ANALYZING Scofield

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

zone

Senior Member
Jun 13, 2010
27,214
164
63
#1
ANALYZING
Scofield

WHY WE PUBLISHED THIS BOOK

After sixty-five years of ordained ministry and studying and teaching the Scriptures around the world, I am convinced that C. I. Scofield was taken in by an immense deception that he unwittingly believed and included in his Bible notes to the detriment of all who believe in them.​

If the Church is to be built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets with Jesus Christ the Chief Cornerstone, then the presumptions and errors of the Scofield Reference Bible must be exposed. We are not his judge. But concerning the Scriptures, we are compelled to judge, 1Th 5:21. We are publishing this booklet that others might be able to know the facts as we have found them to be.
C.G.W.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

THE STORY OF SCOFIELD'S LIFE
SCOFIELD NOTES ANSWERED
DANIEL'S 70 WEEKS
THE REAL ISRAEL
ORIGIN OF SCOFIELD HERESIES
Scriptures quoted from KJV

When Albertus Pieters wrote about the Scofield Bible in 1938, he said it was one of the most dangerous books on the market.


[SIZE=+2]SCOFIELD'S BASIC ERRORS[/SIZE]

1. He disregards the witness, the doctrines and the examples of interpretation of the Old Testament that are given us by the apostles in the New Testament.

2. He usurps apostolic authority by contradicting their clear teaching and so setting himself above them.

3. He makes false statements exactly opposite to known facts to support his false doctrines.

4. The greatest reigning error of this century is his teaching that promises a millennial kingdom on the earth after Christ returns for his church. (cf. Ro 8:18-23.)

5. That the church was not foreseen and that the prophets never prophesy of the church. (Isa 54:1; Hos 1:9-10; 2:23; Gal 4:2130; Ro 9:22-26 and 1Pe 2:9-10.)

http://www.gospeltruth.net/scofield.htm
 

zone

Senior Member
Jun 13, 2010
27,214
164
63
#2
[SIZE=+2]SCOFIELD'S BASIC ERRORS[/SIZE]

1. He disregards the witness, the doctrines and the examples of interpretation of the Old Testament that are given us by the apostles in the New Testament.

2. He usurps apostolic authority by contradicting their clear teaching and so setting himself above them.

3. He makes false statements exactly opposite to known facts to support his false doctrines.

4. The greatest reigning error of this century is his teaching that promises a millennial kingdom on the earth after Christ returns for his church. (cf. Ro 8:18-23.)

5. That the church was not foreseen and that the prophets never prophesy of the church. (Isa 54:1; Hos 1:9-10; 2:23; Gal 4:2130; Ro 9:22-26 and 1Pe 2:9-10.)


The leaven of these teachings has permeated everywhere, even where his notes are unknown. For proof to back up my accusations see the following:

SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917, 1967) from the Introduction to THE FOUR GOSPELS: "All (gospels) record Christ's offer of Himself as King."

ANSWER: That statement is plainly false. Nowhere does Jesus ever suggest in the faintest way that he is waiting for popular or national approval to establish his kingdom or to be an earthly king. Jn 6:15, "When Jesus perceived that they would come to take him by force to make him a king, he departed..." His offer of the kingdom is the same he made to Nicodemus at the beginning of his ministry, "Except a man be born again, he cannot SEE the Kingdom of God," Jn 3:3. Also Jn 3:14-16. Take it and be saved; neglect it and be lost.

SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917, 1967) on Mt 4:17: " 'At hand' is never a positive affirmation that the person or thing said to be at hand will immediately appear, but only that no known or predicted event must intervene." The verse reads "From that time, Jesus began to preach and say, repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."

ANSWER: Scofield is speaking pompous nonsense. Mk 1:15 reads: "The time is fulfilled for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. Repent ye and believe the gospel." The Scripture gives us plenty of examples as to what the term at hand means. In Mt 26:46, Jesus said, "He that betrayeth me is at hand." And while he was yet speaking Judas came and kissed him and betrayed him. 'At hand' means something within your reach. So the Scripture uses it continually.

SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917, 1967) on Mt 4:17: "When Christ appeared to the Jewish people, the next thing, in the order of revelation as it then stood, should have been the setting up of the Davidic kingdom. In the knowledge of God, not yet disclosed, lay the rejection of the kingdom and the King, the long period of the mystery-form kingdom, the worldwide preaching of the cross and the out-calling of the church. But this was as yet locked up in the secret counsels of God." Then he gives Mt 13:11,17 and Eph. 3:3-10.

ANSWER: The first statement -- "When Christ first appeared to the Jewish people the next thing should have been the setting up of the kingdom," is the error of the Pharisees, that Christ should appear as a mighty warrior conquering the world for Israel and setting up such a kingdom on earth. Scofield's notes reveal this as his understanding of the kingdom. He declares that is what should have been according to the revelation to that point. Nothing could be further from the truth. That is absolute heresy. Israel, clinging to this false hope, lost everything in A.D. 70. Scofield falsely assumed that the Davidic Covenant prophesied an earthly enthronement of Christ upon the throne of David with Jews ruling over all.

The first year of Christ's ministry is given in the first four chapters of John. In Jn 3:1-2, we read, "There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews, the same came to Jesus by night and said unto Him, 'Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God, for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.'" Who came? Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews, a member of the Sanhedrin. He came by night to talk with Jesus alone.

The Sanhedrin knew that Jesus was a teacher come from God. What then was on their minds? The Messiah! They were looking for the kingdom. They knew the prophecy that Messiah should come 490 years or so, after the commandment to rebuild Jerusalem and the Temple. It was now time for Messiah to appear. That is why they sent inquirers to John the Baptist and why Nicodemus has come to question the Lord.

Jesus answered him, "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus said unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? Jesus answered, Verily, verily I say unto you except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, that which is born of the Spirit is Spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again." (Jn 3:5-7.) That was the beginning of Jesus' ministry and at its very beginning he is preaching the kingdom. What kind? A kingdom with a sword-rattling, warrior Messiah? No way! A Messiah who will be lifted up as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have eternal life. (Jn 3:14-15.)
"You mean that Jews cannot see the kingdom of God unless they are born again?" Nicodemus, you are Jewish flesh, a member of the Sanhedrin, a Pharisee. Your Mosaic religion, Abrahamic descent, your Jewish flesh with all its pride, none of it can get you into the kingdom of God--only the new birth."
This is the kingdom that Jesus preached from the beginning of his ministry, but Scofield twists things up to make it appear Jesus was preaching the Pharisees' earthly kingdom.

ANALYZING Cyrus I. Scofield and His Teaching
 
Last edited:
1

1still_waters

Guest
#3
Analyze his notes with this...

 
A

Abiding

Guest
#4
His relationship with Untermeyer, Schiff, and associates isnt a small matter.
 
1

1still_waters

Guest
#6
ROTFLMHO!

how do you get the live gif thingee?
*Hmmm....gets 1,000,000 ideas*
Google image search..

*hint*

lighters...
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
#7
[SIZE=+2]SCOFIELD'S BASIC ERRORS[/SIZE]

1. He disregards the witness, the doctrines and the examples of interpretation of the Old Testament that are given us by the apostles in the New Testament.

2. He usurps apostolic authority by contradicting their clear teaching and so setting himself above them.

3. He makes false statements exactly opposite to known facts to support his false doctrines.

4. The greatest reigning error of this century is his teaching that promises a millennial kingdom on the earth after Christ returns for his church. (cf. Ro 8:18-23.)

This is all opinion. where are the facts supporting this opinion?


5. That the church was not foreseen and that the prophets never prophesy of the church. (Isa 54:1; Hos 1:9-10; 2:23; Gal 4:2130; Ro 9:22-26 and 1Pe 2:9-10.)


The leaven of these teachings has permeated everywhere, even where his notes are unknown. For proof to back up my accusations see the following:

SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917, 1967) from the Introduction to THE FOUR GOSPELS: "All (gospels) record Christ's offer of Himself as King."

