Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

The Scofield Bible

44 posts in this topic

Posted

Does anyone here use the Scofield Bible ?
Does your church ?
I know his notes are not Bible but he is wrong on creation and repentance in his notes
any thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I use the 1909 Scofield and my wife uses the 1917 Scofield. I really do like his notes, disagree with some of them, but usually take them as someone's opinion. I don't think my church thinks too highly of Scofield.

Jason

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

ok those are the older copies of his

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Scofield has some good notes, he also has some bad ones: the gap theory, critical readings in the margins, salvation by works in different dispensations. But he does have some awesome notes on types. (That reminds me, I should go read some of them again...)

Also, stay away from the New Scofield Reference Bible, as that is not a Scofield Bible. It was one put together by some liberal scholars that used some of his notes but changed what he originally said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Ok thank you I didn't know that .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I knew I forgot something important!!

The King James Bible edition of the New Scofield Study Bible is NOT a King James Bible - I repeat, it is NOT a King James Bible. They have taken the liberty to edit the text of the Bible as well, not just the notes! (To make the text conform more to the critical readings found in the margins of earlier editions.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Thank you I also ddin't know that boy there is a lot of stuff I don't know :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

[quote]
Thank you I also ddin't know that boy there is a lot of stuff I don't know
[/quote]

You and me both, sister! :lol: Here is where I come for the "low-down" (and high-up :wink: ) on Bibles, "famous" preachers, and just about anything or anyone else that claims to be IFB! :D This forum is like unto Epinions for IFB resources! :D

May the Lord bless, keep, encourage, strengthen, and guide each of you,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Yes I agree this placce is awesome :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I used the Scofield as a textbook for some of my external classes at Liberty U., but my Leatherbound Liberty Annotated KJV is what I use for study/reference and I have the KJV online which I use copy/paste to quote.

2 Tim. 3:
14: But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them;
15: And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.
16: All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17: That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.



May God bless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I use [i]The First Scofield Study Bible[/i] based on the 1909 edition of [i]The Scofield Reference Bible[/i]. I'm like Refreshed, I like some of his notes, but some I do not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

forgive me brethren, but i have read on this board more than a few times that so and so is a "gappist" and something along the lines that I am glad that Spurgeon was not, to bad McGee was, etc.

yet I have not read why the gap teaching is in error, only that it flat out is so so there!. so far i haven't seen any scripture for or against it on this site at least.

I actually thought it a little humorous, jerry, when you were glad that spurgeon was not a gappist. a sigh of relief for sure.

i thought it funny because what about his cigar smoking, or his Calvinism, or his innumerable corrections of the KJB in his comments, or his etc.

do we defend a doctrine because it lines up with our camp, or do we defend a man because we like him, or we reject the doctrine because so and so said such and such?

So what does the word "replenish" mean in Gen 1? Does it mean the same thing it means in Gen 9? Or does it have a different meaning altogether? Or do we let the "Hebrew" lexicon correct the Bible we all say is without error?

Just wondering. Or is there a thread on the gap already? If there is, I go over and read it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Gen 1:28 And God430 blessed1288 them, and God430 said559 unto them, Be fruitful,6509 and multiply,7235 and replenish4390 (853)


H4390
îìà îìà
ma^le^' ma^la^'
maw-lay', maw-law'
A primitive root, to fill or (intransitively) be full of, in a wide application (literally and figuratively): - accomplish, confirm, + consecrate, be at an end, be expired, be fenced, fill, fulfil, (be, become, X draw, give in, go) fully (-ly, -ly set, tale), [over-] flow, fulness, furnish, gather (selves, together), presume, replenish, satisfy, set, space, take a [hand-] full, + have wholly.


H853
àú
'e^th
ayth
Apparently contracted from H226 in the demonstrative sense of entity; properly self (but generally used to point out more definitely the object of a verb or preposition, even or namely): - (As such unrepresented in English.)


