The Author of this website uses the Authorized King James Bible and believes the Modern Bibles are dangerous, with an emphasis on Bibles that have men's names attached to them, such as the Scoffield Bible and the MacArthur Study Bible. The other modern Bibles such as NIV, NASB and the rest that I will list (this page is under construction currently) below the KJV Bible information will be compared with the KJV and you will see that they come up wanting.
The King James Version Bible gets ignored by most Christians in our day because they feel it is harder to read and understand due to its old language style, but I am here to tell you that it is the only uncorrupted Bible version we have. (There are a few older Bibles like the Geneva and Matthews Bibles that are trustworthy but they are not in a language form that is not at all easy to read.) Modern leaders disagree with the thought that the KJV is the better translation but they have either been taught at seminaries (learning institutions Christians go to become preachers but they have been dubbed cemetaries because of how they usually kill people's faith) to favor the modern Bibles or they say the KJV doesn't agree with any of the modern translation so IT must be the wrong one. What they neglect to notice or tell people is the modern translations disagree with each other over 3000 times!
The KJV was translated originally from one (only) Greek text called the Textus Receptus (means Received Text) which was found in the Greek Byzantine area, while the modern tranlations use not only the Received Text but they also used two earlier dated manuscripts found in Egypt called the Sinai and Vaticanus manuscripts. The modern translators state that "older means better" but these earlier manuscripts were rejected by the KJV Bible translators due to their corruption. (The only reason the modern translators used the Received Text at all is because there is not enough material in the two Egyptian texts to make up a whole New Testament Bible - this is VERY telling!!!
The two Egyptian texts leave out thousands of words that the Received Tex has (including the name of Jesus!) and the Sinai manuscript was found in a trash heap outside of a monastery in Egypt with lots of corrections and rewrites all over it. The Vaticanus manuscript included the Apocrypha which has been deemed by our church fathers to not be the inspired Word. (It is true that the 1611 version of the KJV Bible included the Apocrypha but that is because some Catholics got into the mix of Bible translators and insisted it be included, it was removed as soon as the rest of the Bible translators could push for this with King James.)
Why Does the KJV have the
“thee” and “thou”?
In almost every language except modern English, people know whether the speaker is addressing one person or many. In Classical English, if the speaker is talking to one person, he uses “thee” or “thou”. If he is talking to many people, he says “ye” or “your”. The King James preserves this. For example: Jesus said to Nicodemus in John 3:7, “Marvel not that I said unto thee (Nicodemus), ye (all of you people) must be born again. Jesus was telling Nicodemus that all people of all times must be born again! This is a very important doctrine that is lost without “thee” or “thou”.
The two videos below are beginning videos for you to continue your study on why the KJV over the other Bible versions. The first video is by David Daniels and the second one is by Brian Moonan.
This is part of a testimony by a former Roman Catholic nun named Sandy Hooper, her website has been taken down but she can be contacted at SHooper410@aol.com if you want to hear her whole story.
REALIZED SATAN TAMPERING WITH THE WORD OF GOD
Now, I shall share what happened from there when I discovered what was happening to God's word. I'm not talking about the "Incarnate Word," Jesus Christ, but His "words." I shall excerpt one of my own writings to explain:
"My husband had a visit from an old friend whom he hadn't seen in years, along with his wife. At the time of their visit they were both in a drug treatment program to kick the habit. During the course of the evening I began to witness to the couple. During this time I had pulled out at least 6 to 8 different versions of the Bible. The husband stopped me in the middle of a conversation and asked me, Which Bible is the true Bible?' His questioned stumped me. The question made such an impact on me that I began to wonder myself! From then on that question stayed with me.
"This incident took place in the early part of November of 1995. It was several weeks before this time I had decided to leave the Catholic church. I had been a Christian for 20 years and had remained in the Catholic Church all that time. Something was missing in my life and I couldn't pin-point the problem other than that I missed Christian fellowship. I missed the fellowship like I had when I lived in Florida. Down there I was very involved in the Charismatic movement (Don't worry, the Bible straightened me out on the tongues business).
"It was near the end of summer of 1995 when I started attending a Baptist Church, and it was the end of November I decided to join. New members were required to take membership classes which took place in the Pastor's office each Sunday. About the third Sunday of my visit I noticed a book on his desk. I asked him if I could borrow the book. It was titled, New Age Bible Versions,' by Dr. G.A. Riplinger. That night I started to read her book and was brought to tears just after reading the first two chapters as I saw what was happening with God's words. About a week or two before I borrowed that book, I had purchased for the first time in my life a King James Bible, therefore, I was able to compare the versions as I read her book."
