Scofieldism

[Rob_0126]

As I said before, I am not here to defend Scofield because first, dispensationalism doesn't depend on him, and second, I don't know the actual facts about him. But what I do know is that there are many people who would love to slander him to try to discredit the rapture and dispensationalism.

So again, you judge Bro Meyer's entire sermon series, based on a short segment of the 1st sermon, out of 11.

Slander is a false tale or report about someone. If it's the truth, then it's not slander.

And btw, where is your thread about the pre-trib rapture being true? I couldn't find it.

If you knew someone was deceiving you, would you want someone to tell you, or just ignore it and believe the lies?

Yes, Joseph Mede taught the rapture along with others as far back as the 300's AD. All that Meyer most likely did was read one of MacPherson's books and just accepted it as the truth without doing any other research.

I believe that at the time, that was all the information brother Meyer had on it. He was a diligent researcher of information.

I didn't call those references "proofs" did I? They provide information that you can independently verify to find what the truth actually is.

The insinuation was so to me, but you like to play word games, to create doubt in other readers minds, to derail the thread, as it seems. Is that your intention?

Yes, just listen to these recordings and it will explain everything. Very similar to what the people who believe the earth is flat say - "just watch this video and it will prove that the earth is flat". And when you watch the video you find out that it proves nothing. That is one of the crazy ideas I was talking about that had been "proven".

Theirs a big difference in a flat earth video made by a kid, and a 22+ yr preacher of the gospel, explaining his findings on a doctrine he use to teach, but found crafty errors in it, and wanted to warn others about it.

I did not say he explains 'everything'. From what research he did on scofield, he explains what he found out, to be important to the Christians who hold that man up in high regard, to this very day. He also goes into scripture to disprove what scofield taught.

A question: Do you believe the King James Bible is the infallible Word of God?

Yes, you called Scofield a freemason and you can't produce any evidence that he actually was. And then based on that you confidently say he worshiped Satan. And when I searched the internet to try to find out if any of that was true I can find no facts which support those claims only unsupported speculation, innuendo, and guilt by association.

If that is what you call the truth about Scofield I want no part of it.

You wanted a summary of what was being taught in the sermons, and I gave it. Then you go on to ask for proof, and ignore listening to what the preacher had to say about the matter, because apparently you got your feelings hurt.

Brother Meyer shows how he was a freemason, by the people he associated with (Proverbs 13:20), and by perception. But you would have to listen to what he found out, to know this.

Brother Meyer knew well about witchcraft, because he was a witch before he came to Christ. He knew what to look for.

He had at least 1 freemason that turned to Christ, in his church, and received a lot of freemasonry material to research on. Also, the knowledge the ex-mason had in the craft(1st hand knowledge).

And btw, anyone who changes the Word of God, does worship satan by default. Your either in Christ, or in the World.



This all being said, why not be helpful to this thread and listen to the series, then make your findings, and be helpful, instead of devisive?

Otherwise, move on and let folks here listen for themselves and add equity to the thread, instead of trying to derail it.

ADD: Here is an interesting article on the biography of Joseph M Canfield, that wrote 'The incredible Scofield and his book'. It's eye opening, and shows the reason behind why he wrote the book to begin with.

An excerpt from Joseph M Canfield's(a baptist) biography:
(The highlighted words are by me, to point something out)

"Simply put, when a person begins to research this man, the most incredible facts begin to show up. At the outbreak of the American Civil War, Cyrus I. Scofield enlisted on May 20, 1861 in the Confederate Army and served with the 7^th Regiment of the Tennessee infantry. Twelve years later Scofield committed perjury when he took an oath to become the United States District Attorney for Kansas and stated that he had never voluntarily born arms against the United States. (Liar)
Scofield did not last very long as a District Attorney, and by 1877, he was making a living on scams and writing bogus checks.(Thief) He was taken to court several times and even served jail time.

