The dispensationalists, when they got their act together, had quite a bit in common. The list you posted sounds like it could have been the table of contents to a Bullinger book.
Scofield, Bullinger and Larkin are roughly contemporaries to each other.....oftentimes writing on the same topics. Okay, that makes sense.....thanx.
William E. Cox writes......"The father of dispensationalism, Darby, as well as his teachings, probably would be unheard of today were it not for his voted follower, Scofield.......Darby was a prolific writer, and also spent much time lecturing in different countries. Scofield came to know him and became enamored by his teachings. These two men had at least two things in common--both had practiced law, and both had untiring energy in advancing their beliefs...."
Furthermore, Cox writes....."Scofield was converted in 1879, and three years later was ordained a Congregational minister. With no formal theological training he wrote his reference Bible. Except for his work, it is doubtful whether this man's name would be remembered any more than would Darby's. Taking the King James Bible and adding his own Notes to it [emphasis added], he assured himself a place in the memory of all who read that version of the Bible This was in violation of the policy of all well-known Bible societies, who rules have been: 'Without Note or Comment'........"
"Scofield's worst critics are men who have come out of his camp, and who remain true to the Bible as the infallible Word of God....."
"The gist of the entire controversy at this point, it seems to me, lies in the fact that many of Scofield's most devoted disciples equate his Notes with the inspired words of the writers of the New Testament."
......say it isn't so......."most of his devoted disciples equate HIS NOTES with the inspired words of the writers of the New Testament."
Wierwille's devoted disciples do the same.......nothing new under the sun.
I had a Scofield Bible when I first got into twi. I LOVED it... it had his preferred translations inserted in the text between hash marks /like this/, and comments in the margin. It made the King James wonderfully readable.
As I started studying with twi, I found they often came to the same conclusions about the text. BUT, I had SEVERAL twi people tell me to stop using that Bible, because all the retemories, etc. were strictly KJV text, regardless of what twi taught regarding the "translation according to usage." And, occasionally, Scofied differed from Doc Vic. Can't have THAT!!
I was really disappointed to have to stop using that Bible, but I did it. Just one more thing I "set aside" in my thinking.
I've looked for one since, but the newer versions have a whole bunch of extra stuff inserted, and go by the name Scofield Study Bible.
Frankly, in my 19 years in, corps training and all, I never heard a single twi person reference Scofield's work.
Whether or not VPW directly studied Scofield or not is something I can't answer, but it is very, very apparent that he was influenced greatly by Darby's Dispensational view of the Bible, of which Scofield was an "apostle." So many of the thoughts, particularly the dividing of "dispensations" would likely be very similar to Scofield.
I recently posted some information on this here and here, both on the "Acceptable Behavior" thread.
Is the Scofield Correspondence Course work part of the Moody Bible Institute?
Could it be that veepee ordered and studied some of Scofield's work thru Moody.........of which, wierwille never turned in any completion work thru Moody?
From what I've been reading lately regarding the history of "pretribulation" and rapture (gathering together for us) movements taking place before the tribuation, Scofield was a huge, possibly, "THE" major influence on America's Charistmatic/evangelical movement (of which TWI is).
The rapture of Christians BEFORE the tribulation - or, the great escape - is a very recent, new doctrine in church history. Its a "new" doctrine, less than 200 years old, gaining momentum in the 1830s or so, because of several prophecies. Several people took that and ran with it. Scofield was a disciple of this new "revelation." So much so, that he redid the Bible and put his own notes in there. This version of the Bible became dominant in America over time. It has had a tremendous influence in America. All Christians who believe they will be raptured before the tribulation and before Christ's Second Coming in the US, are pretty much a direct result of Scofield's influence. I recall VP mentioning Scofield's name. I'm sure he read it. Other disciples were people he mentions as being friends with.
From other reading, I have come to realize TWI was a gnostic outfit. Maybe I'll post some stuff on that on another thread.
I'll put it this way: If Wierwille had not read Scofield's work, I'd be stunned beyond imagination. It would be like one of us never having read Wierwille.
Dispensationalism aside.............what about the other teachings?
Like..........The Jews, the Gentiles and the Church of God
Or............A Believer's Standing and State
Or............The Two Resurrections
With each passing year.......the more I uncover.........the more I see that piffle was a "copy and paste" compilation. Nothing really new or original, at all.
Recommended Posts
Raf
The dispensationalists, when they got their act together, had quite a bit in common. The list you posted sounds like it could have been the table of contents to a Bullinger book.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Good topic.
One of the problems in tracking the SPECIFIC sources for plagiarism is finding the
source when there's more than one possible source.