It was from here when my life was actually changed concerning the Bible, the Catholic church, Catholic doctrine, the so-called Baptism of the Holy Spirit, tongues and so forth.
When I compared these versions, I did notice how these other bibles lined up with the Roman Catholic bible. No wonder I was still in confusion! In these modern bibles, salvation is shown as a "process" which requires good works. All this is brought out by the straining of the tenses in the modern bibles. Let me show you exactly what I mean. When you read the following, please do notice the straining of the tenses:
Luke 13:23 (new versions), "Are there few who are being saved?" KJV says "...be saved."
II Cor. 2:15 (new versions), "are being saved." KJV says, "are saved."
I Cor. 1:18 (new versions), "those who are perishing foolishness, but to us who are being saved" KJV says, ...are saved."
Acts 15:19 (new versions) "are turning to God." KJV says, "turned."
Luke 15:32 (new versions), "your brother was dead and has begun to live." KJV, "is alive."
Acts 2:47 (new versions), "were being saved." KJV says, "should be saved."
2 Cor. 4:3 (new versions), "are perishing." KJV says, "are lost."
all the unnatural straining of the tenses, and the teachings of the
Catholic Church, no wonder I didn't know if I was truly saved!
AUTHORIZED KING JAMES IS GOD'S BOOK
From there the King James Bible became the final authority in my life. In that Book I knew I would get the truth. It straightened me out on a lot of doctrines concerning tongues, baptism of the Holy Spirit, eternal security, about heaven and hell, the saints, purgatory, and many other things. When I used these other bibles, they led me nowhere but in confusion and frustration. Doctrines such as the Deity was hard to prove to a Jehovah's Witness. Now I know why! I don't have that problem any more with a King James Bible. I've had Mormons at my door and Jehovah's Witnesses, and when I get the King James out, all of a sudden every body gets Greekitis. I tell them I don't know Greek, and therefore there's not a lot of sense going through it. But there's one thing I do know and have, and that is the Holy Bible. I don't have to apologize to anyone for having the truth in my hands. It's either believe it or reject it. No need to turn to man's teachings, the Catholic church, traditions, the Greek, Another Testament, or other bibles to disprove the LIVING ONE.
FREE AT LAST!
I know a person can't be born again twice, but that's what it seems to me. My eyes have been opened. I no longer walk in darkness. I no longer hang by the rules of the Roman Catholic church. When I began to study from the King James Bible, I saw how the Roman Catholic church is really an enemy to God's word. When reading from the true word of God, God will also give us back our common sense. For instance, let me share with you the following concerning Original sin. As a Catholic, we were taught we needed baptism to free us from sin. But yet the Roman Catholic church does not believe that chapters 1-3 of Genesis is real history. What they have actually done is call Jesus a liar.
Jesus Christ quotes Genesis 2 and 3 as a strict, straight history. "And Jesus answered them, For the hardness of your heart he (Moses) wrote you this precept. But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female" (Mark 10:5-6). Jesus also quotes Moses verbatim from Genesis 2:24 (Mark 10:7-8). Jesus said, "Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father: there is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust. For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words" (John 5:45-47).
If Jesus were here in the flesh, He would say the same thing to the Catholic Church who tells me Genesis 1-3 is not straight history. They have made Jesus a liar. Genesis tells how the world began (Gen. 1), how human beings began (Gen. 2), how they fell (Gen. 3).
And this is what I mean by common sense. The Roman Catholic church fails to remind us that between chapters 1-3, is the fall of man. Here is where Original sin began! If the Roman Catholic church does not believe Genesis 1-3 is not real history, then why, from A.D. 500 to 1997, were all those babies baptized for!!!?
And what about the saints whom we were taught to pray? Every good Catholic should read his Bible. The Bible says that God puts no trust in His saints (Job 15:15). "Behold, he putteth no trust in his saints;"
If God doesn't put any trust in His saints, why should I?
And what about Blessed Sinless Mary? The Bible says, For ALL have sinned, and come short of the glory of God" (Rom. 3:23). This means Mary too! Even Mary herself knew she needed a Saviour and went through purification for sins as the Jewish law required. Mary said herself, "And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my Saviour." (Luke 1:47).