Prior to his time as a district attorney, Cyrus had married a Roman Catholic woman by the name of Leontine. They had two girls, Abigail and Helene. About the time he resigned as a district attorney, Cyrus abandoned his family, leaving his wife to support herself and their two girls(Infidel-1 Tim 5-8 ). Eventually the marriage was dissolved in divorce. Fundamental Christians are very hardnosed on divorce, and if a minister’s marriage ends in divorce, the minister will be forced to resign and barred from being in the ministry. Scofield’s supporters ignored this matter and kept it a secret for a long time in order to make Cyrus Scofield a licensed minister of the Gospel. While Cyrus was still legally married to Leontine, he began to date a young woman in his congregation by the name of Hettie Van Wark(Adulterer). They were married on March 11, 1884.

The Bible version that bears his name is a tainted version produced by two British clergymen, Westcott and Hort(satanists). These men are hailed as Bible scholars, but what is not brought out is the fact that both men were devoted Satanists and very active in occult rituals during their lifetime. The Devil must laugh his head off every time he thinks back on this coup. Think about it, the Fundamental Christians in the United States preach out of a Bible that Satan’s disciple’s doctored up and perverted. Here is a quote from page two of the Introduction to the 1945 Scofield Bible edition: “….The discovery of the Sinaitic MS, and the labours in the field of textual criticism of such scholars as …..Westcott and Hort, have cleared the Greek Textus Receptus of minor inaccuracies…..”(So the kjv and tyndales source of translations had error?)

Is Scofield the man you want teaching you about the Bible?

[Forty9er]

And btw, where is your thread about the pre-trib rapture being true? I couldn't find it.

I couldn't find it either. It was a few months ago and it seems to have disappeared out of the Chapel and I couldn't find it with a search.

The insinuation was so to me, but you like to play word games, to create doubt in other readers minds, to derail the thread, as it seems. Is that your intention?

I don't play word games. I never said or implied those references were proofs. Contrary to what you seem to believe you don't prove anything by reading or listening to one or two people's opinion.

My intention is to question the truth of what you claim about Scofield and to challenge you to produce actual proof of what you are saying. If what Meyer says can't be verified by independent facts then all it amounts to is slander of a person who is no longer alive to defend himself.

[Rob_0126]

Here is some photos, if anyone would consider that proof enough.
http://poweredbychrist.homestead.com...s/scofield.htm

Typewritten copy of the divorce decree - -->Image

His first wife's grave stone, that he didn't mention about for years -->Image

But, if you need source cited proof,
Here is a long list of excerpts from a thesis done on Scofield, in 2011, by D. Jean Rushing, with sources cited:

...After settling the forgery charges in November 1879, the downtrodden Cyrus Scofield
visited a Washington Avenue mission in downtown St. Louis and found a new life in
Christianity.(221)

By 1880, Scofield rented room at 1000 Locust Street in St. Louis and pondered a
life in Christian ministry though he still referred to himself as married and his occupation as
lawyer.(222)

Separated from Cyrus Scofield for several years Leontine Cerré Scofield and her
daughters, Abigail and Helene, had returned the family home in Atchison, Kansas. Later that
year, the priest of St. Benedicts Church in Atchison confirmed Cyrus Scofield’s twelve-year-old
daughter, Abigail Scofield.(223)

The absent father did not attend this important event in his daughter’s religious life. Instead, Scofield “once in a great while” sent five dollars to the children while he cultivated a new life.(224)

Sources Cited:

221- B. Montlau to C.I. Scofield, 15 December 1920.

222 - 1880 St. Louis City Directory, St. Louis, Missouri, Ancestry.com (accessed 11 October 2011); and B.
Montlau, manuscript letter to C.I. Scofield, 15 December 15 1920, Central American Mission Papers, Non-Indexed,
Archives, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Wake Forest, North Carolina; 1880 Federal Census Record,
Carondolet, St. Louis, Missouri, Roll 715, Page 50C, Image 0520, Ancestry.com (accessed 11 October 2011).

223 - Certificate of Confirmation for Abigail Scofield, Canfield Papers, Box 4, Folder #9, Archives,
Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Wake Forest, North Carolina.

224 “Cyrus I. Schofield [sic] in the Role of a Congregational Minister.”

225 - Trumbull, 26.

Supposedly, scofield became born again around Nov, 1879, at a mission in downtown St. Louis.
Remind you, he separated from his 1st wife before conversion, but never reconciled it afterwards, and left his wife and children to fend for themselves.
Was he just a confused babe in Christ, or was it a false conversion?

As seems evident from their absence in the Life Story , Scofield also intended to keep his
marital status and the abandoned children hidden from his followers. Scofield kept up this
charade his entire life even though he and his daughters maintained limited contact until shortly
before his death in 1921.(227)

Source Cited:
227- Cyrus Scofield, manuscript letter to Abbie, 21 May 1921, CN014, Scofield Memorial Church Selected
Records, Series II, Folder 13, Archives, Dallas Theological Seminary, Dallas, Texas.

Later it is known that he didn't want people to know that his abandoned family was Roman Catholic.
But besides that, he pretty much abandoned his family for years.

In the Life Story, Dr. Scofield gave the impression that he remained unmarried until he and Hettie Wartz
married in Dallas in 1884.

source cited:

The Life Story book, by scofield

So he gave the impression he was never married before Hettie Wartz. What is apparent is that if the Christian community knew of this, they would have tossed him out on his ear. And 1 Timothy 5:8 would have disqualified him from his supposed ministry.

Goodell’s mentorship of Scofield led him to a preaching ministry in
downtown St. Louis and the St. Louis Association of Congregational Churches issued Scofield a
local preaching license in 1880. He organized Hyde Park Congregational Church and an East St.
Louis railroad meeting of the Y.M.C.A.(262)
Scofield’s downtown ministries and Bible studies with Rev. Goodell and Dr. Brookes kept him occupied until a he left St. Louis, Missouri permanently in the summer of 1882.

source cited:

262- Scharf, 1749, James M. Gray, “Testimonial to Rev. C.I. Scofield, D. D.,” Moody Bible Institute
Monthly, October 26, 1916, 550.

So, I take it Rev. Goodell and Dr. Brookes didn't know about Scofields continued abandonment of his wife and 2 children.
Otherwise, they wouldn't have given him a license to preach, and would have kicked him out on his ear for abandonment.

In the August 27, 1881, Topeka Daily Capital article, Leontine Scofield alluded to the
next step for their marriage, “I will gladly give him the matrimonial liberty he desires.”(270)

At this point, the couple had lived apart for at least four or five years if not longer. The following
month, Leontine Scofield signed a divorce petition claiming that Cyrus Scofield “for more than
one year…and a long time prior thereto absented himself from his said wife and children” and
alleged that the “minor children have all of their lives been under the care of this Plaintiff
[Leontine].”(271)

Acting as counsel for himself, Cyrus Scofield denied the allegations but inexplicably withdrew his appearance and asked the court to dismiss the petition, which the court dismissed on March 4, 1882.(272)

Cyrus Scofield and Leontine Scofield remained legally married but separated.

sources cited:

270- “Cyrus I. Schofield [sic] in the Role of a Congregational Minister.”

271- Petition, Court records from Case No. 2161 and 2681, filed in the District Court for Atchison County,
Canfield Papers, Box 4, Folders 7 and 31, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Wake Forest, North Carolina,
2.

272 - Answer and Motion and Order, Court records from Case No. 2161 and 2681, filed in the District Court
for Atchison County, Canfield Papers, Box 4, Folders 7 and 31, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Wake
Forest, North Carolina.

So it finally came out that he was separated, and abandoned his wife and 2 children.
His wife wanted a divorce but it was not granted, so he was still legally married.
Again, why was this guy allowed in the ministry?

Scofield remained at the First Congregational Church for nine months before by an offer of a permanent
pastorate at the Dallas church prompted his petition to the St. Louis Congregational Licensing Board for another preaching license.(273)
After much discussion and in a less than unanimous vote, the licensing board reinstated Scofield’s preaching license in April 1883.(274) There was still no change in Scofield’s marital status.

sources cited:

273 - Minutes, 11, Scofield Memorial Church Selected Records, CN014, Series I, Folder 4, Archives, Dallas
Theological Seminary, Dallas, Texas.
274 - “Various Topics.”

So, with his preaching license stripped, he was still preaching.
The board gave him a reinstatement of license to preach, even though he was still abandoning his wife and 2 children.
Is this a christian, or a false convert, or just a liar?

