34 Comments

C. I. Scofield and His Reference Bible


This evening I read something which was interesting, if true. I qualify that with an ‘if’ after spending the last couple hours searching on-line to check the facts, and finding nothing which would disprove it. If anyone has documented information to disprove this, please share it. What did I read?

Scofield’s reference bible broke the time-honored tradition that all the Bible societies had conformed to of printing Bibles without the opinions of men included.

Did you know that? I found it not only interesting but disturbing in light of its high percentage of use here in the West within Churches, Seminaries, and Bible Colleges over the last 100 years: If not ‘the’ study Bibles themselves, their notes and theological ideas which were published in the original and the subsequent 4 editions since its introduction in 1908 by the Oxford University Press. (It remains one of the largest selling Bibles ever to this day)

Did you also know that some of our commonly used words and phrases used today in Bible study, especially prophecy, were coined first in Scofield’s Bible notes? Such as: pre-millennialism, dispensationalism, Judeo-Christian, and most recently the political movement called Christian Zionism, to name a few.

Scofield himself died in 1921, and though he had presented his own notes and interpretations of scripture in the original published Bibles, in versions published after his death even more expanded notes were added by the editors ‘in his name’.

Prior to the publishing of his Bible, there apparently had never been a Bible printed except in its plain text. While many men of God had published works on the scriptures, commentaries and notes, such as Adams, Wesley, Calvin, Luther, and Matthew Henry (to name a few) these were not included within the Bible itself, or on its pages.

Do you realize how many Bibles are offered for sale today in our local Christian book stores, and by well known ministry’s on-line and on TV/radio, and how many of these also are filled with not just the plain text of the scriptures but personal notes and interpretations written by these ministry’s and their leaders?. Right off the top of my head I can think of at least 4-5. I’m sure there are many.

After thinking about this, I’m now wondering how many of the teachings, beliefs, and interpretations Christians receive are from reading and studying the Word itself: or are many of their interpretations based on someone else’s notes or personal interpretations.

To take it a step further, how many Christians have been and are being taught by men behind pulpits who have been ‘schooled’ not by receiving revelation on scripture by the teaching of the Holy Spirit of God, but by either depending on the notes and interpretations within these Bibles, or they themselves (the Pastors/Teachers) have been taught by others in the past who depended upon them.

*****

A few quotes from one of the articles read tonight on the history of the Scofield Reference Bible:

….the world was ripe for Scofield’s Bible, especially in the rapidly progressing American society. From the beginning, America was destined to become multi-cultured nation of common people, many of them uneducated, who spilled out of Europe and various other parts of the world into a land of hope and promise. Many who populated this vast continent were fleeing the heavy hand of social, economic, and religious oppression. However, some were forced to come to America because of other reasons. They brought only what they deemed necessary to survive the harsh climate of the new nation. Many also brought their belief systems, which eventually became meshed together as the old generations died and their offspring married people of other beliefs.

By the late 1800’s, telegraph poles spiked the landscape along major byways, lacing its spiny arteries across the expanding nation and connecting each new town to the main populace. Eventually the nation became literally lit up, and connected with the advent and development of electricity and the telephone. There were 150,000 telephones in the United States by 1887, and electricity was now challenging the darkness. People could stay up all night frolicking or working and information was spread almost as fast as the wind. The industrial revolution was about to explode the country’s major cities with a rush of “busyness” that would divert time from its historical, patient and plodding path. Time was about to get on the fast track, and people would begin to feel as if they had less and less of it. With the arrival of the automobile, transportation was also on the verge of change, both in comfort and speed.

During the turn of the century, when Scofield’s Bible was still in the formation stage, America was expanding and overwhelming the virgin territory once solely occupied by the Indians. With the dawning of more and more technology, America would never take it easy again. In 1947, the first mass audience watched the World Series on television. Television changed the way we gather information and knowledge. Our evenings became filled with entertainment and the gathering of frivolous knowledge. As the nation grew, it became plagued with too many things to do and not enough time to do them in. America made a paradigm shift from a quiet nation to a noisy and busy one. People had to find the time to be still, to pray, and to read and study the Word of God. Something had to be done away with to make room for new activities. More and more people stopped reading the old classics, including the Bible and historical books, and other personal spiritual activities were sacrificed as well.

