SeekGod.ca Discussion Forum

I would add Berry's Interlinear Greek-English New Testament (Baker) and the OLD Scofield Reference Bible.

I don't think that Scofield's work should be on the list of resources. His biography is filled with spurious behaviors. Here is a look at this life, his reference Bible and theology - with refutations:

ps: I have not read through the refutations of his theology that closely in this article, so I am not recommending that they be taken as a truthful view of the scriptures either unless one uses discernment and comparison to God's Word. My reason for posting this is to show the heresies and to warn people that Scofield's teachings are not Biblically correct.

Quote:SCOFIELD'S BASIC ERRORS


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.

Look at the second statement where Scofield says, "In the knowledge of God, not yet disclosed lay the rejection of the kingdom and King." Scofield thereby denies great and clear prophesies where the rejection, crucifixion, death, burial, resurrection and enthronement of Christ in glory are all set forth. (lsa 53; Ps 2; Ps 16:8-11, Ps 110:1-4) Was he totally ignorant of these wonderful prophecies?

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

Quote:
"The leaven of these teachings has permeated everywhere, even where his notes are unknown"

Uhm...maybe because his (Scofield's) teachings are...uhm...biblical...(!?!)

The Sanhedrin and Pharesees were (wrongfully) looking for 2 Messiahs: one suffering, one of glory who would (they thought) overthrow the oppressive Romans. They had no faith. This is painfully clear when they picked up stones to kill Him. From all the prophets, even our Lord's disciples did not know that He was there to reconcile the world unto Himself. Paul had to correct Peter (usurp?), then Peter knew Paul was from God. Paul corrects the doctrine of several churches.

As far as throwing the baby out with the bathwater...King David no less, has a biog filled with spurious behaviors. So does the church at Corinth, Galatia, Houston, Chicago etc...J. Vernon McGee once said that if he was able to look into the hearts of his audience, he wouldn't spend 5 minutes teaching them, then he said, but if you looked into my heart you wouldn't spend 5 minutes listening to me. We are all sinners saved by grace, and there are many good tools written by sinners, Scofield's OLD is one of them.

But if you don't care for Scofield, then add L.S. Chafer's Systematic Theology - 7 vols. to the list of tools.

From another article on Scofield:

Quote:C.I. Scofield.

You will learn how he defrauded his mother in law, out her life savings. And how he was convicted of forgery. In another case, was sent off to prisons. You will learn tonight how he openly carried on with other women, and abandoned his wife and family. Never sent them a dime of support. When his wife finally divorced him he married the woman with whom he was living. All the time he was writing the now infamous notes to the Scofield reference Bible. As a Christian he was a disgrace. As a man he lacked ordinary chivalry of a gentlemen. He called himself "Dr." yet he never went to any college which could convey that degree. His life as a minister makes the recent escapades of some modern ministers pale into insignificance.

His financial support for the reference Bible came from Zionist and conspiratorial groups out of Boston Massachusetts. Chiefly known as the Secret Six . That group tied to the order of the illuminati. And some other orders some of you may know about.

http://www.geocities.com/pvrosman/Dispen...alism.html

It's not about imperfections. We all sin. However; if one's connections and associations are unchristian, and when one's theology and belief system is outside of God's parameters, then their teachings are considered evil fruit. If the tree is evil, the fruit is evil [Matt 7:15+]. What they teach is tainted.

This is why we must rely on Scripture for truth, not man.

Jer 17:5 Thus said the LORD; Cursed be the man that trusts in man, and makes flesh his arm, and whose heart departs from the LORD.

ps: you may want to check out the discussion we had on "throwing the baby out with the bathwater". I am sure you will find it "enlightening"

http://www.seekgod.ca/forum/showthread.php?tid=96

A quickie brief overview from Wickipedia of LS Chafer, which throws up all kinds of red flags, in my opinion:

Quote:Chafer is widely recognized as one of the founders of modern Dispensationalism[5][6][7][8][9] and was vehemently opposed to covenant theology.[10] Strictly speaking, he was a premillennial, pretribulational dispensationalist. Other aspects of his overall theology could be generally described as rooted in aspects of the Plymouth Brethren, Calvinism, a mild form of Keswick Theology on Sanctification, and Presbyterianism, all of these tempered with a focus on spirituality based on simple Bible study and living.

Chafer's theology has been the subject of much study and debate in and out of the theological community since his death,[11][12][13] especially on the two larger topics of dispensationalism and Christian Zionism,[14] specifically that the Jews are a people called unto God with a separate historical purpose and plan from Christians.

LS Chafer founded the Dallas Theological Seminary, which is fast becoming known for it's contemplative position and quite enthralled with Richard Foster, the guru of the contemplative movement [mysticism and eastern religion's meditative prayer systems].

I was looking at a book that he wrote on satan - it's online. Shaking head, it's real doozie. From what I see, Chafer does a whole lot of conjecture and raises satan's position in Heaven way higher than the text says. Not only that, Chafer seems to think that satan has all this power on earth, which almost smacks of superiority to Christ, and that is in opposition to what we are told in Eph 2. I am not convinced that Chafer is Biblically theological.