ANSWER: That statement is plainly false. Nowhere does Jesus ever suggest in the faintest way that he is waiting for popular or national approval to establish his kingdom or to be an earthly king. Jn 6:15, "When Jesus perceived that they would come to take him by force to make him a king, he departed..." His offer of the kingdom is the same he made to Nicodemus at the beginning of his ministry, "Except a man be born again, he cannot SEE the Kingdom of God," Jn 3:3. Also Jn 3:14-16. Take it and be saved; neglect it and be lost.

SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917, 1967) on Mt 4:17: " 'At hand' is never a positive affirmation that the person or thing said to be at hand will immediately appear, but only that no known or predicted event must intervene." The verse reads "From that time, Jesus began to preach and say, repent for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."

ANSWER: Scofield is speaking pompous nonsense. Mk 1:15 reads: "The time is fulfilled for the kingdom of heaven is at hand. Repent ye and believe the gospel." The Scripture gives us plenty of examples as to what the term at hand means. In Mt 26:46, Jesus said, "He that betrayeth me is at hand." And while he was yet speaking Judas came and kissed him and betrayed him. 'At hand' means something within your reach. So the Scripture uses it continually.

SCOFIELD note (SRB 1917, 1967) on Mt 4:17: "When Christ appeared to the Jewish people, the next thing, in the order of revelation as it then stood, should have been the setting up of the Davidic kingdom. In the knowledge of God, not yet disclosed, lay the rejection of the kingdom and the King, the long period of the mystery-form kingdom, the worldwide preaching of the cross and the out-calling of the church. But this was as yet locked up in the secret counsels of God." Then he gives Mt 13:11,17 and Eph. 3:3-10.

ANSWER: The first statement -- "When Christ first appeared to the Jewish people the next thing should have been the setting up of the kingdom," is the error of the Pharisees, that Christ should appear as a mighty warrior conquering the world for Israel and setting up such a kingdom on earth. Scofield's notes reveal this as his understanding of the kingdom. He declares that is what should have been according to the revelation to that point. Nothing could be further from the truth. That is absolute heresy. Israel, clinging to this false hope, lost everything in A.D. 70. Scofield falsely assumed that the Davidic Covenant prophesied an earthly enthronement of Christ upon the throne of David with Jews ruling over all.

AS for this. even jesus disciples thought this is what Christ came to do. They asked who would be greates in his kingdom. and who would sit on the right and left hand side. So if his disciples thought this. it is not out of reach to believe the jews thought this too. In fact this is why they rejected Christ. they wanted the king not the savior (they di dnot think they needed saved)

so this point is in error.

Again, the 70 AD thing is opinion not supported by facts.

The first year of Christ's ministry is given in the first four chapters of John. In Jn 3:1-2, we read, "There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews, the same came to Jesus by night and said unto Him, 'Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God, for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.'" Who came? Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews, a member of the Sanhedrin. He came by night to talk with Jesus alone.

The Sanhedrin knew that Jesus was a teacher come from God. What then was on their minds? The Messiah! They were looking for the kingdom. They knew the prophecy that Messiah should come 490 years or so, after the commandment to rebuild Jerusalem and the Temple. It was now time for Messiah to appear. That is why they sent inquirers to John the Baptist and why Nicodemus has come to question the Lord.

Jesus answered him, "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus said unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? Jesus answered, Verily, verily I say unto you except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh, that which is born of the Spirit is Spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again." (Jn 3:5-7.) That was the beginning of Jesus' ministry and at its very beginning he is preaching the kingdom. What kind? A kingdom with a sword-rattling, warrior Messiah? No way! A Messiah who will be lifted up as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have eternal life. (Jn 3:14-15.)
"You mean that Jews cannot see the kingdom of God unless they are born again?" Nicodemus, you are Jewish flesh, a member of the Sanhedrin, a Pharisee. Your Mosaic religion, Abrahamic descent, your Jewish flesh with all its pride, none of it can get you into the kingdom of God--only the new birth."
This is the kingdom that Jesus preached from the beginning of his ministry, but Scofield twists things up to make it appear Jesus was preaching the Pharisees' earthly kingdom.

as for this. I already posted something on this in another thread. http://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/29413-king-messiah-vs-suffering-servant.html

Here are the differences!


