What's the beef with the Scofield Study Bible

Discussion in '2004 Archive' started by Plain Old Bill, Mar 11, 2004.

  1. Plain Old Bill

    Plain Old Bill
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2003
    Messages:
    3,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    I spend a great deal more time reading all ovewr this board than making comments or asking questions,but once again I do have a question.I have noticed comments equating the Scofield to a JW bible and othev remarks comparing it to a cultic bible.Where do these ideas come from? I have known many good pastors and lay people who love to use the Scofeild, are the all wrong?
     
  2. Frogman

    Frogman
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2001
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    Perhaps I am the wrong one to answer this since I use a Scofield.

    I think a lot of the problem is that people associate the scofield with either the Pre-millenial pre-rapture belief and the baptist brider position or perhaps both.

    Perhaps I am blinded by the occultic effects of the Bible. I will say I disagree with him on the church; and use his notes very little. A better one for study/reference is the Thompson's imho.

    Bro. Dallas [​IMG]
     
  3. er1001

    er1001
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2003
    Messages:
    165
    Likes Received:
    0
    Like you Plain Old Bill i do far more reading than posting on the board.I have never owned scofield bible,however i gave one to my wife for christmas a while back.She liked it and wore it out.And as the Frogman said many great preachers have used.Also i have heard many a great sermon preached from that bible by what i would consider greater preachers than those who would criticize it.I think who compare them or it to the JW's in any way deserves a stiff rebuke. ER
     
  4. I Am Blessed 24

    I Am Blessed 24
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2003
    Messages:
    44,448
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have used a Scofield Bible for almost 30 years and have had it rebound 3x. The pages are coming loose again. When I HAVE to buy a new one, it will be a Scofield also.

    [​IMG]
    §ue
     
  5. Frogman

    Frogman
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2001
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree with you sis sue. [​IMG]
    Bro. Dallas
     
  6. uhdum

    uhdum
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2001
    Messages:
    355
    Likes Received:
    0
    There may be more, but I know that the Scofield is heavily dispensational, pre-mil, and pre-trib.

    Therefore, not all agree with it. However, I have always loved how extensive and complete the reference system is.
     
  7. gb93433

    gb93433
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,496
    Likes Received:
    6
    The Scofield promotes the gap theory that doesn't exist. Howver I am not a promoter of any study Bibles. I do promote the study and reading of a Bible without notes.
     
  8. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    Scofield had some problems. He called the universal body the "true" church (which makes my local assembly an "untrue" church?); he is into the gap and theistic evolution; and some of the modern scofield (still using KJV) use terms like "sacrament" that ifb'ers find offensive.

    My first Bible in 1957 was a Scofield. Got a new one for college. Another new one at ordination. And a new one when I went to teach and still use it now.

    I "LOVE" my "old" Scofield and would recommend it highly. It is one of the best basic study bibles for pre-trib, dispensational baptists like me.
     
  9. Frogman

    Frogman
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2001
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    agreed Dr. Bob, but I am limited to the Old Scofield. Some friends gave us a new one as a Christmas (uh-oh) gift and they do not compare.

    But that is the opinion of a 90 year old KJVO believer.

    My first was the 1917 edition, second was the Old Scofield, and our pastor gave our oldest son The first Scofield.

    I also am a dizzy dispy, I am pre-mil and pre-trib.

    I don't believe theistic evolution though. Is this Scofeilds notes on the creation?

    I ahve always considered those very possible. But have not considered it as related to an evolutionary theory. Instead that vs. 2 of Gen. 1 resulted from the casting of satan from heaven.

    That would be an interesting discussion imho.

    Any way, Scofield was not my first Bible. My dad used a Thompson's and this is the Bible I cut my teeth on so to speak. I kept it after I left home until about three years ago (he had another, but not Thompson's) Kelly bought me one (again for Christmas) and I returned dad's to him. I left home in 1988.

    I have a KJ Study Bible, but have found it follows very nearly to the Scofield notes. I have a KJ reference Bible given to me by my local church when I joined. I have one given to me by my grandparents when I graduated eighth grade with my name on it, I don't use this one much, but carry it in the vehicle when working construction and read from it when not busy working.

    I have a Baptist Study Bible NKJV and use this for cross reference.

    I preach and teach from Scofield because I have grown comfortable with finding references in that one.

