View Single Post
  #4  
Old 09-05-2008, 11:44 PM
bibleprotector's Avatar
bibleprotector bibleprotector is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 587
Default

Issues with the old Scofield:

1. Oxford text.
2. Doctrinal concerns (no credence given to the historicist view of prophecy).

Having said that, I do own one, and on occassions have utilised it.

Problems with the new Scofield are much greater:

Dr. William Grady wrote: A random survey of the NSRB margins in Philippians alone revealed a total of 29 changes from the King James Bible. Of these, twenty-one (72%) were traced to either the RSV or the NASV. The skeptic can ckeck it out for himself: Philippians 1:7, 8, 23, 27; 2:1, 15, 25, 27, 28; 3:1, 8, 17, 19, 20, 21; 4:3, 6, 14, 15, 21, and 22." The "New Scofield Reference Bible" in the "King James Version" is NOT new, is NOT a Scofield Bible, and it is certainly NOT a King James Version.