Scofield, Bullinger and Clarence Larkin ALL wrote on a number of topics
that each other wrote on. They were roughly contemporary to each other,
and I speculate these were COMMON TOPICS at the time, where each
responded to "supply and demand" by addressing the same subject from
their own perspectives. To a point, all of them agree. The details and
"flavour", however, is their own.
Now, if they drew on common source material or each other can be
found by checking the backs of THEIR books, since they were aware
of copyright laws, and honoured them.
Since we KNOW he plagiarized Bullinger,
when approaching subjects taught by people we aren't SURE he
plagiarized-if someone he DID ALSO covered the same topics-
my suspicions are that he just used ONE source to plagiarize
other than two.
However, that is my suspicion, and simply an approach, an assumption.
Reality may easily be that he plagiarized Bullinger, Larkin AND Scofield,
(as well as Oral Roberts, EW Kenyon and JE Stiles.)
=============
On the subject of "standing and state", for example,
Scofield began as follows:
"A distinction of vast importance to the right understanding of the Scriptures,
especially of the Epistles, is that which concerns the standing or position of the
believer, and his state, or walk. The first is the result of the work of Christ and
is perfect and entire from the very moment that Christ is received by faith.
Nothing in the afterlife of the believer adds in the smallest degree to his title of
favor with God, nor to his perfect security. Through faith alone this standing
before God is conferred, and before Him the weakest person, if he be but a
true believer on the Lord Jesus Christ, has precisely the same title as the most
illustrious saint."
"What his actual state may have been is quite another matter-certainly it was
far, far below his exalted standing in the sight of God. It was not all at once that
he became as royal, priestly, and heavenly in walk as he was at once in standing.
The following passages will indicate the way one's standing and one's state are
constantly discriminated in the Scriptures."
Hm.
I can't find a corresponding explanation offhand from Bullinger, nor a source
of same. The Companion Bible has NO appendix addressing it, which by itself
tells me something. So, perhaps he did NOT get that one from Bullinger.
Clarence Larkin, however, DID cover this subject in his book,
"Rightly Dividing the Word."
Scofield was well-known then-and now is MUCH better known than Larkin.
However, in this PARTICULAR case, I'm at least partly suspicious Larkin's
work here was the stolen one.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Thanks Raf & WW,
Scofield, Bullinger and Larkin are roughly contemporaries to each other.....oftentimes writing on the same topics. Okay, that makes sense.....thanx.
William E. Cox writes......"The father of dispensationalism, Darby, as well as his teachings, probably would be unheard of today were it not for his voted follower, Scofield.......Darby was a prolific writer, and also spent much time lecturing in different countries. Scofield came to know him and became enamored by his teachings. These two men had at least two things in common--both had practiced law, and both had untiring energy in advancing their beliefs...."
Furthermore, Cox writes....."Scofield was converted in 1879, and three years later was ordained a Congregational minister. With no formal theological training he wrote his reference Bible. Except for his work, it is doubtful whether this man's name would be remembered any more than would Darby's. Taking the King James Bible and adding his own Notes to it [emphasis added], he assured himself a place in the memory of all who read that version of the Bible This was in violation of the policy of all well-known Bible societies, who rules have been: 'Without Note or Comment'........"
"Scofield's worst critics are men who have come out of his camp, and who remain true to the Bible as the infallible Word of God....."
"The gist of the entire controversy at this point, it seems to me, lies in the fact that many of Scofield's most devoted disciples equate his Notes with the inspired words of the writers of the New Testament."
Wierwille's devoted disciples do the same.......nothing new under the sun.
Edited by skyriderLink to comment
Share on other sites
TheHighWay
I had a Scofield Bible when I first got into twi. I LOVED it... it had his preferred translations inserted in the text between hash marks /like this/, and comments in the margin. It made the King James wonderfully readable.
As I started studying with twi, I found they often came to the same conclusions about the text. BUT, I had SEVERAL twi people tell me to stop using that Bible, because all the retemories, etc. were strictly KJV text, regardless of what twi taught regarding the "translation according to usage." And, occasionally, Scofied differed from Doc Vic. Can't have THAT!!
I was really disappointed to have to stop using that Bible, but I did it. Just one more thing I "set aside" in my thinking.
I've looked for one since, but the newer versions have a whole bunch of extra stuff inserted, and go by the name Scofield Study Bible.
Frankly, in my 19 years in, corps training and all, I never heard a single twi person reference Scofield's work.
Edited by TheHighWayLink to comment
Share on other sites
markomalley
Whether or not VPW directly studied Scofield or not is something I can't answer, but it is very, very apparent that he was influenced greatly by Darby's Dispensational view of the Bible, of which Scofield was an "apostle." So many of the thoughts, particularly the dividing of "dispensations" would likely be very similar to Scofield.
