now? 1 John isn't 1 Peter isn't?

Anyway, I wouldn't spend much time on this individual, personally. I'm a very hard-core dispensationalist. I teach at a firmly dispensational school. I got two degrees from a different dispensational school. I have presented papers at dispensational conferences. I've read most of the dispensational systematic theologies out there. I've never heard that position. I mean, maybe he's right and everyone else is wrong. But he's got a serious burden of proof on his shoulders. Why in the world would he think that 1 John does not apply to the Church, but will all the sudden start applying after the Rapture? Or James! that was likely the first NT book written, and yet it was written to people after the Rapture? What? That's just silly. I'd also ask if he knows why the books of the NT are placed in the order that they are . . . they aren't exactly placed in the order they were written.

In other words, if I were to take time with that person (and I wouldn't), I would basically say, "Really? And how did you come to that conclusion?" a lot.

"I teach at a firmly dispensational school..."
Scofield teachings? Scofield Bible?
Cool, man, cool. Tell me more.

Meanwhile, your advice to the original thread poster is right on! There is no way logic, reason, persuation is going to work on invididuals whose minds have already sprung onto what they hold to be truth. GK Chesteron comes to mind here, he's right, have an open mind, but firmly clamp onto The Truth, as given by Our Father.
What is Truth? I don't know, I thought I once knew, now, as I hear others, I know that I do not know nearly as much. Must relearn.
Roland

Were he to say this to me I would ask:

1. What do you mean by "correct?"
2. Why is the KJV "the only correct one?"
2. What was the "correct" translation of the Bible prior to 1611?
3. What are the "correct" Bible translations for non-English speaking people today?

Great tips! Thank you, all of you, for responding!

Hello, I am Paul, and saw your conversation, of some months ago, may I explain this "strange" doctrine, funny we would even in this to be quoting the Bible. I will not make any endeaver to do so until invited. Thank you.

Sure, go ahead.

Peter describes the message he preaches in Acts 3:21 Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began.

He states that he is preaching that "which God hath spoken by the mouth of his holy prophets since the world began"

Compare that to this in Romans, Paul describes his gospel or preaching
Romans16:25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,

"Which was kept secret since the world began," the question that must be answered is .

How can these two be the same thing?