People came to America to start all over again and found out that they needed every second to stay afloat spiritually in an atmosphere in which many drowned. There were also houses to be built, businesses to form, inventions to be concocted, and certainly many places to go and things to do. Governments and other time-consuming activities related to the birth of a nation also required much time to develop. The formation of each new state presented its own vortex of time- consuming activities that swallowed everyone who entered its borders. As people began to cut things off their lists of priorities to make room for indulgence in the new fast-paced age of running to and fro, they turned to quick fixes to make up for the deficiency. The more time they saved, the more they had to spend racing along the path of progress in the new rapidly developing society of America. New inventions would help them recapture more of their “lost” time, but there would never be enough new gadgets to get them back on the old paths of seeking and finding biblical and spiritual knowledge.

Bursting on the scene of this budding age of industry was the spurious Scofield Reference Bible. For the person who did not have time to read and study the history of Christianity, who did not have time to study the Bible for himself or herself, and who did not read well enough to gather or grasp the meaning of the Scriptures, Scofield was ready to feed and divert them from historical theology. Scofield gave the people the quick and easy way to study the Bible……What the church leaders failed to grasp in allowing the Scofield Bible to reach fame and acceptance was that a trend would develop that would eventually prove to be the downfall of millions. The paradigm would shift from honor of the Word of God to a cavalier mishandling of the Scriptures until they would no longer be given the reverence and awe of ages past.

The printed Word of God would fall into the hands of unscrupulous men who would add their own words to the pages, stamp their own names onto the cover, and by degrees, turn the Bible into a book of scripture mingled with fatuous opinions. The historic compass of the Scriptures had always been used to point faithfully at the true path; now that path became shrouded in a maze of new directions. The old landmarks would be grown over with the suffocating weeds of human error, causing multitudes to lose the way to truth and an intimate relationship with God.

Currently in America, there are scores of Bibles written in the name of various individuals who intend to force their own particular theories on the Scriptures. This bending and blending of God’s Word has further divided the Body of Christ and created doctrinal walls behind which are guarded numerous captive people. They are often held captive by their own ignorance or an unwillingness to discover truth for themselves. Their wholesale surrender to the caldron of new ideas mingled with canon has them addicted to reading the latest revelation.

Many writers today eagerly leap into every opportunity to exploit the masses for personal gain. Some so-called prophecy experts have imitated Scofield’s success by adding their notes to the Bible. Publishers are to blame as well, since their love for money has lured them into becoming the vehicles to deliver their wares to the masses for these scurrilous encroachers on God’s Holy Word.

Today we also are living in a video-oriented generation that gathers knowledge in sound bites. The foolishness of the knowledge that most Americans gorge their minds on is appalling. If ever a people were ripe for utter deception, the nation of America is certainly so.

About these ads

34 comments on “C. I. Scofield and His Reference Bible

  1. [...] C.I. SCOFIELD AND HIS REFERENCE BIBLE [...]

  2. Hi this is a great stuff. I am currently attending a dispensationalist church with many believers who love the Lord, yet I know are completely naive to the danger of dispensationalism. Currently I’m reading a book by James Canfield titled “Scofield and His Incredible Book” which goes into great detail the life and history of Scofield and the Bible that he polluted with his teachings. I’ll tell ya brother, the more and more I dig into this the scarier it becomes.