Mary needed purification from sin, "And when the days of her purification according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord.....and to offer a sacrifice according to that which is said in the law of the Lord, A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons." (Luke 2:22,24).
The fact is, Mary is a Jewish woman following the Law handed down to Moses. Read Leviticus 12 my friend. Mary, a sinner, had to make a "sin-offering" (see Lev. 12:8). We must ask ourselves, why does the Roman Catholic church insist she was sinless when the Bible says she was not? Mary had to make a sin offering, and they were so poor they were not even able to offer the required sacrifice for Mary's cleansing as all females were to do in obedience to the law. Mary was so poor she and Joseph could not bring the required LAMB for sacrifice (see Lev. 12:8 again). They could only offer a pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons (Luke 2:24). However, Mary didn't need the lamb, she held Him in her arms! She had the Lamb who could save her from her sins! A Saviour her heart rejoiced in!
The Catholic Mary no way resembles the Jewish Mary of the Bible. Even in the days of Jesus people tried to elevate Mary in a position that was not her's. "And it came to pass, as he spake these things, a certain woman of the company lifted up her voice, and said unto him, Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked." (Luke 11:27). But Jesus immediately corrected the woman and said, "Yea rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it." (Luke 11:28).
Jesus was way ahead of the Roman Catholic Church. We are not to sway from the word of God and put our trust in Mary or the saints, but in Jesus Christ Himself.
I could cry when I think of all the years I have wasted and abiding by these false doctrines. If only I had known sooner. But I thank God I have come at least this far. The truth certainly has freed me indeed! Put your trust in Jesus Christ and His infallible word. With those words in your hands, the Holy Spirit shall lead you and guide you into all truth.
The next two sections KJV vs. NKJV and KJV vs. NIV are copied over from Chick.com, written by David Daniels:
Changed Words Means Changed Meanings:
We know that Bible versions disagree on how to translate certain words. Here is an example: Is Jesus God's "Son" or God's "servant"? In Acts 3:26, the NKJV calls Jesus God's "Servant." The KJV correctly calls Him God’s "Son." These are not the same by any stretch of the imagination. Which one is He? If He is God's servant, so are you and I. If He is God's Son, then we all need to listen to what He said, because He is God! Changed words like this make a great deal of difference in how we understand a passage.
Please decide what God is saying to Moses:
It looks like God is saying, "Moses, you are continuing to refuse to keep My commandments and My laws." But look carefully at the accurate King James:
"And the LORD said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws?"
Now we understand! It was the people, not Moses, that God was upset with. "Ye" and "you" mean more than one person. "Thee," "thou," "thy," "thine," "doeth," "hast," etc., only mean one person. How do we know? The "y" is plural. The "t" is singular. Isn't that easy? Now you know what Jesus meant when He said to Nicodemus, "Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again" (John 3:7).
What Jesus said was, "Nicodemus, marvel not that I said unto thee, all of you need to be born again." This is very important. Not only Nicodemus needed to be saved. But everybody, including him, needed to be born again. That's why Jesus used the plural.
But there is more of a problem than the thousands of times "thee" and "thou" are removed from God's words. What does a word mean? This is very important, as you shall see.
KING JAMES BIBLE - KJV
For the Son of man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them. And they went to another village.
For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost.
...I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.
I Cor. 5:7
...Christ our passover is sacrificed for us:
Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.
And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which were spoken of him
...power to heal sickness, and to cast out devils.
But if ye do not forgive, neither will your Father which is in heaven forgive your trespasses.
I Cor. 10:28
...for the earth is the Lord's and the fulness thereof:
...Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.
A little while, and ye shall not see me: and again a little while, and ye shall see me, because I go to the Father.
The following Bible comparison chart is just part of the information that you can find on The King James Bible Page on AV1611.com, more specifically: http://av1611.com/kjbp/charts/various.html I have only included the NASB comparison below since we have already looked at the NIV comparison. If you do visit their website you will see how often the NIV and NASB versions match what the Jehovah's Witness translation, New World Translation, states for the below verses. This fact alone should make someone run from the modern versions!!!
NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE - NASB
Matt 9:13 - For I did not come to call the righteous, but sinners.
Matt 18:11 - put as a footnote which casts doubt about the verse
Matt 19:17 - "Why are you asking me about what is good?"
Matt 25:13 - You do not know the day nor the hour.
Mark 10:24 - how hard it is to enter the kingdom of God!
Luke 2:33 - His father and mother.
Luke 4:4 - Man shall not live on bread alone.
Luke 4:8 - Omitted.
John 6:47 - He who believes has eternal life.
John 8:9 - when they heard it, they began to go out one by one.
John 9:4 - We must work the works of Him who sent Me.
John 10:30 - I and the Father are one.
The Scofield Bible
Let's first take a look at C.I. Scofield, the man, and then we will cover his Bible version and the dangers it has brought to Christians. (This article can be seen in it's entirety on http://www.gospeltruth.net/scofield.htm
In 1833, Elias and Abigail Scofield moved to Lenawee County, Michigan to help her father operate a sawmill on the Raisin River. Their home was on a cleared farm along the river. They had four daughters from three to seventeen years of age. Their last child, Cyrus Ingerson Scofield, was born August 19, 1843. His mother died three months later. Not long after, Elias married again. The older sisters soon married. Emeline married Sylvester V. Papin, from a prominent French family of St. Louis, March 19,1850. He was a law student and became a clerk in the City Assessor's office and later became head of the department. In 1855, Laura married a young dentist, William Eames. They moved to Lebanon, Tennessee. Cyrus's sister, Victorine, was listed in the 1860 Census in Tennessee, as living with Laura and William. Cyrus was not listed in the census records in either state. By April 1861, when Fort Sumter was fired upon, Cyrus was visiting his sisters in Tennessee. He never returned to Michigan. Though not yet eighteen, Cyrus gave his age as twenty-one and enlisted in the Seventh Regiment of the Tennessee Infantry. In April 1862, he was listed as a patient in a hospital in Richmond, Virginia. There was no mention of a wound, so he may have become ill. In July, he wrote to the Confederate Secretary of War asking for exemption from further duty stating that he was a minor and a citizen of Michigan. He also claimed that he had been visiting his sister in Tennessee when he enlisted, that he had never voted in the South and that his health was broken by exposure and battle fatigue. He promised that in a short time he would enter the militia in Tennessee. On September 5, 1862, Cyrus was with the Tennessee Regiment when they crossed the Potomac during heavy fighting. A discharge was issued for Private Scofield in 1862 after one year of service. There is no definite record of where he was for the next four years.
Among the refugees forced out of the South by the war were the Lames family and Victorine Scofield. They moved to St. Louis, Missouri in 1863 where Sylvester Papin helped Lames open a dentistry office. Victorine married and settled there so that was also the place Cyrus settled. Sylvester placed Cyrus in his office in the Assessor's Department and directed his training in law. While working in this office, Cyrus studied to become familiar with the law regarding land grants, titles, and deeds. He got his law education on the job rather than in school. His name is listed in connection with a case in Circuit Court of St. Louis County, December term, 1866. This is the first definite date that appears in Cyrus's life after the Civil War. There were dinners, dances and parties in the French society and Cyrus met Leontine Cerre, a Catholic society lady. She seemed taken with the dashing young man from Tennessee. Cyrus married her on September 21, 1866 when he was twenty-four. Daughter Abigail was born July 13, 1867. Marie Helene was born in October 1869. The family then moved from St. Louis to Atchison, Kansas. Kansas politics was viciously crooked at that time and anyone in Kansas politics was suspected of corruption. Cyrus was deeply involved in it. Some of the problems involved his brother-in-law's interests and squatters being ejected from illegally-occupied land. Cyrus had engaged a lawyer, John J. lngalls, as legal counsel to serve the family interests. lngalls later became State Senator and had to be aware of the corruption and bloodshed. Scofield had some sort of law partnership with lngalls who seemed to sponsor him.
In 1871, Cyrus was elected Representative to the Lower House of the Kansas Legislature from the Fourth District for one term. Re-nomination from that District was blocked, so he filed from Nehama County and was elected from the Eighth District. There is no record to show he ever lived there during that period. The Atchison Directory for 1872-73 lists the same addresses as before. In June 1872, Scofield's first son, Guy Sylvester was born. Though Ingalls served three terms in the Senate, he was very immoral and had no concern for the truth. He recommended his friend Scofield to President Grant for U.S. District Attorney for the Federal Judicial District of Kansas. Cyrus gave up his seat in the Legislature and took the oath of office on June 8, 1873. This ex-Confederate soldier solemnly swore that he had "never born arms against the United States." That was rank perjury. We know he did military service in the South. Evidently in 1873, he was not concerned about perjury. However, a legal conflict of interest brought his term as District Attorney for Kansas to a sudden end in less than six months.
An article on December 14, 1873 in the Daily Times of Leavenworth suggested something was amiss in the D.A.'s office. A case was pending against ex-Senator Pomeroy, and there were hints that Pomeroy paid Cyrus to keep the case from coming to trial. A later Daily Times item reported that Pomeroy, Scofield and Ingalls were involved in "the most infamous of all infamous political bargains ever transacted in Kansas." The reporter suggested that Ingalls and Scofield had received pay-offs from railroad officials and settlers in South Kansas. Cyrus resigned on December 20, 1873 and was not involved in politics again.
Now there is another mysterious time in Scofield's life. Though he was responsible for the support of a family of four, he disappeared for a period of three to five years. One acquaintance said, "Scofield had a bad reputation, and he just skedaddled out of town." In his story of Scofield's life, Trumbull gets around this by stating Cyrus did not like the type of life, associates, and activities related to the D.A.'s office. Leontine Scofield had problems of her own in this period. The son, Guy Sylvester, died in December 1874, a year after Cyrus resigned from the D.A.'s office. In the Atchison City Directory for 1872-73 Cyrus's residence is still listed there. The St. Louis Directory for 1877 lists "Scofield, Cyrus I., lawyer. Res. 3029 Dickson, St. Louis, Missouri." This means Cyrus had written Kansas off--along with Leontine. Mr. Trumbull's story states that Cyrus returned to St. Louis to practice law. But the publication, The Bench and the Bar of St. Louis County shows no evidence that C. I. Scofield was ever a member of the St. Louis Bar in the nineteenth century. Mr. Trumbull's story of a successful law practice is in question since the Court Records of St. Louis show that at one point Cyrus badly needed a lawyer of his own.
According to the court records, Cyrus had signed a note for a $200 loan, which was to be repaid within sixty days. The note also bore the alleged signatures of Emeline Papin and C. E Betts. When the borrower tried to collect on the note after sixty days, however, he was unable to locate either Cyrus's home or office. Between closing date for the 1877 City Directory and August, the "law" office had apparently been closed. Both Cyrus's sister Emeline and Betts declined to pay the note. A Sheriff's Deputy stated that a petition was served to Betts on Sept. 14, 1877, although the other defendants could not be found in St. Louis. Emeline was later served a petition in Webster, Missouri. She claimed, though, that she had never seen nor signed the note and asked to be dismissed from the suit. In preparation for the hearing on March 1, 1878, Emeline's attorney subpoenaed Charles Bass, a teller at the Boatman's Bank, to testify on her behalf. After that, Simpson withdrew the action against Cyrus and Emeline, leaving Betts as the sole defendant with $219.30 owed--with the interest still accruing. There is no record of payment.
Scofield must have needed funds badly. On May 28, 1877, he took out a ninety-day note for $900, again with the supposed signature of Emeline Papin. This was case 46333. Again there was no payment. Emeline denied endorsement, and Scofield could not be located. A "successful lawyer" does not "blow town" to avoid a process server. It seems probable that Cyrus forged her name. There was a hearing on May 6, 1879, but the papers noted, "Dismissed on motion of the plaintiff." There is no evidence that the man involved ever got his $900 or that Cyrus made any effort to pay.
Another case strengthens the belief that Scofield was quite active in forgery. Case 44326 involved another note with Emeline E. Papin's signature for $250 on June 28, 1877. Emeline admitted later that she knew this note was a forgery. Her testimony on May 10, 1878 read: "Mr. Vollmer came out to the house and handed me a letter... I understood that there was a note due and that my brother was in great danger." It is hard to know whether she was a willing collaborator or if she was unaware her name was being used. According to the understanding in dispensational circles, Cyrus was by this time in the Kingdom and starting on the road to righteousness. There is no evidence that Cyrus was a successful lawyer serving a respectable clientele. There were periods unaccounted for in his life at this time. It has been assumed that Leontine decided to leave Cyrus at the time and returned to Atchison. In fact, she had never left Atchison. Cyrus's role as husband and father had been irregular ever since he entered politics. Without regular employment and income, he wandered. As Trumbull tells it, he led the life of a bachelor.
The charges in the forgery lawsuits were dropped without proper adjudication, suggesting that Scofield's career was in the hands of someone with greater "clout" than Pomeroy or lngalls had ever known. However, that career meant Leontine, the Catholic wife, had to go. According to the Scripture (1Ti 5:8), a man who does not provide for his own household is worse than an infidel, although that did not appear to phase Cyrus; he never made any effort to clean up the black marks on his record.