    Well how bout a discussion of the theistic evolutionists? Is that one for Baptist theology? :confused:

    Bro. Dallas
     
  10. Plain Old Bill

    Plain Old Bill
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2003
    Messages:
    3,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have always been aware of Scofields "Gap Theory" and that it is an error.Until I signed up on the Baptist Board I was unaware that there were Baptists who were not pre-mellineal or pre-trib.If I remember correctly there are a couple of other errors.The gap theory error seems to have been corrected in the New Scofield Bible at least that is how I read the notes.
     
  11. Frogman

    Frogman
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2001
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dear Brother,
    As I said, I do have and use in preaching the Scofield Old Study Bible. But I have found things I disagree with Scofield on. I don't know that I have ever identified the 'gap theory' in his notes either from my Old Study System' or the New.

    Would you or someone mind summarizing his beliefs for me and also the changes? Or at least point me to where I can find his notes on this topic.

    Is it related to dispensatoinalism, pre-trib, pre-mil? Or is it related to the creation view?

    Give me some direction and I will try to study this so I can discuss with you. As it now stands I don't understand the concepts and don't know what I would believe. :(
    Bro. Dallas
     
  12. Hamtramck_Mike

    Hamtramck_Mike
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2004
    Messages:
    159
    Likes Received:
    0
    Pardon my ignorance, but what is the gap theory?
     
  13. uhdum

    uhdum
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2001
    Messages:
    355
    Likes Received:
    0
    In short, the Gap theory places an underdetermined amount of time between the verse two verses of Genesis 1. This theory allows for advocates to account for theistic evolution as the means of God creating the earth.

    Among many problems, one thing this method does is place death, bloodshed, disease, and suffering before sin (through natural selection, etc.). Some claim a "primeval creation" before Adam. Also during this gap, Satan supposedly falls from heaven.

    Perhaps someone more knowledgeable about the theory can help me out.

    God bless!
     
  14. Dr. Bob

    Dr. Bob
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2000
    Messages:
    29,402
    Likes Received:
    12
    Space in the spark plugs . . .

    Seriously, it is a belief that God created the earth perfect, then Satan fell, chaos reigned and God started to REcreate the earth.

    Between Genesis 1:1 and 1:2. It is based on a poor translation and folks look at the English Bible (not the original language) and misunderstand and formed a whole doctrine!

    Most Christians who believe in evolution put it in that "gap" as a concession to science. Dinosaurs, etc.

    Lots of good folks believe the gap. Scofield did. I joke that the gap is between their ears . . .
     
  15. Frogman

    Frogman
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2001
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hey thanks. I understand now, never heard it as the gap theory before. I see your point. I can tell what I am persuaded of and that is as far as I can go.

    I do beleive that in the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. I do beleive the judgement you spoke of on Lucifer the fallen angel occurred prior to creation of all other life.

    I see the conflict after your explanation. the claim, unless I am wrong in my assumption, is that this 'gap' permits those wishing to support evolution from a Biblical standpoint are permitted to do so. The basis for this is that any subsequent 'creation' would not be the original creation and therefore would by implication 'prove' evolution.

    Ok, I disagree with that. But that doesn't mean I don't accept the idea that Genesis is the original creation of God of the universe. Genesis 2 show us the universe after the judgement of satan. Either way you look at it, the creation of flesh is from dust of the earth, but still demands the immediate act of God.

    AS you know the argument is that the universe 'became' instead of 'was' and also that creation is the act of bringing something forth from nothing.

    and to make is to bring forth something from materials already present. I would think (note I said I would think) the earth was prior to the creation of man.

    Just some thoughts.

    Bro. Dallas [​IMG]
     
  16. Frogman

    Frogman
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2001
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    Lots of good folks believe the gap. Scofield did. I joke that the gap is between their ears . . .

    Foul, Foul...I was writing my post as you were...do I look like I have a 'gap' between my ears?

    &lt;grin&gt;
    Bro. Dallas
     
  17. Plain Old Bill

    Plain Old Bill
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2003
    Messages:
    3,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dear Frogman,
    You are right but just by a few days.I know that this I am about to point you to is not for this thread but it sure addresses the "Gap Theory".

    You can go in your search window and just type creation science or young earth, a multitude of sites will be available to you pro & con so you can research for yourself and make a good decision.

    I can tell you what I think but you have to decide for yourself.