  3. excellent article and i agree with the author… i don’t particularly like the study Bible… i don’t want to know what other people think God is trying to say… although I do like the devotional Bibles that offer a person’s opinion… their opinion gives me something to think about and ponder… but as far as trying to read and interpret, the Holy Spirit teaches me and guides me into truth… He shows me the prophetic scriptures and makes me wonder what is being said or revealed… I have much more joy when I allow Him to be the teacher :) all those study notes in the study Bible serve as a distraction, in my opinion… I gave my study Bible away… If I really find something hard to understand, I then search out the answer… that’s just me… every time I read the Bible, I learn more… I imagine the Lord wants us to read and read and read for all of our lives and each time He will say something new to us in His timing… Things we need to know at a particular time… :)

  4. Hi Nate…

    I looked up the book you mentioned and found it:

    The Incredible Scofield and His Book (Paperback)

    Thanks for the recommendation.

    the more and more I dig into this the scarier it becomes.

    Yes, for me too. Its only been in the past year that i have been digging into what is behind the many strange ways many Christians here in the West interpret scripture–especially prophecy. The trail led me to Scofield’s dispensationalist teachings.

    The absolute extent of how deeply these teachings have infiltrated the Church here in America over the last 75 years has amazed me.

    Reading (the above quotes) was a real eye-opener last night. I didn’t know that his Bible was the first one to include personal interpretations. Today we have many similar Bibles for sale…

    Its frightening.

    • Stephen, what i believe the author was pointing out was that the Scofield bible, which included his own personal interpretations based on his theology, was the first to be published by a well known bible society, which gave it wide spread distribution, and the first to gain such popularity particularly in the United States. But thank you for pointing out that the Brown bible was written in the 1700’s and includes notes.

  5. Micey i agree with you sweetie 100%!

    Reading someones opinions are great–we can even learn from them. But we should never use them as a substitute for receiving revelation on scripture from the One Great Teacher we have, that being The Holy Spirit.

    every time I read the Bible, I learn more… I imagine the Lord wants us to read and read and read for all of our lives and each time He will say something new to us in His timing… Things we need to know at a particular time…

    Amen!!

  6. We have a Scofield bible, my husband has had it for years, but it has gone unused for a very long time.. the church we used to attend, nearly all the people there held to the teachings of Scofield..

    I used to have a Ryrie study bible and found that too often, wanting to know what a passage meant, instead of comparing scripture with scripture, as we are told to do, it was easier to see what Ryrie (or Scofield, as the case may be) thought, after all, they being scholars, should know best, right? (I told myself)

    Finally, after being unsure of whether or not I was truly saved, I prayed for God to show me the truth, and got a new bible with no notes at all, simply the Word of God, KJV.. and it was amazing what new things were opened to me from what I was taught by those who followed the teachings of Scofield.

    The bible tells us (1 John 2:27) that the Spirit within teaches us of all things, and is truth, and is no lie..

    Certainly we can be taught by men, but those who pray for the Spirit’s leading in their message, and they are easy to tell, for their messages touch the heart..

  7. Yes amen Vicki, we can be taught by men…God does appoint teachers within the body.

    I even use and love bible commentaries–especially the old ones from some of the great bible scholars of the past…and have been helped by them many times…

    Where Scofield erred (and the publishers) is in adding his notes and “personal” interpretations within the Bible itself-along side Holy Scripture, giving it [his interpretations] as much weight as the Word itself.

    As if that wasn’t bad enough, his teachings were ‘new’….born out of what be claimed to be ‘new revelations’ from God. Which we know birthed the erroneous teachings within dispensationalism.

    Its very interesting when reading all the bible commentaries written by men of God down through the ages, prior to Scofields Bible being published, and realize they never read into the Word of God the many things he did…Which made me ask the question: were they ALL wrong for 1900 years…or was Scofield wrong in his new way of interpreting certain very important scriptures which pertain to the Church?

    My conclusion is that Scofield was wrong.

    His teachings have led to a great part of the body of Christ misapplying the promises of God and not being Christ centered in their eschatological beliefs. Even the false teaching of dual covenant theology was ‘born’ out of Scofields original teachings.

  8. Well, I need to share a thought or two here. The first one to take a step in a new direction can be a good thing or a bad thing, depending on a number of factors. Here are a few of my own observations about the Scofield Bible:

    First, Scofield’s reference Bible was never intended to lift his teachings on a par with Scripture. I was around (pastoring) when his was just about the only study Bible out there. It was commonly said in those days, “Just remember, inspiration stops at that line toward the bottom of the page. Remember that, and you’ll do all right.”