Gen 1:28 And God430 blessed1288 them, and God430 said559 unto them, Be fruitful,6509 and multiply,7235 and replenish4390 (853) the earth,776 and subdue3533 it: and have dominion7287 over the fish1710 of the sea,3220 and over the fowl5775 of the air,8064 and over every3605 living thing2416 that moveth7430 upon5921 the earth.776

Gen 9:1 And God430 blessed1288 (853) Noah5146 and his sons,1121 and said559 unto them, Be fruitful,6509 and multiply,7235 and replenish4390 (853) the earth.776

But what does replenish in 1:28 have to do with a 'gap' between 1:1, and 1:2?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Are you asking someone to show why we believe the Gap Theory contradicts Scripture, or are you just throwing out comments?

I never said I endorsed the bad points of Spurgeon, but was glad that he did not believe a certain doctrinal error - which I feel you have to be seriously blind to adhere to! Yes, he was a Calvinist, but he was not a five-point Calvinist. I have read enough of his works to realize that I can still glean much from his writings - just like I can glean from Matthew Henry (who was not a Baptist), and some other writers. I can deal with where he stands on the KJV. His approach to alternate renditions is way different than the modern Bible correctors today. I am not so ignorant that I will throw out everything by someone because they do not dot their "i"s exactly the same way as I do! There are enough heretics to stand against without throwing out material by those who only differ a little - and not on the Fundamentals of the faith. It's not like I am endorsing Billy Graham, Max Lucado, or James Dobson.

As far as his cigar smoking goes - I don't endorse smoking at all, but I will not judge him by our modern standards. The Bible does not say thou shalt not smoke. There are principles involved, but I daresay there are many of us who do not live by all of them either. He also did repent of it later in life. Why he didn't do it sooner is between him and the Lord.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I'd ask one who believes the 'gap' theory, what difference it makes in anything.

I think it's made up because of 'theories' of science in the 19th century.

As if the Word of God has to jump through hoops to coincide with God hating theories by God hating science, so called.

Did God say to study to shew thy theories approved unto God?

Get on with REAL business with God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

When you start talking "gap theory", I would ask you to check out 2 sites. 1. [url=http://www.answersingenesis.org]Answers In Genesis[/url] and 2. [url=http://www.drdino.com]Kent Hovind[/url].
In essence, the idea off gap theory comes from evolutionary thinking trying to fit back in the Bible. At a point in our history, science andcreation were handed over to our public schools, and the churches began teaching stories. Along came the likes of Darwin and freinds who came up with their theories, which were taken by too many as fact. Society, and some preachers began to agree with the "facts" and tried to fit them into the Bible. Remember , the Bible came first, there is no gap. If you go to the links above, you will see a lot of proof that the earth is only about 6000 years old.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I was supporting a Baptist preacher, who was beginning a work in our area,(we are 15-20 miles to the nearest Baptist church). He began teaching the "gap theory", and I immediately separated myself and my family from this perversion of scripture. It is a desperate attempt to reconcile God's Word with pseudo-science and theory of origins.

The preacher had a questionare/handout, which point by point substantiated the "gap theory". Here is a bit of response:

Genesis 1:28 the word replenish
Young

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

To me its like evolution people have no problem believeing that junk.
Yet they say they have trouble believeing God made the world in 6 days ,He is God if He would have wanted to He could have done it in just one day or even one moment He can do whatever He wishes because He is God .
It takes more faith on someone who says evolution or the big bang or gap theory to say how the worlds came to be .
What about Noah and the flood ? What about God destroying Sodom and Gommorah ?
Nope God made the world just like He said in the Bible or He wouldn't have put in the Bible

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Hi Everybody,

Those who reject the Biblical account of creation in favor of evolution (or even theistic evolution) do so because they limit God's power and "press" him into their own little mold. They know full well that creation can't happen by itself, so in their little minds they've concocted an "alternative-answer" to the story of creation as the origin of everything. They refuse to accept some very simple facts:::

(1) God is [b]infinite[/b] in Power and Might.

(2) God can convert energy (His own) to matter by His own spoken Word. We know the conversion formula as E=MC^2.

(3) Since God created everything, then they are accountable to Him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

yes jerry, i was looking for some actual study of the scriptures either denounce or affirm that there is or is not a gap between the verses in Genesis.

At this point I have a Hebrew lexicon being quoted as though that should take care of it.
I have Kurt Hovind being summoned up to silence all unbelief.
I have one quiting a church over such blatant and obvious heresy, although they failed to actually show why it is from scripture.
I have an honest response from jerry who may come back with some scripture.
i have a question on why the word replenish could have any bearing on the issue which to me shows a real ignorance of the issue.
i have the major sense of the crowd that says we need not cower before science and come up with a scheme to allow for millions of years.


now i'll say this for now.

