C. I. Scofield KJV Bible

Discussion in 'Books / Publications Forum' started by KobrinFamily, Mar 7, 2012.

  1. KobrinFamily

    KobrinFamily
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2011
    Messages:
    81
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hi everyone I recived a C. I. Scofield KJV Bible from a friend with my name on it, I was just wondering if this was a good one, I did abit of surching about this Gentlman but I dont understand some of it? Could you guys let me know if this is a good Bible, It seems really nice but sene I dont know alot about this man I dont know if I should use it or not?

    :godisgood::jesus:
     
  2. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,130
    Likes Received:
    221
    You will get responses from all specterums on Scofield.

    Personally, I do like my Scofield Bible. He is a student of dispensation, of which I agree. Some here will not. Just knowing both sides of this theology will help you understand the doctrine.

    From Wikipedia

    In defense of Dispensation - Joseph Wilmouth
     
  3. matt wade

    matt wade
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Messages:
    6,156
    Likes Received:
    76
    Just remember that the commentary in your Bible is just that...commentary. It's not the Scripture itself. You should never simply take anyone's word for something, including commentary writers. Search the Scriptures out yourself.

    Scofield commentary has several items with which I disagree. One of the main ones is the Gap Theory. I still use my Scofield despite disagreeing with some of the commentary.
     
  4. KobrinFamily

    KobrinFamily
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2011
    Messages:
    81
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ok thankyou guys the Bible its self is really nice and I am truley greatful for the gift, I will do more surching into this man and see what I can lurn!
     
  5. Deacon

    Deacon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    6,973
    Likes Received:
    129
    There are a few editions of the Scofield bible, a 1909 version (updated in 1917) and considered the 'old' Scofield bible

    And a newer 1967 'New' Scofield version with updated notes.

    Both editions use a basic KJV text but make "certain word changes", altering "obsolete or archaic" words.

    Scofield was a strong proponent of dispensationalism and his notes promote a basic (and somewhat dated) form of it.

    Rob
     
  6. matt wade

    matt wade
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2009
    Messages:
    6,156
    Likes Received:
    76
    Can you give an example of this?
     
  7. KobrinFamily

    KobrinFamily
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2011
    Messages:
    81
    Likes Received:
    0
    But all in all if I didnt use the study notes its a good KJV of the Bible??
     
  8. Bob Alkire

    Bob Alkire
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2001
    Messages:
    3,134
    Likes Received:
    0
    He is talking about the 1967 New Scofield. Matthew 14:29 has boat where as the KJV has ship.
    Luke 1:54 has helped where the KJV has holpen.

    There are many such changes of this type.
     
  9. Deacon

    Deacon
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member
    Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2002
    Messages:
    6,973
    Likes Received:
    129
    Portions snipped from the
    NOTES from a couple of my "go to" verses used when I check a version:

    EXAMPLE #1
    Concerning 1 Samuel 13:21 rendered in Scofield's version as;

    Yet they had a *file for the **[sickles], and for the *** [mattocks] and for the forks, and for the axes, and to sharpen the goads.

    *This word in the KJV takes the place of two Hebrew words, neither of which was otherwise known. One of these words, pim, has now been found marked on a weight (two-thirds of a shekel) which has been turned up in excavations from this period. Consequently we know that the verse should be translated: "And the charge was a pim for the mattocks…" For Measures and Weights (O>T>). See 2 Chr. 2:10, note.

    **KJV mattock(s)

    ***KJV coulters

    MY GRADE: D+; they failed to properly translate the text although the note leads one in the right direction.


    EXAMPLE #2
    Concerning Mark 16:9 footnote: "Verses 9-20 are not found in the two most ancient mss., the Sinaiticus and Vaticanus; others have them with parital omissions and variations. But the passage is quoted by Irenaeus and Hippolytus in the second or third century."

    MY GRADE: passing

    EXAMPLE #3
    I John 5:7 (Comma Johanneum) included in main text with this note: "It is generally agreed that this verse has no ms. Authority and has been inserted."

    MY GRADE: D+; IMO the verse should have been excluded from the text with an expalnatory note.

    GENERAL CONCLUSION: The Scofield editiors are quite tentative about accepting the critical text and reluctantly depart from the KJV text.

    General note: The 1967 edition was my first "real" bible and the one I memorized most of the verses I know today.

    Rob
     
    #9 Deacon, Mar 12, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Mar 12, 2012
  10. convicted1

    convicted1
    Expand Collapse
    Retired Staff

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2007
    Messages:
    9,011
    Likes Received:
    3
    Yes. Any KJV study bible minus their study notes/commentaries is just a plain old KJV....well can be said for any studybible version....
     

Share This Page

Loading...