利用者:ConstanceWarner498 reinle

The publisher's justification for a brand new "edition" is that [www.MyParallelBible.com Chant D'Esperance] was initial printed in 1909 added material and published another edition in 1917. however it's an author's preogative to change his own works, however that definitely does not give others, quite 45 years when his death, a blank check to create alterations and then sign his name to it!

If we altered the ending of "Macbeth" we'd be but honest to assert that the modification met Shakespeare's approval.

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

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

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

[www.MyParallelBible.com Spanish English bilingual bible] offer his approval to those changes? Not unless one of the 9 committee members had the witch of Endor conjure him up as she had Samuel!

In fact, the publisher even admits that the changes made were arbitrary selections of the revision committee.

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

What are the results of such shenanigans? One example can suffice. allow us to examine the footnote found in Acts 8:12 of the [www.MyParallelBible.com Haitian Creole Bible] regarding baptism.

"Baptism has, since the apostolic age, been practiced by every major cluster in the Christian church and, in Protestant communions, is recognized collectively of two sacraments - the other being the Lord's Supper. Since early in the Church's history 3 totally different modes of baptism have been used: aspersion (sprinkling); affusion (pouring); and immersion (dipping)."

Here we tend to see that the nine revisors (NOT Dr. Scofield) believe that there is a distinction between the true Christian church and Protestant "communion". would possibly I ask? When one cluster is defined as "Protestant" what's the other cluster called?

Secondly, the 9 apostate revisors (NOT Dr. Scofield) claim, without scriptural proof that Christians baptize by pouring and sprinkling likewise as immersion.

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

What does the footnote for Acts 8:12 within the REAL [www.MyParallelBible.com Scofield bible] of 1917 that had a living Dr. Scofield as its editor say?

Nothing. there's no such footnote!

That's right! The New Haitian Creole Bible never approved of and never had in an exceedingly text anytime in his life time!

I ask you, is that this honest?

Proof that the massive print [www.MyParallelBible.com french english Parallel bible] is found on almost every page where the margin notes the twin Bible reading as "KJV". The text of the New Scofield Bible is not a King James Bible and it is NOT a Scofield Bible.

It might be noted that in recent years the dimensions and shape of the New Scofield Bible has been changed to a lot of resemble the Scofield Reference Bible. several Christians who want a real Scofield Reference Bible have purchased a replacement Scofield Bible by mistake.