    Dr. Bob gave a good concise accurate explanation of the Gap Theory. A concession Christians were making to appease their lack of knowledge and conviction to the "scientific community".Keep in mind all science over time ends up agreeing with God's Word.
     
  18. Plain Old Bill

    Plain Old Bill
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2003
    Messages:
    3,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dear Frogman,
    Dr. Bob got it right on the universal church,but I seem to remember something in the book of Isaiah where there was some kind of problem or something that could have been better said in the New Scofield Bible.Right now I can't get my brain to pull out exactly what it is and where it is.
     
  19. Craigbythesea

    Craigbythesea
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,500
    Likes Received:
    20
    Plain Old Bill,

    Posted for your consideration:

    Notes on C. I. Scofield and the Scofield Bible

    THE SCOFIELD BIBLE and C. I. SCOFIELD

    By Glenn R. Goss, Th. D.
    Professor of Bible Philadelphia College of Bible

    The year 1909 (almost 90 years ago!) was quite a year. Louis Bleroit of France piloted a small monoplane across the English Channel; homesteaders began to arrive in Montana; the NAACP was founded; Al Capp, creator of Li'l Abner, was born; Einstein became a leading scientific thinker in Europe; Grand Prairie, Texas, was incorporated; the first Siberian huskies were introduced to Alaska; George Sargent won the U. S. Open in Golf; Pittsburgh beat Detroit 4-3 to take the World Series; and, of great importance but little noted, Oxford University Press published The Scofield Reference Bible. It was released to the public in January, 1909, and revised by Scofield and his team of consultants as the New and Improved Edition in 1917. Now, almost 90 years later, the 1917 edition is still being printed by Oxford University Press, and the 1967 edition, the Scofield Study Bible (the title today) is offered in four versions: the King James, the New International Version, the New American Standard Bible, and the New King James Version. The first million copies were printed by 1930. Since then the number published has escalated, and so has the diversity in versions and languages. The Scofield is now printed in at least seven languages other than English.

    But who is C. I. Scofield? Many know there is a Scofield Memorial Church in Dallas. What is the connection between the church and Scofield himself? How did the Scofield Reference Bible come to be? And why is the Scofield Study Bible so loved by some and so disliked by others?

    Cyrus Ingerson Scofield was born in Michigan in 1843. When the Civil war began, he was in Tennessee with his sisters. While there, he enlisted in the Confederate army. Military records show he fought in the Confederate Army for over a year in 1861-1862, then was discharged by reason of not being a citizen of the Confederate States, but an alien friend. Scofield told his biographer Charles Trumbull that he served through the war, and that he was awarded the Confederate Cross of Honor. After the war, Scofield located in St. Louis, married, and had a family of two daughters and a son. His wife was from a French Catholic family, and she and her daughters remained in that church till their deaths. His son died as a young boy. He joined a law firm, read and studied to be admitted to the bar. In 1869 he and his family moved to Kansas, where he was admitted to the bar to practice law. He was elected twice to the Kansas legislature, in 1871 and in 1872. President Grant appointed him as the United States District Attorney of Kansas June 9, 1873. He affirmed, in the oath of office, that he had never voluntarily born arms against the United States . . . He evidently had no problem with that claim, even though he had fought in the Confederate Army. He resigned December 20, 1873, amid charges and counter-charges of political corruption. That ended Scofield's political career.

    Scofield probably moved his family back to St. Louis, for his son Guy died in December, 1874, and was buried in St. Louis. But by 1879 his life had deteriorated to the extent that he drank heavily and was involved in several questionable court cases. For most of this time, his wife and daughters were back to Atchison, Kansas. Mrs. Scofield filed for divorce in 1881, but that case was dismissed. A second filing of the case resulted in a divorce decree in 1883. These and other legal actions involving Scofield, and several notations in city directories, provide some of the only evidence about him during the time from 1873 to 1879.

    A published account of Scofield's life in can be found in The Life Story of C. I. Scofield by Charles Gallaudet Trumbull, published by Oxford University Press in 1920. An unpublished Master Thesis, "A Biographical Sketch of C. I. Scofield" was written by William A. BeVier at Southern Methodist University in 1960. Both of these are complimentary of Scofield. Joseph M. Canfield wrote and published, The Incredible Scofield in 1988. This book is very critical of Scofield's theology and personal life. Due to the lack of existing records, and the lack of information in records that do exist, both BeVier and Canfield make much use of terms such as "it seems," "probably," and "evidently." Trumbull, on the other hand, writes factually, since much of his information came directly from Scofield himself. But even Trumbull passes over the period of 1873 to 1879 with nothing more than a reference to Scofield's habit of drinking. Though not much is certain about this period, one thing is clear. A change was needed in Scofield's life. Both Canfield and BeVier agree with Trumbull that a conversion did take place. Canfield questions if it was real, at least at first, and he does not agree on the time. But all recognized that Scofield needed a change in his life. And, God had prepared a man to meet that need.