I have yet to hear from the book from anyone in response to my question.

God bless ya.

And jerry, i was jesting about spurgeon, i just think it a bit humorous that whew! at least he's not a "gappist".
but you don't seriously expect me to agree with you that smoking is a grey area of the Bible do you?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

There are some articles on Creation and The Gap Theory linked from this page:

http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/ar ... enesis.asp

One of the biggest Scriptural arguments against the Gap Theory is the fact that the Bible states in several places that God created the Heaven and the earth and all that is in them in those six days - and another place states "and all the hosts of them", which many times is a reference to angels (the heavenly host), not just stars. If God created all (including angels) in those six days, there is no room for an expulsion of the fallen angels from heaven before the creation of the earth. Also, Ezekiel 28 states that the devil was walking in the garden of Eden before he sinned! (Note: satan obviously fell after water, stars, and the Garden of Eden were created. See Isaiah 14:13-14; Ezekiel 28:13-17)

Refuting the Gap Theory is an argument that takes into account many passages of Scripture, and is not limited to Genesis 1:1-2.

No sin in the entire universe by the end of the creation week:

Genesis 1:31 And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. And the evening and the morning were the sixth day.

Genesis 2:1 Thus the heavens and the earth were finished, [b]and all the host of them.[/b]

Exodus 20:11 For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, [b]and all that in them is[/b], and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day, and hallowed it.

When were angels created? Somewhere on day one or two, because the foundations of the earth were laid on day three:

Genesis 1:9-10 And God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place, and let the dry land appear: and it was so. And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good.

Job 38:4-7 Where wast thou [b]when I laid the foundations of the earth? [/b]declare, if thou hast understanding. Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it? [b]Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened[/b]? or who laid the corner stone thereof; [b]When the morning stars sang together, and [u]all the sons of God [/u]shouted for joy[/b]?

Hm, [b]all the angels [/b]shouted for joy; therefore no fallen angels yet!

Psalm 104 is also good for a timeline of creation (the creation of angels prior to the foundation of the earth):

Psalms 104:2-5 Who coverest thyself with light as with a garment: who stretchest out the heavens like a curtain: Who layeth the beams of his chambers in the waters: who maketh the clouds his chariot: who walketh upon the wings of the wind: Who maketh his angels spirits; his ministers a flaming fire: Who laid the foundations of the earth, that it should not be removed for ever.

Some points to start with anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

[quote]
i was looking for some actual study of the scriptures either denounce or affirm that there is or is not a gap between the verses in Genesis
[/quote]

Is there anywhere in Genesis that says their is a gap? I didnt read any. I though God was pretty clear, He created everything in 6 days and rested on the 7th.

If you look in 2 Oppinions 1:1-2, I think it reads,

[i]1 In the beginning God created the heaven and earth.
2 [u]For billions and billions of years[/u], the earth was without form, and void; and darkness.....[/i]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I use a First Scofield Bible and haven't read it from cover to cover yet. Do you have a few references that I can read to view the inaccurate notes?

If Matthew Henry wasn't a Baptist, what was he?

I sure do like Spurgeon too...

I will continue to ask the Lord for the discernment I need,

"I will instruct thee and teach thee in the way which thou shalt go: I will guide thee with mine eye" Psalm 32:8

Thank You Father

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I [i]think [/i]Matthew Henry was a Presbyterian.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

You say,

Spurgeon "was a Calvinist, but he was not a five-point Calvinist."



I Say

You have not read much of Spurgeon.

He hated the term "Calvinism" as much as I do. He said he believed the Bible as did Calvin and thought the term was man focused and made one think the doctrines of Sovereign Grace were man made.

Yet at the same time he felt Wesley (Arminian) was one of the greatest preachers as well as George Whitefield (Calvinist).

Read "In defence of Calvinsm." He had an annual conference where he invited "Calvinists" to preach all five points of the Sovereign Grace of God in our Salvation.

Spurgeon's entire ministry philosophy was molded around God's Sovereign Grace.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites