• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Burning Bibles?

Status
Not open for further replies.
D

DrJamesAch

New Member
How is it, that I can be infracted for speaking negatively about the NIV because I am KJVO, but yet when a Calvinist does it, it's perfectly acceptable????

Aaron Posted.

A Scofield Bible is a corrupted bible, and worthy of burning.

Post #12

I finally threw my old Scofield in the trash (Edward), infra
 
Last edited by a moderator:
G

go2church

Active Member
Site Supporter
Don't think it's the Bible that he wants burned, sure, not the Bible but the Scofield notes. Casual conversation doesn't require as much precision. I think most everyone else got the point.
 
A

Amy.G

New Member
Your complaints should be taken up with Admins. Board members have no authority to give infractions.
 
D

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
DrJamesAch said:
How is it, that I can be infracted for speaking negatively about the NIV because I am KJVO, but yet when a Calvinist does it, it's perfectly acceptable????

Aaron Posted.

A Scofield Bible is a corrupted bible, and worthy of burning.

Post #12

I finally threw my old Scofield in the trash (Edward), infra
Click to expand...
What makes you think it has anything to do with Calvinism?
You assume too much. You need to get off this hobby horse of Calvinism-attacking.

John MacArthur is as strong as a Calvinist as any current preacher could be.
But MacArthur is a dispensational MacArthur whom Aaron would vehemently disagree with. It is dispensational theology that Aaron disagrees with. There are many Calvinists that believe in the dispensations, and not like Aaron--covenantal theology.

Perhaps Aaron should follow the rather logical conclusion of his quest for Calvinistic truth along with the covenants and become a Presbyterian. :smilewinkgrin:
 
D

DrJamesAch

New Member
DHK said:
What makes you think it has anything to do with Calvinism?
You assume too much. You need to get off this hobby horse of Calvinism-attacking.

John MacArthur is as strong as a Calvinist as any current preacher could be.
But MacArthur is a dispensational MacArthur whom Aaron would vehemently disagree with. It is dispensational theology that Aaron disagrees with. There are many Calvinists that believe in the dispensations, and not like Aaron--covenantal theology.

Perhaps Aaron should follow the rather logical conclusion of his quest for Calvinistic truth along with the covenants and become a Presbyterian. :smilewinkgrin:
Click to expand...

I assert emphatically because these posts and many others are ones I have reported directly to a particular Calvinist administrator that has let them stand as well as posts that tell me to go play in traffic, go kill myself, accusations that I hate the sovereignty of God of which was stated BY said administrator, and posts such one of mine closed for using a name, but another thread that specifically uses my name "James White Answers Dr. Ach" left open, another thread of mine closed on Romans 8:7 for no reason at all, and another one opened by Biblicist, a Calvinist, on the exact same topic that even used my name in the OP, left open.

And it wasn't Aaron's view (of which I disagree, anyone that believes Jesus is coming back at all is a dispensationalist of a sort) on dispensationalism that I was quoting, but his comment on burning the Bible. A Calvinist gets away with that, I was infracted for saying the same thing about the NIV.

Just let me know if you want any more examples, I have plenty of them :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
D

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
DrJamesAch said:
I assert emphatically because these posts and many others are ones I have reported directly to a particular Calvinist administrator that has let them stand as well as posts that tell me to go play in traffic, go kill myself, accusations that I hate the sovereignty of God of which was stated BY said administrator, and posts such one of mine closed for using a name, but another thread that specifically uses my name "James White Answers Dr. Ach" left open, another thread of mine closed on Romans 8:7 for no reason at all, and another one opened by Biblicist, a Calvinist, on the exact same topic that even used my name in the OP, left open.

And it wasn't Aaron's view (of which I disagree, anyone that believes Jesus is coming back at all is a dispensationalist of a sort) on dispensationalism that I was quoting, but his comment on burning the Bible. A Calvinist gets away with that, I was infracted for saying the same thing about the NIV.

Just let me know if you want any more examples, I have plenty of them :)
Click to expand...
I don't know what you were referring to with the NIV. Read the rules concerning attacking other versions of the Bible in the versions forum. It is an attack on the Bible itself. Aaron wasn't doing that. He was attacking the theology of Scofield--dispensationalism.
There are may study Bibles out there. If you don't like one because of the doctrine that the author is teaching you may want to give out some strong statement about it. Perhaps you wouldn't want to buy a MacArthur study Bible as opposed to a Ryrie Study Bible or a Thompson Chain, given the choice. MacArthur is a strong Calvinist. If you denounce the Bible for that reason, then it is far different then denouncing it because it is a different translation. The board has rules about that which you need to read.
 
D

DrJamesAch

New Member
DHK said:
I don't know what you were referring to with the NIV. Read the rules concerning attacking other versions of the Bible in the versions forum. It is an attack on the Bible itself. Aaron wasn't doing that. He was attacking the theology of Scofield--dispensationalism.
There are may study Bibles out there. If you don't like one because of the doctrine that the author is teaching you may want to give out some strong statement about it. Perhaps you wouldn't want to buy a MacArthur study Bible as opposed to a Ryrie Study Bible or a Thompson Chain, given the choice. MacArthur is a strong Calvinist. If you denounce the Bible for that reason, then it is far different then denouncing it because it is a different translation. The board has rules about that which you need to read.
Click to expand...

What part of the Scofield BIBLE and burning it is not an attack on a version of the Bible?? I think virtually every fundamental Baptist church in the world that uses the Scofield would disagree with you on that. Regardless of whether it is a REFERENCE Bible or not, the fact is it is STILL A BIBLE and he clearly said he would burn it, and even gave my post over that issue in the context of which I made the accusation a thumbs up
 
D

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
DrJamesAch said:
What part of the Scofield BIBLE and burning it is not an attack on a version of the Bible?? I think virtually every fundamental Baptist church in the world that uses the Scofield would disagree with you on that. Regardless of whether it is a REFERENCE Bible or not, the fact is it is STILL A BIBLE and he clearly said he would burn it, and even gave my post over that issue in the context of which I made the accusation a thumbs up
Click to expand...
Perhaps they once used it, but I know very few that use it any more. There are much better choices nowadays.
I am sure that "burning" is a hyperbole. I doubt if he would really do that himself, but would probably give a good one away. He likes to get on people's nerves just like you do.
It is not an attack on a version.
 
agedman

agedman

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
DHK said:
I don't know what you were referring to with the NIV. Read the rules concerning attacking other versions of the Bible in the versions forum. It is an attack on the Bible itself. Aaron wasn't doing that. He was attacking the theology of Scofield--dispensationalism.
There are may study Bibles out there. If you don't like one because of the doctrine that the author is teaching you may want to give out some strong statement about it. Perhaps you wouldn't want to buy a MacArthur study Bible as opposed to a Ryrie Study Bible or a Thompson Chain, given the choice. MacArthur is a strong Calvinist. If you denounce the Bible for that reason, then it is far different then denouncing it because it is a different translation. The board has rules about that which you need to read.
Click to expand...

DHK,

I would respectfully disagree with the heart that Aaron had when posted about burning every Scofield Bible.

I took time to point out that Scofield was one of the first to include a commentary along with the Bible, and that, just as any commentary, there are areas in which we may all have disagreement.

However, on this thread, I see that he has verified his heart in the matter, again.

You need to address this issue and make sure that folks understand that it is fine to disagree with a commentary, but when it comes to Scriptures, they are not offered for burning.

Any such post needs snipped and the poster brought up as such thinking being inappropriate to the character of the BB.

Limited to THAT issue, James has a point.

When one is right, even when in other posts and threads that person may be wrong, it is to the credit of the board moderators and administrators to be consistently honest toward all.

Had Aaron made correction and clarification, then it would be entirely a different matter.

That he did not, and re-posted in this thread in obvious "in your face" attitude, then that needs corrected.
 
E

Edward63

Member
DHK said:
[/B]As requested by others, Aaron, will you please explain your intent and reason for making such a post?
[/SIZE]
Click to expand...

Since my remark of throwing my Scofield into the trash seems to have prompted this outrage, it may be good to keep in mind one of the definitions of Bible in the American Heritage Dictionary of American English is:

"A particular copy of a Bible: the old family Bible."

I bought a new KJV, minus man's distortions and heresies, so I could study God's word alone. If teaching that there are two distinct people of God and that there are to be Old Covenant sacrifices in a coming kingdom after Christ's one sacrifice is not heresy, I know not what is.
 
D

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
Edward63 said:
Since my remark of throwing my Scofield into the trash seems to have prompted this outrage, it may be good to keep in mind one of the definitions of Bible in the American Heritage Dictionary of American English is:

"A particular copy of a Bible: the old family Bible."

I bought a new KJV, minus man's distortions and heresies, so I could study God's word alone. If teaching that there are two distinct people of God and that there are to be Old Covenant sacrifices in a coming kingdom after Christ's one sacrifice is not heresy, I know not what is.
Click to expand...
What you believe is heresy others may not.
However, that being said, perhaps it warrants another question:

What does one do with older Bibles that they no longer need or want to discard?
What did those of the first century do?
 
InTheLight

InTheLight

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
DHK said:
They are still sold in most Christian book stores.
It is a widely popular study Bible.
Click to expand...

I own a Scofield Reference Bible. However, there is no Scofield Version or Scofield Translation. Guess I was being a bit too obtuse. Oh, and I haven't used it in over 40 years.
 
D

DHK

<b>Moderator</b>
InTheLight said:
I own a Scofield Reference Bible. However, there is no Scofield Version or Scofield Translation. Guess I was being a bit too obtuse. Oh, and I haven't used it in over 40 years.
Click to expand...
Yes, the same here. It is a study Bible, not a translation. I tried to make that point before. "Burning" it is an attack on the theology not on the Bible. But I believe hyperbole is being used, however I will wait for clarification of the author of the quote.
 
R

Robert Snow

New Member
InTheLight said:
I own a Scofield Reference Bible. However, there is no Scofield Version or Scofield Translation. Guess I was being a bit too obtuse. Oh, and I haven't used it in over 40 years.
Click to expand...

Oxford, in the late 1960's did have the New Scofield Reference Bible, which was a KJV with some word changes, although the KJV words were in the margin.

I have, love and use a Scofield Reference Bible in KJV. I also have a King James Study Bible which I also use.

Now, as to burning Bibles. I have eleven Bibles that are not KJV. I don't use them. Would anyone be upset if I planned to burn them? I imagine they would. I will either keep them, throw them away or give them to, I don't know who I would give them to. I probably will keep them till I die or they deteriorate.

BTW, how should a worn out Bible be discarded?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top