Home | Be a Christian | Devotionals | Join Us! | Forums | Rules | F.A.Q.


Go Back   Christian Forums > Theology (orthodox Christians only) > Theology (orthodox Christians only) > Christian Scriptures > Bibliology & Hermeneutics
Register BlogsPrayersJobsArcade Calendar Mark Forums Read

Bibliology & Hermeneutics The study of the Bible and Scriptures, and its interpretation and translation.

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 26th March 2003, 01:50 PM
Regular Member

Gender: Female Faith: Other-Religion Member For 5 Years
 
Join Date: 13th January 2003
Posts: 365
Blessings: 97,350
Reps: 10 (power: 0)
Gideon4God is on a distinguished road
Old vs. New Scofield Bible

Does anyone here like the Scofield Bible?  What is the difference between the "old" and the "new" Scofield?
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Become a CF Site Supporter Today and Make These Ads Go Away!

  #2  
Old 1st April 2003, 08:41 PM
Athlon4all's Avatar
I'm offline indefintely

27 Member For 5 Years
 
Join Date: 6th February 2002
Posts: 533
Blessings: 145,305
Reps: 10 (power: 0)
Athlon4all has disabled reputation
Old is KJV, New is NKJV. I'm not sure what else but the diff between NKJV and KJV is the main diff. Scofield Study Bibles are great.
__________________
Athlon4all
Email and AIM, etc in my profile. Please do not hesitate to give me a yell
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

"In the beginning God created the Heavens and the Earth." Genesis 1:1
Jesus Loves YOU!
  #3  
Old 1st April 2003, 09:05 PM
Regular Member

Gender: Female Faith: Other-Religion Member For 5 Years
 
Join Date: 13th January 2003
Posts: 365
Blessings: 97,350
Reps: 10 (power: 0)
Gideon4God is on a distinguished road
The new Scofield has the NIV and not the NKJV if I'm not mistaken.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
  #4  
Old 1st April 2003, 10:01 PM
Jephunneh's Avatar
Senior Member

Member For 5 Years
 
Join Date: 23rd August 2002
Posts: 721
Blessings: 164,328
Reps: 9 (power: 0)
Jephunneh is an unknown quantity at this point
From"The Answer Book" by Rev. Samuel C. Gipp, Th.D.



QUESTION: Isn't the New Scofield Bible a King James Bible'?

ANSWER: Not only is the New Scofield Bible NOT a King James Bible, it is not even a "Scofield" Bible.

EXPLANATION: The first and most weighty reason why the New Scofield Bible is not a Scofield Bible at all is shamefully simple. Dr. C.I. Scofield did not edit it. Dr. Scofield died in 1921! Barring a very "selective" resurrection, it is impossible for a man who died in 1921 to edit a book in 1967.

The publisher's justification for a new "edition" is that Dr. Scofield, whose reference Bible was first published in 1909 added material and published another edition in 1917. But it is an author's preogative to alter his own works, but that certainly does not give others, more than 45 years after his death, a blank check to make alterations and then sign his name to it!

If we altered the ending of "Macbeth" we would be less than honest to claim that the change met Shakespeare's approval.

Secondly, the editors exercised great liberty in changing attributes of Dr. Scofield's reference work that Dr. Scofield himself felt important enough to include in his work. In the introduction to their doubly dishonest 1967 publication they admit such changes.

New Scofield: "Among the changes and improvements in this edition are: important word changes in the text to help the reader; a modified system of self-pronunciation; revision of many of the introductions to the books of the Bible, including designation of the author, theme, and date; more subheadings; clarification of some footnotes, deletion of others, and the addition of many new notes;: more marginal references; an entirely new chronology; a new index; a concordance especially prepared for this edition; new maps; and more legible type. Some of these features are explained below."

By their own words, they admit to altering Dr. Scofield's text (the King James Bible), introduction of books of the Bible, notes, marginal references, chronology and many other features.

Did Dr. Scofield give his approval to these changes? Not unless one of the nine committee members had the witch of Endor conjure him up as she had Samuel!
In fact, the publisher even admits that the changes made were arbitrary choices of the revision committee.

"Each position taken represents the thinking or conviction of the committee as a group."

What are the results of such shenanigans? One example will suffice. Let us examine the footnote found in Acts 8:12 of the New Scofield Bible concerning baptism.

"Baptism has, since the apostolic age, been practiced by every major group in the Christian church and, in Protestant communions, is recognized as one of two sacraments - the other being the Lord's Supper. Since early in the Church's history three different modes of baptism have been used: aspersion (sprinkling); affusion (pouring); and immersion (dipping)."

Here we see that the nine revisors (NOT Dr. Scofield) believe that there is a difference between the true Christian church and Protestant "communion". Might I ask? When one group is defined as "Protestant" what is the other group called?

Secondly, the nine apostate revisors (NOT Dr. Scofield) claim, without scriptural proof that Christians baptize by pouring and sprinkling as well as immersion.

Remember, the footnote is found in a S-C-O-F-I-E-L-D of 1967. A book which claims on its title page that a dead man (Dr. Scofield) is one of its editors.

What does the footnote for Acts 8:12 in the REAL Scofield Bible of 1917 which had a living Dr. Scofield as its editor say?

Nothing. There IS no such footnote!

That's right! The New "Scofield" bible has a "Scofield" note added after the death of "Scofield" the editor which the REAL Dr. Scofield never approved of and never had in a text anytime in his life time!

I ask you, is this honest?