    Secondly, it’s not a lot different from many of the older commentators, who would print the Biblical text at the top of the page and fill about eighty percent of the page below with their commentary (Barnes’ Notes, for example). It’s just that Scofield gave a lot less of his opinions than some others did. From that standpoint, he was conservative!

    If you compare his notes with other study Bibles today, he commented on far fewer passages, and left a lot more up to a person to study. Also, his notes are more like a simple guide to finding related passages (topically) than a commentary.

    I cut my spiritual teeth on the Scofield Bible, so I think that makes me appreciate it more than some might. But no, I don’t agree with everything there (and neither did many pastors who recommended using it). I might add that, while his understanding of prophecy was a bit simplistic, so was the understanding of most of the people in his time. Few people a century ago had tried to categorize Biblical prophecies into some kind of coherent understanding. And while many dispensationalists, including Scofield, go out on a limb sometimes, so do their opponents. Often the truth can be found somewhere between the extremes.

    Perhaps we can acknowledge that Scofield’s work has helped many people to improve their Biblical literacy. We can also respect the fact that he was a pioneer who was not trying to do something liberal, but rather educate people in the Scriptures (after all, he was a noted Bible teacher and, if memory serves me right, a professor training men for ministry too. I have met some old timers who personally heard him preach, and they felt he was truly anointed by God).

  9. Thanks for the comments and your point of view Wayne!

    I cut my spiritual teeth on the Scofield Bible, so I think that makes me appreciate it more than some might.

    I can understand that as its still the most widely read and used bible here in the West today. I was reading at your homepage and see you attended Baptist Bible College and, Luther Rice Seminary. Was the Scofield bible the one most used within classrooms? From the articles i’ve collected Scofields bible and notes are used in many bible colleges and schools still today…and have been for over 75 years.

    Perhaps we can acknowledge that Scofield’s work has helped many people to improve their Biblical literacy.

    Wayne i can’t agree with that. What his work did was cause many to not study for themselves–instead they came to depend upon his notes and, personal interpretations, especially of prophecy, as ‘the Gospel truth’

    Over the last 6 years i’ve worked on a few Prophecy boards, and its obvious the influence of Scofields teachings in his bible on end times, the Church, Israel, etc., have made a huge impact on believers today, and that includes within politics: that should come as no surprise for when any type of research is done, its proven what he wrote has been taught in the majority of Protestant Churches here in America since the 1920’s.

    We can also respect the fact that he was a pioneer who was not trying to do something liberal, but rather educate people in the Scriptures (after all, he was a noted Bible teacher and, if memory serves me right, a professor training men for ministry too. I have met some old timers who personally heard him preach, and they felt he was truly anointed by God).

    I don’t know about his personal life…though there are many things written by others which i’ve read, who did study his life: the ‘picture” they’ve painted wasn’t too kind. Its one of the reasons i did not want to get into his personal life, but wanted to keep it on his bible and interpretations.

    He died over 87 years ago…so anything about his personal life was written by those who did not know him.

    I do thank you again for your comments Wayne…im not a dispensationalist, so personally i can’t agree with much of what Scofield believed and included in his notes pertaining to the Church and prophecy. But i don’t fall out with others who do…

    God bless,
    pj

  10. hi pj, i tried to find what your views on end times are… could you post again what the different views are because i have only been exposed to dispensationalism and i’m curious to read what those other views are. thanks! :)

  11. Hi Micey!

    End time prophecy and how one interprets it is such a huge topic, and all the different views out there can be pretty confusing. I would have to say my studies into last day prophecy hasn’t allowed me to place myself into one of the most commonly held positions….though i find myself agreeing more with the Historic/Covenant Premillennialism view then the others.

    Here is a chart which compares the 3 Millennial Views.

    http://www.reformedreader.org/mchart.htm

    Another one on Comparison Of Four Eschatological Positions.

    http://home.att.net/~nathan.wilson/eschtlgy.htm

    A Comparison of Historic Covenant and Historic Dispensational Theology.

    http://reformed-theology.org/html/c-vs-dis.htm

    What you’re going to find Micey, if like me, is that you may agree with specific points in most positions, but disagree with other points. Where that left me some time ago was tossing out all preconceived ideas and studying bible prophecy with fresh eyes…It was once doing this that i came to realize that i didn’t have to pick and chose a specific camp or one ‘view’ .

    The links i posted for you? I even hesitated to do that. Why?, because when you go out reading on line the different charts/positions compared etc,. what you’re going to find is the author is predisposed to one himself so is going to be biased even in his presentation! ahaha

    There has been one website in the last year which i’ve found which not only has well over 100 well written articles on all points of view on Eschatology, but is fair in presenting them unbiased.

    That can be found here: Eschatology

    If i could recommend one website to study on, it would be that one.

    Maybe it would be a good idea for me to start posting topics on these different points of view. Would that help?

  12. yes, I think that would be a fantastic idea… thanks for all the links! :)

  13. I happened by this blog by accident, and found the conversations interesting. If I may add…

    On the quote:

    “Scofield’s reference bible broke the time-honored tradition that all the Bible societies had conformed to of printing Bibles without the opinions of men included.”

    Even the Geneva Bible had annotations in which the monarchy did not fully endorse, so though the Bible societies may not have included notes, translations did, so this quote is extremely misleading. Other than that, interesting discussion!

    zdoppelt.blogspot.com

  14. Hi Zach..

    The evening i came across the quote [above] i did find reference to other bible translations which had notes prior to Scofield’s…but from what i read these notes consisted of information in the line of ‘locations, Hebrew, Greek, word usage and translation, etc..’

    What Scofield did was (personally) interpret scripture–in particular prophecy, including his interpretations in his bible.

    Thus was born modern day dispensationalism.

    Today we have MANY bible teachers who have followed Scofields example: publishing bibles through their ministries which ALSO include personal interpretations of last day prophecy.

    In my thinking this is dangerous…

    Many of these men, including Scofield, promote their interpretations as equal with the Word of God itself.

    Thanks for the comment! This topic kinda fell away on a back page. Glad someone ‘bumped it’!

    God bless
    pj

  15. Sorry to post on this discussion in such a tardy manner. I have found it to be of great interest, and wanted to ask if the Geneva Bible–either the 1560 or 1599 edition, or perhaps both–contain the opinions of men as well with the cover?

    I do not write this to cause a stir, merely as a question. Thank you for the illuminating information contained on youir site.

  16. I believe the Geneva bible had marginal notes Jon…

    From what i’ve read these were not interpretational as much as translational..

  17. You know what, I should probably try to purchase or gain access to a Geneva Bible, and then I can verify that. I’m sure the tenor if what you are saying is correct, though. I doubt that there are pages where there is more commentary than text, as is the case with the Scofield Bible in places…which at fist I found distracting. Now, with the revelation of what I’ve read about “Dr” Scofield on your own site and several others, I find it quite troubling.

  18. Every Christian is a dispensationist.

    Unless of course you practice circumscion, visit Jersalem once a year on the day of Atonement. Eat Kosher food and visit a Synogogue each Sabbath.

    So lets not get too hung up on dispensationism.

    Dispensation is a Biblical word which is more that can be said for the Trinity, Calvinism or even the word Bible.

    Paul said, ‘You have heard of the Dispensation of the Grace of God’.

    Those of you who dont accept what l say. Do you obey the whole law? The 613 Commandments? Why not? Dont you know that this is a requirement of Gods people?

    Come on get real, Christ came to blot out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us and took it out of the way nailing it to the Cross. By this act he usshered in a new dispensation of the Grace of God. Now God saved on the principle of Faith in Christ..

    Steve

  19. Every Christian is a dispensationist.

    If you mean every Christian knows there are seasons mentioned in the bible by which time is measured ['time of the gentiles, etc] then u are correct…

    BUT believe me not every Christian follows Dispensationalist theology or/and eschatology in the way Scofield and Darby taught it….