    Enter Thomas McPheeters, a Christian businessman who knew and served the Lord. He bluntly asked Scofield one day in September, 1879, why he was not a Christian. The following discussion brought conviction, repentance, and a change of heart. Scofield was born again! He began to learn about, live for, and serve his new-found Lord. He lost his desire for alcohol completely. Also, he spent much time with Dr. James H. Brooks, a prominent pastor and Bible teacher in St. Louis. He served the YMCA and was licensed to preach by the Congregational churches of St. Louis.

    In 1882 Scofield was asked to move to Dallas, Texas, and take charge of a struggling Congregational mission church there. After some time, he consented, and arrived in Dallas Saturday, August 19. He preached the next day to eleven people who came. That evening two of them accepted Scofield's invitation to believe in Christ as Savior. He began cottage prayer meetings, led the church to adopt a constitution and bylaws, and was called as the full time pastor and ordained in 1883. He married Miss Hettie Hall Wartz in 1884, and the church sent Miss Eva Smith, its first missionary, to India in 1885. The only child of this union, Noel Paul, was born December 22, 1888. In 1889 a new building was begun at Bryan and Harwood, to seat 600. A mission church later called Grand Avenue Congregational church, was begun in South Dallas in 1890. Scofield started the Central American Mission (now CAM International) that same year. Church membership was noted as 355 in 1892, 550 in 1894, and 812 in 1896.

    In 1896 Scofield accepted a call to pastor the Trinitarian Congregational Church in Northfield, Massachusetts, D. W. Moody's home church. He remained there until 1903 when he returned to Dallas hoping for more free time to work on the Reference Bible. He spent nearly a year in Switzerland in research, but was back in Dallas in 1905. Scofield acted as an absent pastor, and continued his research with another trip to Europe. In 1908, the church withdrew from the Lone Star Congregational Association, and in 1909, following his resignation as pastor, Scofield was appointed Pastor Emeritus. The church name was changed in 1923, two years after Scofield's death, when the congregation approved a change of name to Scofield Memorial Church.

    The Reference Bible was not his first work. Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth was published in 1888. In 1890 came the Scofield Correspondence Course, which later was turned over to Moody Bible Institute in 1914. As of 1998, over 100,000 students have been enrolled in that program.

    The Reference Bible plans came to light in 1901 at a summer Bible conference in which Scofield and A. C. Gaebelein were ministering. Scofield told Gaebelein his plans, but noted that financial backing was the main drawback. The next year at the conference Gaebelein sought and gained sufficient support for Scofield to move ahead with the work, and Scofield returned to his pastorate in Dallas with the desire to begin the work. The Reference Bible could not be too bulky, but it had to include the tools to Bible study along with a clear summary of the Bible so that it would meet the need of someone who was just beginning to read the Bible. He determined to find and state exactly what the Bible itself had to say and not to add philosophical or theological definitions. This would provide a wider acceptance and usage.

    Scofield traced key subjects and teachings through the Bible with chain references. Each Bible book was to have a simple, clear introduction. Paragraph headings were introduced, at the suggestion of Dr. R. A. Torrey. From his experience in teaching the Bible in both oral and written form, he desired to include helps where readers might have questions, though constantly refusing to allow the notes to become commentary on the text.

    Scofield and his wife went abroad in 1904 to work on the notes for the Bible. In England he visited his friend Mr. Robert Scott of Morgan and Scott, publishers of religious books. When Scott learned of Scofield's project, he introduced Scofield to Henry Frowde, the head of Oxford University Press. Preliminary acceptance was soon granted, and the matter of a publisher was settled before the Scofields arrived in Montreaux, Switzerland where they planned to work. Large wide-margin notebooks were prepared, each large page having a page from the Bible pasted in the center. On these pages the Reference Bible took shape. This trip lasted about eleven months, and resulted in the preparation of the introductions and the book analyses.

