User:RolenHassell320 reinle

The publisher's justification for a replacement "edition" is that [www.MyParallelBible.com Chant D'Esperance] was 1st published in 1909 added material and revealed another edition in 1917. however it's an author's preogative to change his own works, however that definitely does not give others, over 45 years once his death, a blank check to create alterations and then sign his name to it!

If we altered the ending of "Macbeth" we would be less than honest to claim 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 vital enough to include in his work. in the introduction to their doubly dishonest 1967 publication they admit such changes.

New Scofield: "Among the changes and enhancements during this edition are: vital word changes within 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, together with designation of the author, theme, and date; a lot of subheadings; clarification of some footnotes, deletion of others, and the addition of many new notes;: more marginal references; an entirely new chronology; a replacement index; a concordance particularly prepared for this edition; new maps; and additional legible kind. a number 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 many different features.

[www.MyParallelBible.com Spanish English bilingual bible] provide his approval to those changes? Not unless one amongst 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 choices of the revision committee.

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

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

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

Here we see that the 9 revisors (NOT Dr. Scofield) believe that there's a distinction between the true Christian church and Protestant "communion". would possibly I ask? When one group is outlined as "Protestant" what is the opposite group called?

Secondly, the 9 apostate revisors (NOT Dr. Scofield) claim, while not scriptural proof that Christians baptize by pouring and sprinkling likewise as immersion.

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

What will the footnote for Acts 8:12 in the REAL [www.MyParallelBible.com Scofield bible] of 1917 which 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 a 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 dual Bible reading as "KJV". The text of the New Scofield Bible isn't a King James Bible and it's 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 more resemble the Scofield Reference Bible. several Christians who need a true Scofield Reference Bible have purchased a new Scofield Bible by mistake.