    So lets not get too hung up on dispensationism.

    LOL, i don’t see anyone doing that friend–where did you believe you saw this?

    Those of you who dont accept what l say.

    Steve i don’t accept blindly what you or anyone else says. I read and study the word of God for myself.

    ‘me’ thinks you may be overestimating yourself a tad…check your pride meter Steve.

  20. Greetings in the name of Jesus Christ.

    It has been about five months from the last comment made on this thread.I have been researching much of what I believed as a former dispensationalist that did not match what thus saith God.I read a book by Dave McPherson called the Rapture plot and the very ones that defend the pre-trib rapturehave plagarized and stretched the truth to defend their dispensational theology.

    I hear preachers that say it is heresy to say the Church replaced Israel ect.Fact is this was taught and believed for 1800 years before John N Darby came along and then C.I.Scofield and Clarence Larkin ect.

    To say the Temple must be rebuilt and animal sacrifices re-instituted is a rank heresy that is not biblical.The so-called un-conditional promise of land to the Jews is another unbiblical doctrine.

    The very Jews today are not biblical Jews but imposters that are mongolian Khazars.Henry Ford`s the International Jew is online and should be read.The so-called Jew`s today have America and controls most of the wealth today and will soon take over this world and they are using Zionism and Christians to do it.

    I read an book also online by William Cox {Why I left Scofieldism}and another {Scofield the man behind the myth}that should be read by all believing in Scofield who applied Dr to himself and also who according to the Pastorial Epistles was unqualified to pastor any church.

    Also the first resurrection in Rev 20:5 for 1800 years was understood to be a spiritual resurrection.Christ according to Scripture now sits on the Throne of David and this was understood as the Bible says Acts 2:30-31 was the Resurrection of Christ.Dispensationalist are waiting for something that happened 2000 years ago.

    For 1800 years the Church believed the 1000 years was symbolic of the Church age.You have dispensationalist believing the resurrection of the saved and the lost is seperated by 1000 years.No Scripture says the saved and lost will be resurrected upon the return of Jesus to be judged.This earth as we know it will be destroyed by fire.Most dispensationalist are so earthly minded that they are no heavenly good.

    2nd Peter 3:13 Nevertheless we,according to his promise,look for new heavens and a new earth,wherein dwelleth righteousness.

    One of dispensationalist most important verses Acts 15:16 is completely taken out of context to defend the rebuilt temple ect.This is pertaining the gentiles being added to the Church not a rebuilt temple when taken in context.

    Most dispensationalist would have a cow to find their pre-trib rapture along with dipensationalism was actually created as a new interpretation of Scriptures created by Jesuit Roman Catholic priest as a counter-attack on the reformation.The revived Roman Empire is no other than the Roman Catholic Church who sits upon the grave of the Roman Empire crowned waiting to be healed from her deadly wound received in 1798.

    Also these Jesuits have took over most protestant seminaries in America that secretly brain-wash the students with dispensationalism.

    Yes dispensationalist need to reform their theology.Abraham could have cared-less about earthly land.{Hebrews 10:10}

    God richly bless you.

    Brother Miller.

  21. I think the Geneva Bible (1599) was the first Bible with annotated comments. It predates the KJV. King James actually initiated his “new” Bible translation so as to remove those reformed Bible notes as he increasingly became less agreeable to them! The Dutch Reformed Church also produced a similar Bible as well during the same time period.

  22. It seems to me there is a bit of a double standard going on here, I see posts castigating the Scofield Reference Bible, and by extension, study Bibles which follow the theological framework known as dispensationalism such as the Ryrie Study Bible and the MacArthur Study Bible, for placing notes on the same page as the text. However, I have not seen one post which castigates usage of such study Bibles as the NIV Study Bible (or companion study Bibles for the NASB and the KJV produced by Zondervan), the ESV Study Bible (published by Crossway), and the ESV Reformation Study Bible [edited by R.C. Sproul].
    This suggests to me that the motivation on this blog and objection is not the practice of interpretive notes in a Bible, but the content of those notes when they disagree with your theological construct.
    Keep in mind also that simply gainsaying a position you disagree with is not proof that your construction is valid.