King Messiah:

1. Come take power
2. King over the whole Earth
3. Kill his enemy
4. Never die

Suffering servant

1. Come to suffer
2. No kingdom
3. Die for his enemy
4. Suffer BAD death


Messiah was definately prophesied to come do just as the jews thought he would do. Jesus did not do this while on earthly which means this prophesies are as of yet unfulfilled.

Sorry Zone. :(
 
A

Abiding

Guest
#8
I think Darby deserves the most credit for Scoffields doctrine.
Scoffield just took it into the church. And Lindsey ran it into the endzone. :)
 

zone

Senior Member
Jun 13, 2010
27,214
164
63
#10
I think Darby deserves the most credit for Scoffields doctrine.
Scoffield just took it into the church. And Lindsey ran it into the endzone. :)
that's true.
and didn't Darby have Irving (neo-Montanist) and MacDonald (pretrib visionary) as contemporaries?

i mean: even the MASONS have to admit it!!! LOL!

Edward Irving (1792-1834), a leading figure of the Catholic Apostolic Church of England, and Minister of the Caledonian Church, Regent Square, translated Lacunza’s book into English, publishing it in London in 1827. Although Irving disagreed with Lacunza’s views, the futurist interpretation of prophecy—that much of the endtimes scenario was yet to come—appears to have been gaining popularity within Christian communities at this time.

John Nelson Darby (November 18, 1800 - April 29, 1882) developed and organized futurism into a system of prophetic teaching called dispensationalism and is claimed to have originated the secret rapture theory wherein Christ will remove his true believers from this world without warning. While Darby, an influential figure, if not founder, of the original Plymouth Brethren,[FONT=Palatino, Times, Serif]4[/FONT] was an early proponent of a pre-tribulation rapture doctrine, the influence on his views by Margaret Macdonald (b. 1815, Port-Glasgow, Scotland) is controversial.[FONT=Palatino, Times, Serif]5[/FONT]

An objective reading of Miss Macdonald’s vision does not appear to reveal any reference to a pre-tribulation rapture. It is known that Darby knew Miss Macdonald, and her family,[FONT=Palatino, Times, Serif]6[/FONT] and had visited them. He had stayed with them for three days at or around the time of Margaret’s revelation.[FONT=Palatino, Times, Serif]7[/FONT] Congregationalist preacher Cyrus Ingerson Scofield (1843-1921), influenced by Darby and the Plymouth Brethren, wrote The Scofield Reference Bible, a widely distributed and influential text that promoted the teaching of the Secret Rapture, gaining it wide acceptance.[FONT=Palatino, Times, Serif]8[/FONT]

Who first taught the pre-tribulation rapture is not a question easily answered. Southern Baptist evangelist, John L. Bray, recently wrote: "Now I have the Photostat copies of a book published in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, in 1788 but written in 1742-1744 in England, which taught the pretribulation rapture before Lacunza."[FONT=Palatino, Times, Serif]9[/FONT] A number of authors, notably Grant Jeffrey,[FONT=Palatino, Times, Serif]10[/FONT] have published citations of several pre-Macdonald sources describing a raptured Church and teaching the pre-tribulation rapture—some written as early as the second century.

Claims that Ribera’s writings influenced Lacunza, Lacunza influenced Irving, Irving influenced Darby, Darby influenced Scofield, Scofield and Darby influenced D. L. Moody, and Moody influenced the Pentecostal Movement have also been the topic of much discussion. Because the writings of these men did not always agree on specifics, and because individual commentators have had their own beliefs, the actual history of dispensationalism and its many streams continues to be a controversial subject. [FONT=Palatino, Times, Serif]11[/FONT]

Dispensational Fundamentalism
 
A

Abiding

Guest
#11
<< Acts 1:7 >>
And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.


