User:ConstanceWarner498 reinle

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

If we have a tendency to altered the ending of "Macbeth" we might be but honest to say that the amendment met Shakespeare's approval.

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

New Scofield: "Among the changes and improvements in this edition are: important 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, including 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; a wholly new chronology; a brand new index; a concordance particularly prepared for this edition; new maps; and more legible sort. some of these options 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 other features.

[www.MyParallelBible.com Spanish English bilingual bible] provide his approval to these 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 created were arbitrary choices 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 can 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 group in the Christian church and, in Protestant communions, is recognized united of two sacraments - the opposite being the Lord's Supper. Since early within the Church's history three different modes of baptism are 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 group is defined as "Protestant" what's the other group called?

Secondly, the nine apostate revisors (NOT Dr. Scofield) claim, while not scriptural proof that Christians baptize by pouring and sprinkling as well 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 in all its editors.

What will 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 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 big 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 is not a King James Bible and it's NOT a Scofield Bible.

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