User:RolenHassell320 reinle

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

If we have a tendency to altered the ending of "Macbeth" we might be less than honest to claim that the change 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 improvements during this edition are: necessary word changes within the text to help the reader; a changed 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; additional subheadings; clarification of some footnotes, deletion of others, and therefore the addition of the many new notes;: more marginal references; an entirely new chronology; a new index; a concordance especially 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 other options.

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

In fact, the publisher even admits that the changes created were arbitrary decisions of the revision committee.

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

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] regarding baptism.

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

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

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

Remember, the footnote is found in an exceedingly 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 among its editors.

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

Nothing. there is 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 this honest?

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

It might be noted that in recent years the size and shape of the New Scofield Bible has been modified to more resemble the Scofield Reference Bible. many Christians who need a true Scofield Reference Bible have purchased a brand new Scofield Bible by mistake.