I recently posted some information on this here and here, both on the "Acceptable Behavior" thread.
Edited by markomalleyLink to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Is the Scofield Correspondence Course work part of the Moody Bible Institute?
Could it be that veepee ordered and studied some of Scofield's work thru Moody.........of which, wierwille never turned in any completion work thru Moody?
Just a thought.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
markomalley
There are a couple of interesting essays on the subject, as well.
Essay: Dispensationalism
Reisinger, A History of Dispenssationalism in America
Plymouth Brethren History FAQ
Those might give you some background that will make fairly clear the similarity and potential inflences this movement would have had on Wierwille.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sunesis
From what I've been reading lately regarding the history of "pretribulation" and rapture (gathering together for us) movements taking place before the tribuation, Scofield was a huge, possibly, "THE" major influence on America's Charistmatic/evangelical movement (of which TWI is).
The rapture of Christians BEFORE the tribulation - or, the great escape - is a very recent, new doctrine in church history. Its a "new" doctrine, less than 200 years old, gaining momentum in the 1830s or so, because of several prophecies. Several people took that and ran with it. Scofield was a disciple of this new "revelation." So much so, that he redid the Bible and put his own notes in there. This version of the Bible became dominant in America over time. It has had a tremendous influence in America. All Christians who believe they will be raptured before the tribulation and before Christ's Second Coming in the US, are pretty much a direct result of Scofield's influence. I recall VP mentioning Scofield's name. I'm sure he read it. Other disciples were people he mentions as being friends with.
From other reading, I have come to realize TWI was a gnostic outfit. Maybe I'll post some stuff on that on another thread.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Raf
I'll put it this way: If Wierwille had not read Scofield's work, I'd be stunned beyond imagination. It would be like one of us never having read Wierwille.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
I really don't want to get into a debate about this one.
However, to hear anti-dispensationists tell it, the whole thing
was cooked up in one afternoon by Darby and was based
entirely on a prophecy by a little girl.
The concept, however, IS many centuries older than that.
No, I don't have the documentation in front of me.
Yes, I know you don't have to believe me just because I
said so. However, you are free to do your own checking.
I'd recommend skipping anything that references
Dave McPherson. He's demonstrated a personal vendetta
to the entire concept, and has shown he's not above manufacturing
testimony and outright manufacturing "evidence" to support
his point. He blames it for many problems in his life and his
father's life.
Disagree with Darby and Scofield all you want, but please
don't mix facts with speculation, and especially don't make up
lies in the process (don't be a Dave McPherson.)
Darby and Scofield saw reasons to believe what they believed,
and others did as well.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
skyrider
Dispensationalism aside.............what about the other teachings?
Like..........The Jews, the Gentiles and the Church of God
Or............A Believer's Standing and State
Or............The Two Resurrections
With each passing year.......the more I uncover.........the more I see that piffle was a "copy and paste" compilation. Nothing really new or original, at all.
The emporer was wearing STOLEN clothes.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Larkin:
---"Rightly Dividing the Word"-----
Chapter 1 Rightly Dividing the Word
Chapter 2 Ages and Dispensations
Chapter 3 Jew and Gentile
Chapter 4 Church and Kingdom
Chapter 5 The Four Gospels
Chapter 6 The Two Advents
Chapter 7 The Spirit World
Chapter 8 Satan
Chapter 9 The Satanic Trinity
Chapter 10 "The Mystery of Godliness" and "The Mystery of Iniquity"
Chapter 11 Resurrection of Jesus
Chapter 12 The Resurrections
Chapter 13 The Judgements
Chapter 14 The Two Adams
Chapter 15 Atonement and Redemption
Chapter 16 Sin and Salvation
Chapter 17 Law and Grace
Chapter 18 Faith and Works
Chapter 19 The Two Natures
Chapter 20 Standing and State
Chapter 21 Regeneration and Baptism
Chapter 22 Election and Free-Will
Chapter 23 The Reciprocal Indwelling of Christ and the Believer
Chapter 24 The Threefold Work of Christ
Chapter 25 Christ Our Passover
Chapter 26 Heaven and Hell
Chapter 27 Judaism and Christianity
Chapter 28 The Circles of the Christian Life
Chapter 29 Palace Beautiful
Copyright is 1920.
Larkin is younger than Scofield and Bullinger, and their books
came before his.
However, in both cases, these books had a wide circulation
among Christians. Thus,
A) divinity students had access to them (like young vpw)
B) their contents were in the world before 1942,
which means that teaching their contents does not reveal
anything not extant in the church as of 1942.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.