    The Scofields went to Oxford, England, after a short visit to the church in Dallas. The time was spent at Oxford University conferring with other scholars and continuing the work on the notes and references. The Scofields came to America again, and went to Michigan to continue the work. Another stay in Montreaux, Switzerland in 1907 brought the work to completion. It was now ready for final review and printing. During the summer of 1908 the Scofields were in New York City, proofreading the printer's proofs. Publication followed in early 1909.

    A copy of the 1909 edition is very difficult to find today. Some copies exist, but Oxford no longer has records of how many were originally printed. In recent years the Barbour Company reprinted the 1909 edition, though with some changes and corrections in the notes. It is not, therefore, a true copy of the original. Evangelical Word (Wheaton) also published in 1987 a translation of the 1909 notes in a Russian Bible. Over 400,000 of these have been printed for distribution in Russia.

    The New and Improved Edition was published in 1917. This edition included dates at the top of the center column, and comments in the book introductions as to the time of events, according to Ussher. A number of corrections and additions were made to the notes and references, and Arabic numbers were used in place of Roman numerals in the cross references. Sale of the Scofield Reference Bible grew, and by 1930 it became the first book published by Oxford University Press to attain the one million mark in sales. Oxford renewed the copyright in 1937 and 1945, and then dropped the description, New and Improved Edition. About 1990 the name was changed to The Scofield Study Bible, and it continues in print today. In their latest Bible catalog, it is called The Old Scofield Study Bible to distinguish it from The New Scofield Study Bible which was published in 1967. The New Testament alone was printed and released in 1920. A number of printings of this edition were released. The 1917 edition of the Scofield Bible was published in Spanish in 1987, a Swahili edition was released in 1993 (NT) and 1994 (whole Bible), and a bi-lingual edition with both the text and the notes in Spanish and English in 1996.

    After nearly forty years, the New and Improved Edition was ready for revision. In 1954 Oxford University Press chose E. Schuyler English, who had already edited The Pilgrim Bible, a student Bible based on The Scofield Reference Bible, to serve as chair of a revision committee. The committee included William Culbertson, Charles Feinberg, Frank E. Gaebelein, Allan MacRae, Clarence E. Mason, Jr., Alva J. McClain, Wilbur M. Smith, and John F. Walvoord.

    The revision, called The New Scofield Reference Bible, was published in 1967. The King James Version (KJV) was used for the text, though it included such word changes in the text as will help the reader. Archaic words, words whose meaning had changed, and some pronouns were replaced. Introductions to the books were brought up to date, and over 700 new footnotes and over 15,000 more cross references were added. The new and the revised footnotes held to Scofield's original plan that these notes should not be commentary on the text, but helps where readers had questions. The name has now been changed to The New Scofield Study Bible.

    As contemporary versions of the English Bible gained popularity, the Scofield material was adapted to these versions. First came The Oxford NIV Scofield Study Bible (now called The New Scofield Study Bible NIV) in 1984. Three faculty from Philadelphia College of Bible were consultants in the process of adaptation: Clarence E. Mason, Jr. (a member of the Editorial Revision Committee for the 1967 edition), W. Sherrill Babb, President, and Paul S. Karleen, Chair of the Division of General Education.

    The next adaptation was The New Scofield Study Bible NAS in 1988. Paul S. Karleen and Glenn R. Goss, Professor of Bible at Philadelphia College of Bible, served as consultants. The fourth adaptation was The New Scofield Study Bible NKJV in 1989. Arthur L. Farstad , Executive Editor of the New King James Version, was the consultant. The New Scofield Study Bible has been published in several languages. A French edition was released in 1975 (40,000 were printed), the Portuguese edition in 1986, and an edition of the annotations only in Hungarian in 1993. Two German editions have been published (over 65,000 printed), a new French edition has been released, an Italian edition is in preparation, and a new Spanish edition is in preparation also. Spanish Publications Inc. has prepared a number of these editions. Mrs. Erma Walker (President of Spanish Publications, Inc) and her late husband, William, missionaries with CAM International, began by translating the Scofield materials for the Spanish Bible. They directed the work on the publications in Spanish, Portuguese, French, Russian, and Swahili, and the organization now has requests for the Scofield Bible in over a dozen more languages. One of the requests is for the Scofield in Arabic.