    • Dave simply put, as the title suggests this post wasn’t actually concerning other study bibles. There have been other posts where other translations and/or study materials [etc] have been discussed. So there is no double standard.

      But if u read the article quoted in the post then you saw the author pointed this out,

      The printed Word of God would fall into the hands of unscrupulous men who would add their own words to the pages, stamp their own names onto the cover, and by degrees, turn the Bible into a book of scripture mingled with fatuous opinions….

      Currently in America, there are scores of Bibles written in the name of various individuals who intend to force their own particular theories on the Scriptures. This bending and blending of God’s Word has further divided the Body of Christ and created doctrinal walls behind which are guarded numerous captive people. They are often held captive by their own ignorance or an unwillingness to discover truth for themselves.

  23. we are all the product of those whom we have chosen to follow and agree with. another way of saying that is, those who have taught us. in my view you have been predjudised against Dr. Schofield. you have taken a premise(that he has somehow subverted the Word Of God), and that all of us today are in the grip of some massive demonic comspiracy. you have “assumed” that anyone who has embraced the Schofield Bible is some mindless drone who cannot think for himself. is it not possible that the huge success of this particular study Bible is the result of incredible fidelity the Word Of God? of course the particular theology to which you have chosen to embrace, would not allow for this. i have found this study Bible to be of tremendous help to me in “rightly dividing the word of truth.” of course we all know that you would never stoop so low as to reference your own understanding of God’s Word to a study Bible or a commentary, right?

    • Ronald, may i be blunt and say, you are way off base?

      What happens on blogs and forums is people can make assumptions without really knowing anything about the person they are addressing, and frankly you have “assumed”.

      I actually owned and used a Scofield bible and commentary for 25 years and followed his dispensational form of eschatology faithfully during that same period. It was all i knew. At some point i began to have questions about many of his ideas…questions that could not be answered by dispensational theology/eschatology. It was then the Holy Spirit led me to lay it (and other books) aside and seek the answers by reading God’s word unadorned by anyone’s personal interpretation based on their personal brand of theology. I found my answers then.

      My journey has been an on-going one Ronald. One which has thus far lasted 32 years. One thing im very clear in now is my understanding of dispensationalism. It is full of errors.

      is it not possible that the huge success of this particular study Bible is the result of incredible fidelity the Word Of God?

      The popularity of something isn’t proof of anything Ronald. Why don’t you google the history of how dispensationalism was introduced to American Churches…the ‘when’ and by whom. Its very interesting.

  24. pj, i did say, “is it not possible”, not because it became hugely successful, this proves that Schofields edition of the Bible is truthful in all points. i detect in all this debate a huge degree of jealously and anomosity toward mr. Schofield, which began in those earily days. you a i, as well as others have been swept into this argument and personal offence toward Schofield. and we have been drawn into this fight, and have taken sides.

    there has been so much hatred directed toward him, it seems to have become as much personal as doctrinal. it seems irresponable to make broad generalizations about a persons work based on guily-by-association arguments. if Paul the Apostle were alive today, we’d have nothing to do with him and do our best to discredit his ministry. was he not a murderer and spent much of his time in prison?

    i personally believe that God has been pleased to greatly bless this Hurculean work presented to this centuries church. throughtout the centuries of church history, new ideas in theology have unfolded to God’s people.

    i respect your freedom and intellegence to choose a theology to embrace. i was saved at the age of twenty-three in nineteen seventy-one. i to have studied God’s word, read many commentaries, and the giants of our faith. i choose to embrace pre-millinnial, pre-tribulational dispensationalism.

    this system of hermeneutics, to me, best explains God’s unfolding of His progressive revelation. this may not be where you want to go in this discussion, but far too much of what is being promoted on the internet is “calvinistic”, a system of theology that is so far afield of the meaning, flow and intent of God’s word. a simple, natual reading of the Bible will never lead anyone to to accept “calvinism”. thats my opinion!

    i appreciate this forum- rds

    • Hi Ronald…

      I don’t personally know of anyone who feels hatred for Scofield the man. But there are many Christians who believe he was doctrinally wrong on many issues.