You probably may want to review Chafer's stuff. Here is a link to help:

http://homepage.mac.com/shanerosenthal/r...chafer.htm

satan book: http://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/12586

What you've written is circular thinking. Do not follow certain men's theology, because other men say their theology is bad.
Wikipedia is not a good source and it is pretentious to quote it as authority for history OR theology.
I do have the book on Satan. Do you know what a "Doozie" (sic) was/is? Impressive automobile associated with fine living. Worthy of a 2nd look. Beauty. Comparable to a fine looking woman as, "She a real Duesy." (Duesenberg)

If you meant to say the book was unintelligent, it shows that you were "just looking" and not really reading it for knowledge's sake, something the enemy would want you to do. BTW, need to compare to the print version as well. Internet abridgment/edit is common.

I'm not a Roman Catholic, but G.K. Chesterton has some wonderful points on Christian living.
"The Bible tells us to love our neighbors, and also to love our enemies; probably because they are generally the same people." Because he believed in Holy Water I am censored from ever using him? Rubbish!

Dallas Theological Seminary contemplative??...Richard Foster...??? Wha...? I live near Dallas. I'm going ask Dr. Robert Lightner, DTS and Tyndale Theological Seminary if what you say is true. If it isn't, you have some serious gossip issues to answer for (but not to me, thank the Lord).

I stand by my original statement - the old Scofield Bible notes have blessed many hundreds of thousands of believers, and continues to be one of the most valued resources. Find it, purchase a copy, read the notes and of course, the Word. Try it. Take that little chip off your shoulder.

Quote:I stand by my original statement - the old Scofield Bible notes have blessed many hundreds of thousands of believers, and continues to be one of the most valued resources. Find it, purchase a copy, read the notes and of course, the Word. Try it. Take that little chip off your shoulder.

I think that should read "led astray many hundreds of thousands" not blessed.
I don't think its a case of having a chip on one's shoulder but more a case of being familiar with what the Bible teaches and says. It's seeing that Scolfield took many liberties and is responsible for many non biblical doctrines and beliefs which are doing the rounds of the christian sects and cults today.

Glittering generalities. False accusations. "Cultish and sectarian." Keywords glibly written without discernment. That's not a chip on your shoulder? Plus avoiding the issues just making statements.

Cults usually hide what they believe. Scofield is there for the picking, no one says "turn away from your church and turn to Scofield"

Give me an example of a "cultish" Scofield note. Oh, that's right, you have to HAVE one to find one, otherwise quote Wiki.

DTS hasn't changed their doctrinal statement, and it's available on the web, for all to see and read. Tyndale Theological Seminary also.

(02-11-2009 08:41 PM)Artskoe Wrote: [ -> ]Do you know what a "Doozie" (sic) was/is? Impressive automobile associated with fine living. Worthy of a 2nd look. Beauty. Comparable to a fine looking woman as, "She a real Duesy." (Duesenberg)[/align]

Not where I come from - it means wild, crazy, weird, bad. A doozie of a mistake. It can mean something good as well. It's one of those slang words that work on both ends of the spectrum like the words "cool" or "bad".

Quote: doo·zy or doo·zie (dz)
n. pl. doo·zies Slang
Something extraordinary or bizarre: "Among the delicious names taken by, or given to, minor political parties in the United States . . . are these doozies: Quids, Locofocos, Barnburners, Coodies, Hunkies, Bucktails" Saturday Review.

doozy 44 up, 83 down
A night filled with excessive drinking to the point that events of the said night are hazy and cannot be completely recalled.

doozy 5 thumbs down
someone that mean anything, a word that can be used anywhere at anytime, like how in uno you have a wild card that can be any color well DOOZY is a wild word it can mean anything.

doozy 213 up, 62 down
something that is difficult or daunting
man that history exam was a doozy! i think i failed :(

Quote:Dallas Theological Seminary contemplative??...Richard Foster...??? Wha...? I live near Dallas. I'm going ask Dr. Robert Lightner, DTS and Tyndale Theological Seminary if what you say is true. If it isn't, you have some serious gossip issues to answer for (but not to me, thank the Lord).

I never state anything that I can't back up

Quote:Dallas Theological Seminary-
Walking Toward Mysticism

Quotes from Dallas Theological Seminary Toolbox:

"Silence and solitude together form a single path of quiet aloneness before God ...In reading Evelyn Underhill's classic book Christian Mysticism, I observed that for many of the great saints, the contemplative life was previous to and in preparation for an active life of service. " 1999 - Howard Baker, author of Soul Keeping (NavPress, 1998)

"Richard Foster has given a great gift" (in reviewing Foster's book Streams of Living Water). Dr. David B. Wyrtzen

Authors Recommended by Dallas Theological Seminary


Brennan Manning
Brian McLaren
Henri Nouwen
Thomas Merton
Richard Foster- Staff Favorite
Larry Crabb
Bruce Wilkinson
Rick Warren
Eugene Peterson
Dallas Theological Seminary Internship Learning Partnership Covenant Encourages:

Silence and Solitude- Page 9
John Ortberg- Page 2

http://www.lighthousetrailsresearch.com/...m#article4

more:


https://bookcenter.dts.edu/pc-28198-860-...rayer.aspx

ps: From Dallas Seminary staff were two men who sat on the board of "The Message" bible. That version is pure contemplative aka new age/occult

http://www.seekgod.ca/themsgendorsements.htm

http://www.seekgod.ca/drpeterson.htm