The 1912 edition of Who's Who in America places Scofield's conversion sometime in 1879, and Trumbull indicates as much in his biography. However, the only definite dates in 1879 tend to raise doubts about what happened and when. When did the conversion occur? Scofield says he was converted at the age of thirty-six, and it has been assumed the event did take place sometime before D. L. Moody's 1879-80 Evangelistic Campaign. This places the conversion sometime after his thirty-sixth birthday on August 19, 1879 and before the first meeting of Moody's ministers in St. Louis on November 25, 1879. As late as November 6, though, Cyrus was still involved with a forgery charge, and that case's records do not agree with the picture of a new convert trying to right matters of the past. Of course, God forgives the past and changes a man into a new creature if he is really born again (2Co 5:17), but one expects to see a change of behavior. The details of Cyrus's conversion are not supported by public records, so we do not know the whole truth about the conversion of a man who has profoundly influenced the church.
As the forgery cases were being dismissed with unseemly haste and without fair settlement, Cyrus entered his new role as a worker at the Moody meetings. Of course, until 1879, Cyrus was close to illiterate in things Christian, so it is unclear what role he could have played in Moody's campaign.
Scofield's Christian service was sponsored by Reverend James Brookes, the pastor of St. Louis's Walnut Street Presbyterian Church. As Scofield's ideas on prophecy began to take shape, they were sparked by the teachings of his sponsor who was in turn influenced by John Nelson Darby. About 1850, Darby began publishing his dispensationalist writings in Europe, and from 1862 to 1877, he made seven lecture trips to America and Canada to promote his teachings. Brookes's views of a failing church were also influenced by other theologians who wanted the same prophetic view taught and accepted. Remarkably, with such limited theological background and training, as well as little real scholarship, Scofield was able to profoundly alter Christian theology. Indeed, the shape of fundamentalism, which has claimed to be Orthodox Christianity, has been determined by the influence of dubious characters like Scofield. (end of this article for this website)
Now here is another source with a brief excerpt of where he came from and his meteoric rise in Christian theology. Please see http://www.washingtonreport.me/2015-october/the-scofield-bible%E2%80%94the-book-that-made-zionists-of-americas-evangelical-christians.html for the full article.
Two years after Scofield’s reported conversion to Christianity in 1879, the Atchison Patriot was less than impressed. Describing the former Atchison resident as the “late lawyer, politician and shyster generally,” the article went on to recount a few of Scofield’s “many malicious acts.” These included a series of forgeries in St. Louis, for which he was sentenced to six months in jail.
Being a “born again” preacher did not preclude Scofield from becoming a member of an exclusive New York men’s club in 1901, either. In his devastating biography, The Incredible Scofield and His Book, Joseph M. Canfield suggests, “The admission of Scofield to the Lotus Club, which could not have been sought by Scofield, strengthens the suspicion that has cropped up before, that someone was directing the career of C.I. Scofield.”
That someone, Canfield suspects, was associated with one of the club’s committee members, the Wall Street lawyer Samuel Untermeyer. As Canfield intimates, Scofield’s theology was “most helpful in getting Fundamentalist Christians to back the international interest in one of Untermeyer’s pet projects—the Zionist Movement.”
Here is one last website I will post for you to review - there are two audio teaching and an on-line Open Letter that covers the man C.I. Scofield in depth. http://whtt.org/shadowy-origins-of-c-i-scofield-godfather-of-christian-zionism/ This website is authored by a man named Chuck Carlson. Here is a couple of quotes from one of his articles:
The Scofield Reference Bible was not to be just another translation, subverting minor passages a little at a time. No, Scofield produced a revolutionary book that radically changed the context of the King James Version. It was designed to create a subculture around a new worship icon, the modern State of Israel, a state that did not yet exist, but which was already on the drawing boards of the committed, well-funded authors of World Zionism.
Scofield imitated a chain of past heretics and rapturists, most of whose credibility fizzled over their faulty end times prophesies. His mentor was one John Nelson Darby from Scotland, who was associated with the Plymouth Brethren and who made no less than six evangelical trips to the US selling what is today called "Darbyism." It is from Darby that Scofield is thought to have learned his Christian Zionist theology, which he later planted in the footnotes of the Scofield Reference Bible. It is possible that Scofield's interest in Darbyism was shared by Oxford University Press, for Darby was known to Oxford University.
