Usuario:RolenHassell320 reinle

The publisher's justification for a replacement "edition" is that [www.MyParallelBible.com Chant D'Esperance] was first revealed in 1909 added material and printed another edition in 1917. however it is an author's preogative to alter his own works, but that actually does not provide others, quite forty five years once his death, a blank check to make alterations and then sign his name to it!

If we altered the ending of "Macbeth" we'd 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 necessary enough to incorporate in his work. within the introduction to their doubly dishonest 1967 publication they admit such changes.

New Scofield: "Among the changes and enhancements during this edition are: important word changes in the text to assist 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 therefore the addition of many new notes;: a lot of marginal references; a completely new chronology; a replacement index; a concordance especially ready for this edition; new maps; and additional legible kind. a number 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 alternative features.

[www.MyParallelBible.com Spanish English bilingual bible] give his approval to those changes? Not unless one amongst 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 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 group in the Christian church and, in Protestant communions, is recognized together of two sacraments - the opposite being the Lord's Supper. Since early in the Church's history 3 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 is a distinction between the true Christian church and Protestant "communion". may I ask? When one group is defined as "Protestant" what is the opposite cluster called?

Secondly, the 9 apostate revisors (NOT Dr. Scofield) claim, without scriptural proof that Christians baptize by pouring and sprinkling still 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 in 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 a text anytime in his life time!

I ask you, is this honest?

Proof that the massive print [www.MyParallelBible.com french english Parallel bible] is found on nearly 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 size and form of the New Scofield Bible has been modified to more resemble the Scofield Reference Bible. several Christians who desire a true Scofield Reference Bible have purchased a replacement Scofield Bible by mistake.