Proof that the New Scofield Bible isn't a King James Bible is found on almost every page where the margin notes the twin Bible reading as "KJV". The text of the New Scofield Bible is NOT a King James Bible and it is NOT a Scofield Bible.

It might be noted that in recent years the size and shape of the New Scofield Bible has been changed to more resemble the Scofield Reference Bible. Many Christians who desire a true Scofield Reference Bible have purchased a New Scofield Bible by mistake.

The "Bible" business is lucrative. Isn't it?
  #5  
Old 1st April 2003, 10:37 PM
Regular Member

Gender: Female Faith: Other-Religion Member For 5 Years
 
Join Date: 13th January 2003
Posts: 365
Blessings: 97,350
Reps: 10 (power: 0)
Gideon4God is on a distinguished road
Thx for the post. I should be getting my Old Scofield Bible in a couple of days, I ordered it the end of last week.

your peach,

Gideon
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
  #6  
Old 3rd April 2003, 08:04 PM
Jephunneh's Avatar
Senior Member

Member For 5 Years
 
Join Date: 23rd August 2002
Posts: 721
Blessings: 164,328
Reps: 9 (power: 0)
Jephunneh is an unknown quantity at this point
You're welcome Gideon.
  #7  
Old 5th April 2003, 12:32 PM
TWells's Avatar
Senior Member

Gender: Male Faith: Other-Religion Country: United States Member For 5 Years
 
Join Date: 1st March 2003
Location: TN
Posts: 505
Blessings: 138,769
Reps: 70 (power: 0)
TWells will become famous soon enough
Gideon,

I have a copy of the "apostate" New Scofield Bible which is the King James Version. The reason for the revisions is because of the numerous changes in Dispensationalism since Scofields death. Gideon if your intrested in normative Dispensationalism then your only options (with this view) are Scofield, Larkin, and Sperrys Systematic Theology. Your going to have to write off Charles Ryrie, John Walvoord (the two leading dispensationalists since Chafers death) and others as "apostates". I dont know of any dispies that hold to the extinct classic form. All are now 'revised' (with the exception of progressives like me.)  Ryries "Dispensationalism" (formally titled "Dispensationalism Today") has been since its writing in the 60's THE standard statement of Dispensationalism. Walvoord was on the revision committee for the New Scofield Bible. If your going to use the Old Scofield Bible be aware of the numerous changes made in the system since Scofield (such as the view of two destinys for saved Jews and saved Gentiles - one for new earth the other for new heaven.
__________________
"...I simply couldnt get along with the Christian God. He was a bombastic bore, not at all the sort of fellow you would want to entertain for dinner, because you would be sitting on the edge of your chair listening to his subtle attempts to undermine your existence and probe the unathentic nature of your life. He was like the school chaplain who took you aside for a VERY SERIOUS TALK" - Alan Watts

Last edited by TWells; 5th April 2003 at 02:28 PM.
  #8  
Old 5th April 2003, 04:00 PM
Tinker Grey's Avatar
Wanderer

Faith: Atheist Member For 5 Years
 
Join Date: 6th February 2002
Location: Erewhon
Posts: 5,371
Blessings: 20,773
Reps: 279,570,289,784,620,512 (power: 279,570,289,784,638)
Tinker Grey has disabled reputation
Don't buy a Webster's dictionary either, since certainly old Noah had nothing to do with those editions.
  #9  
Old 5th April 2003, 04:51 PM
Regular Member

Gender: Female Faith: Other-Religion Member For 5 Years
 
Join Date: 13th January 2003
Posts: 365
Blessings: 97,350
Reps: 10 (power: 0)
Gideon4God is on a distinguished road
5th April 2003 at 05:32 PM TWells said this in Post #7

Gideon,

I have a copy of the "apostate" New Scofield Bible which is the King James Version. The reason for the revisions is because of the numerous changes in Dispensationalism since Scofields death. Gideon if your intrested in normative Dispensationalism then your only options (with this view) are Scofield, Larkin, and Sperrys Systematic Theology. Your going to have to write off Charles Ryrie, John Walvoord (the two leading dispensationalists since Chafers death) and others as "apostates". I dont know of any dispies that hold to the extinct classic form. All are now 'revised' (with the exception of progressives like me.)  Ryries "Dispensationalism" (formally titled "Dispensationalism Today") has been since its writing in the 60's THE standard statement of Dispensationalism. Walvoord was on the revision committee for the New Scofield Bible. If your going to use the Old Scofield Bible be aware of the numerous changes made in the system since Scofield (such as the view of two destinys for saved Jews and saved Gentiles - one for new earth the other for new heaven.


I did purchase the Old Scofield, thx all.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
  #10  
Old 14th July 2003, 08:48 PM
A Brethren IN CHRIST's Avatar
Senior Veteran

43 Gender: Male Faith: Christian Country: United States Member For 5 Years
 
Join Date: 8th July 2003
Location: royal city washington state
Posts: 2,294
Blessings: 144,524
Reps: 237 (power: 0)
A Brethren IN CHRIST is a jewel in the roughA Brethren IN CHRIST is a jewel in the roughA Brethren IN CHRIST is a jewel in the rough
Berean in act 17:11 recieved the word with an open mind and searched the scriptures daily , whether those things were so

every man makes mistakes
hope you have a gifted pastor teacher that can read hebrew and greek

I do too use the scofield
Closed Thread


Return to Bibliology & Hermeneutics

Thread Tools
Display Modes


 
Become a CF Site Supporter Today and Make These Ads Go Away!


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:01 AM.