There is little reason to believe that Scofield knew or cared much about the Zionist movement, but at some point, he became involved in a close and secret relationship with Samuel Untermeyer, a New York lawyer whose firm still exists today and one of the wealthiest and most powerful World Zionists in America. Untermeyer controlled the unbreakable thread that connected him with Scofield. They shared a password and a common watering hole--and it appears that Untermeyer may have been the one who provided the money that Scofield himself lacked. Scofield's success as an international bible editor without portfolio and his lavish living in Europe could only have been accomplished with financial aid and international influence.
This connection might have remained hidden, were it not for the work of Joseph M. Canfield, the author and researcher who discovered clues to the thread in Scofield family papers. But even had the threads connecting Scofield to Untermeyer and Zionism never been exposed, it would still be obvious that that connection was there. It is significant that Oxford, not Scofield, owned the book, and that after Scofield's death, Oxford accelerated changes to it. Since the death of its original author and namesake, The Scofield Reference Bible has gone through several editions. Massive pro-Zionist notes were added to the 1967 edition, and some of Scofield's most significant notes from the original editions were removed where they apparently failed to further Zionist aims fast enough. Yet this edition retains the title, "The New Scofield Reference Bible, Holy Bible, Editor C.I. Scofield." It's anti-Arab, Christian subculture theology has made an enormous contribution to war, turning Christians into participants in genocide against Arabs in the latter half of the 20th century.
Please read this article that has a conversation between Dr. Texe Marrs and a Zionist Christian woman he ran into at a Prophecy conference. It is truly sad that there are millions of Christians out there almost as sold-out as she is for the Jews. Christians should only be sold-out for Jesus Christ. Here's a small blurb from that conversation and you can see the entirety of it here: http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Wolves/scofield.htm
"Well, yes," she offered. That would hasten the coming of the Kingdom of the Jews, wouldn't it?" "The Kingdom of the Jews?," I repeated, almost incredulous. "Oh sure," she excitedly exclaimed. "That is what the Scofield Bible, which my husband and I love, says. The Jews shall reign over all the earth. They are God's Chosen. In helping them to rebuild their great temple, I am helping to usher in the Kingdom of the Jews." "My dear Sister," I confided, "You cannot serve God and the Devil. You cannot, on the one hand, help Jews, who despise our Saviour, Jesus Christ, rebuild their blasphemous temple in which they intend to carry out animal sacrifices. This would be mocking the once and for all sacrifice of Jesus on the cross. Do you really believe that in doing that, you are serving God?" But, she objected, "in helping the Jews rise to power, I am serving God!"
Please take time to watch this video that was posted by TruthInjector. The title of the video is: Christian Zionism: The Antichrists' Rewrite of History - The Scofield Bible is a LIE!
Since most of us need no introduction to John MacArthur, I will just go right into the articles and videos I would like to share with you. You can read my personal opinions of John MacArthur on my Calvinist page and I can attest to you I have never bought his or any other man's study Bible.
Here is a letter found on Royal Heir Blogspot: http://royalheir.blogspot.com/2014/09/john-macarthur-exposed-as-freemason.htm
Here is one more resource http://www.jesus-is-savior.com/Bible/NKJB/macarthur_study_bible.htm where you will read a very thorough warning about John MacArthur's teachings and his study Bible.
If you want to get born again in Christ Jesus, please take this time now to talk to God. You can say something like this: God I know I am a sinner and I need a Savior and I believe Jesus Christ is the promised Messiah. I believe Jesus Christ was born of a virgin mother, conceived by the Holy Spirit, and that He lived a sinless life because He was God in the flesh, and that He was crucified as the once for all sacrifice for mankind's sins. I believe he was buried and rose from the grave and was witnessed alive before ascending to heaven where He now sits on the throne as King of Kings. I repent of my sins and accept Jesus' gift of salvation today and I ask Him to be my Savior and Lord. I ask the Holy Spirit to come and make a dwelling in my heart and to lead me into all righteousness. Thank you God for hearing my prayer and for sending your Son to save me by dying in my place at the Cross so I can be in the family of God. And Father, I understand that while I am saved by my confession of faith, it is also Your will for me to get water baptized to show my private confession in a public way, and so I ask you to lead me to the church or baptismal situation you have for me so I can get baptized in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Amen!