    After The New Scofield Reference Bible was published in 1967, Oxford released A Companion to The New Scofield Reference Bible by E. Schuyler English in 1972. Paul S. Karleen authored The Handbook to Bible Study with a Guide to the Scofield Study System, published by Oxford in 1987. This latter volume is a complete and very helpful guide to the Scofield Bible, and assists the reader to understand the approach of the Scofield system and the doctrine of the Scofield Bible.

    In 1967, E. Schulyer English wrote that the sales of the Scofield Bible had topped three million copies. Now, the number hovers near the five million mark with all language editions. That testimony itself demonstrates the appeal, approval, and usefulness of the Scofield Bible. Though Study Bibles are being published now at an astounding rate, between five and fifteen new titles a year in the last decade, the new and the old Scofield Bibles show a consistency in demand. And many have not just one, but several Scofields, for as one wears out, another is purchased to take its place. And why is the Scofield loved? Because no other Bible provides the clarity and consistency of comments that help the reader to understand God's revelation to humans in the broadest sense, and how that revelation relates to every day Christian life.

    But not all love Scofield. Some call his teaching heresy, socialist, communist, Zionist, or that which has been the leading cause for the fall of American civilization because it presents, from their point of view, an antinomian view that rejects the moral law of God (as given in the Old Testament) as the standard for living today. Also, some claim that it believes the church is weak, ineffective, and failing because the hope is in the coming of Christ for His own, rather than in a victorious church. Some look at Scofield as a drunkard, liar, adulterer, and perjurer, and note that such a one can produce only that which is evil and heretical. Are these criticisms valid? No, for Scofield was born again after Thomas McPheeters confronted him with the claims of Christ, and he began to grow in Christ. All branches of Christianity can identify persons who, having been regenerated, turned and followed Christ into significant service for the Lord. Also, the ministry of dispensationalists shows a great concern for the world's peoples and a growing ministry to them. Scofield's own CAM International has built, strengthened, and provided leaders for the church in Latin America. This is one example among many of certainly believing in, supporting, and building the church in this age (see Mt. 16:18). Further, the charge that dispensationalists are "antinomian," or against the moral law of God, is in error. In response to the same charge by Dr. John H. Gerstner in his book, Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth, John Witmer in his review responds: "Concerning this charge Gerstner concedes, 'We notice, with relief, that many dispensationalists are better Christians than their theology allows'" (p. 250). This concession helps explain how a theology supposedly so heretical could produce such exemplary Christians as Brookes, Scofield, Gaebelein, Chafer, Pettingill, Trumbull, Ironside, DeHaan, and a host of others including many dispensational leaders living today. In fact the daily Christian living of most dispensationalists is indistinguishable from that of most followers of covenant theology. This clearly raises the question as to whether dispensational theology is as antinomian as Gerstner claims, since he would certainly agree with Jesus' observation that "the tree is known by its fruit," (Matt 12:33; cf. 7:15, 20). Indeed, many have been saved through reading the Bible and the Scofield notes. And many have been called to serve Him through reading that Bible. The Scofield Bible stands as a source of help and blessing to untold millions who have read, heard, and profited from it. And that was the goal of Scofield himself, "The completed work is now dedicated to the service amongst men of that Loving and Holy God, whose marvelous grace in Christ it seeks to exalt," (Introduction, 1909 edition).

    A Note from the editor: I am one of those who have had four Scofield Bibles. Forty five years ago, I had heard of the Bible but could not find one. Then I saw one advertised in a Montgomery Ward catalog for $3.18 (a small hard-back). When I went to Bible college my home Bible class bought me the second one. When I was teaching at Dallas Bible College and pastoring a church part-time, I bought my third one. After many years, I had it rebound. Finally, in 1992 I bought my fourth one (it is a NKJV) and use it today. I will always appreciate what they have meant to my life and ministry.-- Dr. Ray E. Baughman
     
  20. Plain Old Bill

    Plain Old Bill
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2003
    Messages:
    3,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dear Craigbythesea,
    First Thing I would like to do is Thank you for your extensive article, I read every word.I am grateful that you went to so much trouble for a very informative and educational post.
    I am on my third Scofield now it is the New Scofield KJV 1967.
    The purpose of this thread is being served well.I hope to find some opposing views with scriptural referrences.This has all been very civil and I hope it stays that way when opposing views show up.
    Bless You my Brother for your input and effort.
     

Share This Page

Loading...