  25. I always read the Bible without any commentaries. Rather, I try to read Ancient History books written by laymen, i.e. archaelogist and historians, and that’s been very fruitful to me… :D

  26. I am an Irish Brit, but my greatgram was a PB, or so-called Plymouth Brethren (funny we called them “Irish” Brethren, in Dublin in the 1950’s when I was a boy). But my greatgram had a great affect on me, an Irish Roman Catholic in those days. And now after over 40 years as a Christian (yeah born-again Evangelical Anglican), with two graduate degrees, I find myself a PD, or Progressive Dispensationalist (since the mid 90’s). Oh yeah, with a stop-over in Gulf War 1 (RMC, Royal Marine Commando), and after, I lived and taught in Israel in the late 90’s. And you guessed it, I am a “Biblical” Zionist!

    Btw, I have been both A-Mill, and Post-Mill in my long history (63 years late this month), so I have covered some ground! But, now with Modern Israel, and the world we see today (2012), the Visible Second Coming of Christ is ever more certain! Indeed, ‘Come Lord Jesus’! (Rev. 1:7 / Zech. 14: 4, etc.) Perhaps, the Antichrist will be a Muslim? See, Mideast Beast, etc. by Joel Richardson.

    “Interpretors of the Revelation should bear in mind two important passages: 1 Pet. 1, 12 ; 2 Pet. 1, 20,21. Doubtless much which is designedly obcure to us will be clear to those for whom it was written as the time approaches.” (Note, Scofield Ref. Bible, Revelation, 1917) This note now 95 years ago, is pressing more upon us!

    • Btw, I have been both A-Mill, and Post-Mill in my long history

      You sound alot like me Robert.

      My own eschatology studies still continue to expand, grow, and even change on some issues. I’ll soon be 65 and am still learning.

      The only staunch view i have ruled out is Scofield’s (and Darby’s) dispensationalism.

    • PJ, It is funny, but I cannot escape some form of Dispensationalism, in reality the biblical idea that God has yet to redeem National Israel! (Rom. 11:25-29) I say to degree, for it will be awefully hard on both the literal land (Holy Land), and only a third of Israel will survive physically, (Zech. 13: 8-9). But indeed a full “dispensational” schema is somewhat impossible! But, I think we can have a somewhat biblical outline. Btw, I am most certainly Post-trib! The Church had best better be able to identify Antichrist when he comes! As Richardson shows, it will be mostly centred in the Mid- East, but will somewhat effect the West also. I might even live long enough to see it, God alone knows? ;) The world sure has gotten smaller in my wee life-time! Indeed life is short! (James 4: 14-15)

    • The world sure has gotten smaller in my wee life-time! Indeed life is short! (James 4: 14-15)

      Amen brother… i know what you mean.

      If you’d be interested in where i stand on modern day Israel and it’s possible future redemption, in the side-bar you’ll find links to a 4-part study titled, “Covenants: The Train”. A little below that is another link to an excellent article by Steve Lumbley titled “What We Believe About Israel”. If time allows look them over. Any thoughts you’d like to share on either of these would be very much welcomed! Perhaps we can get a good discussion going!

  27. It is not true to say there were no Bibles before Scofield with notes on the pages. Centuries before the was the John Brown study Bible, and with far more notes than Scifield ever had.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Holy Spirit Activism

Signs, Wonders, Peace and Justice

We Are 'N'

paul the slave standing proudly for the glory of JESUS CHRIST

Gralefrit Theology

Trying to explicate the inexplicable

Pursuing Truth

Eschatology studies, discussion forum, and more

For the Love of His Truth

A Christian Blog about Fundamental Biblical Facts

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 459 other followers

%d bloggers like this: