Myron Robertson Seeking God's heart

For the most part Dr. Missler's teaching is biblically sound and I have found few better. However, he is a staunch believer in Schofield's doctrines and I have seen on some of his Revelation videos where he finds scripture that simply disproves portions of Schofield's doctrine and he simply dismisses it saying it does not appear to agree with our doctrine and we know our doctrine is true. So while he is quite happy to use scripture to tear to shreds (his words) someone else's doctrines, he is not willing to allow the same word of God to shred his beliefs. That is a problem, but I have never found a single person who does not struggle with this problem from time to time. Why should we expect him to be any different?

Neither Schofield nor his teacher Darby actually created the doctrine that carries his name. That doctrine was created by a Jesuit doctor of theology, Francisco Ribera, during the Counter-Reformation in the 1500s. After the reformers, led by Martin Luther, started naming Catholicism as Babylon and the Pope as the Anti-Christ, the Pope commissioned several people to find alternate interpretations of the scriptures the reformers used to support their doctrines.

Darby discovered this doctrine in the 1800's and began teaching it. Schofield was his best known student. Schofield was funded by the World Zionist Movement to alter the beliefs of Christians so that they would be more favorable to an attitude of acceptance of the return of Jews to their traditional homeland. Thus Christian Zionism and a futurist interpretation of the book of Revelation came into Protestant theology. Portions of this theology are not at all biblical, and other portions take some serious twisting of scripture. 

Ironically various Pentecostal denominations, most of which are staunchly anti-Catholic and hate any thing that even remotely looks or sounds Catholic are the primary proponents of this doctrine which did not exist at all before Father Ribera created it.

January 02 2017 • 6 responses • Vote Up • Share • Report

K T

First, I am very picky about biblical teaching, and what I am willing to dedicate my precious time to learning. About two years ago, I started having serious doubts about my faith, and being from an IT background where I work around mostly atheists, I wanted to validate my faith. My atheist friends knew more about the bible than I did, and they told me about slavery in the bible, enlightened me about the poor treatment of women, the genocide of the Canaanites, and the fact that the stoning of rebellious children was okay, and that caused me to think about abandoning my faith and becoming a secular humanist since those are absolutely not okay. Also, the fact that every pastor brings up sex was a big turn-off since I know that Soloman had hundreds of wives and concubines and David had 8 wives and many concubines too. Heck Abraham made a baby with his wife's handmaid and then they threw her out to die. 

That sex talk in the church is a real put-off since bringing my kids to church makes me have to explain things to my kids that I have no desire to explain to my seven-year-old daughter, and I don't like that kind of talk in front of my wife. That is a personal thing, in my opinion, and I wish that it was not addressed in the open congregation in church.

Before I abandoned my faith, I read much of the new testament and I still had some questions about things, so I went to bible commentary to better understand what I was reading. That was very verbose, so I thought that I would use one of my audible credits on the Book of Romans, and it was heavy. After about 3 hours in, I really got it; sin is bad. I never finished it, but I never thought that it was not sound teaching. I then went to a more fun book, the gospel of John and I loved it. Since then, I have purchased Matthew, Luke, Revelation, Isaiah, and Corinthians and I am still working through them. I would love to get Genesis, but it is still hard for me to hear the flood story and Adam and Eve in the garden without serious questions, so I don't think that I am ready for that yet. 

In Chuck Missler’s classes, he teaches with a verse by verse strategy using scripture to interpret scripture, As a matter of fact, I think that he uses the KJV because he reads so much of the bible in his teaching that he would violate copyright laws if he didn't use the KJV. But, if you don't think that his interpretation is right, he always says, “Don't trust Chuck Missler,” and he uses some verse in Acts Chapter 17 saying that you should do your own research. 

Overall, everything that he teaches is biblical and he uses the bible to explain the world that we live in. He believes in a literal Genesis story, a real Moses and Exodus, Moses wrote the Torah, Isaiah wrote Isaiah, and he believes in the rapture and Christ's coming and the Millennial Kingdom. I don't know of any other theologians that can even come close to his level of understanding of science, which is nice for me since that is where my doubts really come from.

The only thing that I wish is that he would not have such an eschatological slant to his teachings. I have read Revelation but it is hard for me to read it and understand it. Also, I have never read the book of Daniel or Isaiah all the way through and I easily get lost. So my basic understanding of eschatology basically stopped at Christ is coming again to judge the living and the dead. If you are like me, you should consider starting with Revelation so that you can get what he is saying when he talks about things future because he gets deep fast. 

So yes, he teaches faith saves through grace. He teaches the bible as literal truth. He explains how scientific discovery today fits with the biblical narrative that even someone like me, who is a liberal and was and maybe still is in many ways a skeptic about some of the bible, gives me a reason to question that skepticism.

March 31 2022 • 0 responses • Vote Up • Share • Report