Which the Father hath put in his own power; and not in the power of a creature, no, not of the angels; see Matthew 24:36 wherefore it is vain and sinful, as well as fruitless, to indulge a curious inquiry into these things, or into the times and seasons of what is future; as of the time of a man's death, of the end of the world, of the second coming of Christ; only those things should be looked into which God has revealed, and put into the power of man to know by diligent search and inquiry

Of coarse they kept asking Him. He told them His Kingdom was not of this world. And this kingdom will be in the eternal state.
 
A

Abiding

Guest
#12
Darby loved the pretrib idea that came from a dream a 12 yr old girl had. If i remember right,
then started a club, which soon became a prophecy club that travelled like today with conventions
Yes there were occultic ties, with some of his associates.
 
A

Abiding

Guest
#13
Manuel de Lacunza seems like the first one
to start it all. Them pesky jesuits. :)
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
#14
Darby loved the pretrib idea that came from a dream a 12 yr old girl had. If i remember right,
then started a club, which soon became a prophecy club that travelled like today with conventions
Yes there were occultic ties, with some of his associates.

where do you guys get this stuff??
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
#16
What stuff exactly. :)
Stuff like this..

Darby loved the pretrib idea that came from a dream a 12 yr old girl had. If i remember right,
then started a club, which soon became a prophecy club that travelled like today with conventions
Yes there were occultic ties, with some of his associates.
 
A

Abiding

Guest
#17
Stuff like this..

Darby loved the pretrib idea that came from a dream a 12 yr old girl had. If i remember right,
then started a club, which soon became a prophecy club that travelled like today with conventions
Yes there were occultic ties, with some of his associates.
Its history. And this girl came to meetings at the start to tell her story.
Do you want links? Darbys associates are well know Christians and there
is alot of records. Want some?
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
#18
Its history. And this girl came to meetings at the start to tell her story.
Do you want links? Darbys associates are well know Christians and there
is alot of records. Want some?
Why would I want links? All I would get are mans ideas of what happens.

I find it hypocritical that we tell scotty and the roman church to not rely on history, or tradition. and only get our truth form the word. and yet we would do it ourselves.

Thanks. But I will stick to the word of God.


Those things are nice to read. But I would not trust them. Because usually the men who wrote them are biased. Just like in the other thread where something Zone posted was tainted by the person who was against scofield adding things scofiled never said to make him look bad
 
A

Abiding

Guest
#19
Why would I want links? All I would get are mans ideas of what happens.

I find it hypocritical that we tell scotty and the roman church to not rely on history, or tradition. and only get our truth form the word. and yet we would do it ourselves.

Thanks. But I will stick to the word of God.


Those things are nice to read. But I would not trust them. Because usually the men who wrote them are biased. Just like in the other thread where something Zone posted was tainted by the person who was against scofield adding things scofiled never said to make him look bad
Sure I understand that will always happen. In fact part of studying, no matter what field its in, will
have that and we have to cope with it and expect it. The cool thing with History is that it isnt as hard to pick out the opinions from the facts. Thing is your biased too to some degree as everyone is and we have to see to it that we test all things, and not put trust in ourselves either.

My opinion is that if a person is a student of bible prophecy and hasnt studied Darby, and Scofield. And
looked closely at the supporters and crew they run with. Just havnt done their homework.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
#20
Sure I understand that will always happen. In fact part of studying, no matter what field its in, will
have that and we have to cope with it and expect it. The cool thing with History is that it isnt as hard to pick out the opinions from the facts. Thing is your biased too to some degree as everyone is and we have to see to it that we test all things, and not put trust in ourselves either.

My opinion is that if a person is a student of bible prophecy and hasnt studied Darby, and Scofield. And
looked closely at the supporters and crew they run with. Just havnt done their homework.
Thats like saying that since a man named saul was a pharisee and murderer of Christians we should ignore all his works.

I have owned scofield study bibles since I was a teenager. I have 3 now. From kjv, to nkv to NASB. I love them. Would recommend them to anyone. I do not agree with everything he says. (in fact hardly even use it in the last 5 years because of Logos) But i have never found so much error that I would not listen to what he says and call him a heretic.

No one is perfect.


And again. Your trusting that history is accurate, and not skewed by people trying to tear down people they do not agree with.