On October 1, 1883, Leontine Scofield filed essentially the same petition for divorce
from Cyrus Scofield. This time the divorce proceeded without objection and the court granted
the decree on December 8, 1883.(275)

The court found Cyrus Scofield guilty of “willful abandonment” and “enjoined Scofield from ever interfering with the custody of the children.”(276)

Consistent with her Catholic beliefs, after the court granted Mrs. Scofield a divorce on the
grounds of abandonment, she began calling herself a widow.(277)

sources cited:

275 - Petition and Order, Court records from Case No. 2161 and 2681, filed in the District Court for Atchison
County, Canfield Papers, Box 4, Folders 7 and 31, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary, Wake Forest, North
Carolina.

276 - Order, Court records from Case No. 2161 and 2681, filed in the District Court for Atchison County,
Canfield Papers, Box 4, Folders 7 and 31, Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary.

277 - 1885 Kansas State Census, (accessed 11 October 2011) ancestory.com. No church records for Leontine
Scofield’s divorce from Cyrus Scofield were available but Leontine continued to receive certain Catholic rites after
the divorce. “Scofield Rites,” Atchison Daily Globe, November 7, 1936.

Finally, his abandoned wife got her divorce. Then he was found guilty of willful abandonment.
And yet, he was still preaching?!

A veiled hint found in one of Cyrus Scofield’s personal letters to a fellow Congregational
minister in Texas alluded to the final cause of the abandonment of Scofield’s family. In the
letter, Scofield expounded on his interpretation of several Bible passages relating to marriage and
divorce. Scofield elaborated extensively on what he called a “mixed marriage case” which he
defined as the marriage of a believer to an unbeliever.(284)

Though Scofield believed the Christian spouse could not terminate the marriage, he did express the belief that if an “unbelieving depart” then the believer was free to remarry.(285)

Scofield wrote, “how horrible a mixed marriage… He [Christ] does not regard it as properly a marriage at all—as if two Jews or two Christians.” (286)

sources cited:


284 - Cyrus Scofield to Frank Boyle, manuscript letter, 16 September 1890, C.I. (Cyrus Ingerson) Scofield
Papers, CN 001, Folder 1, Archives, Dallas Theological Seminary, Dallas, Texas.

285 - C. Scofield to F. Boyle, 16 September 1890.

286- C. Scofield to F. Boyle, 16 September 1890.

What a scoundrel!
He claimed that it was ok to abandon his wife and 2 children continually, after his conversion,
because she was a unbeliever??
What about the Children?? Did they deserve what he did?

[Forty9er]

I told you I wouldn't defend everything in Scofield's life and I won't even try. But in your latest list of Scofield's sins there is not one mention of the things you accused him of in your post on the first page of this thread. Where is the proof that "Scofield was a freemason" and because of that worshiped Satan? Where is the proof that "He took scripture out of context, and his doctrine is refuted with the very scripture he supposedly used"?

But more importantly, what has any of this to do with the validity of the doctrine of the rapture or the doctrines of dispensationalism? You must somehow mistakenly think that by destroying Scofield's reputation you can destroy those doctrines as well. But it doesn't work that way. Do you think that if I could find someone who taught a doctrine that you believe is true and could expose him as a fraud that that would mean the doctrine that he taught would then be invalidated?

So what exactly are you trying to accomplish in this thread? Is it only that you are just so outraged at Scofield that you had to expose him? Or are you really only using Scofield to attack the doctrines of the rapture and dispensationalism?

By your own admission the doctrine of the rapture existed at least 200 years before Scofield. And John Nelson Darby, who is credited with the first systematization of dispensational theology following the Reformation, died in 1882 long before Scofield published his study Bible. All of these doctrines existed before Scofield and they have continued long after Scofield. Even if you could completely remove Scofield from history the doctrine of the rapture and the dispensational doctrines would continue substantially unchanged.

[Rob_0126]

I told you I wouldn't defend everything in Scofield's life and I won't even try. But in your latest list of Scofield's sins there is not one mention of the things you accused him of in your post on the first page of this thread. Where is the proof that "Scofield was a freemason" and because of that worshiped Satan? Where is the proof that "He took scripture out of context, and his doctrine is refuted with the very scripture he supposedly used"?

I'm not posting for your convenience. I'm posting info to help people realize that scofield was not a Godly man, and his reference bible should not be trusted.

Being that you persist on not listening to bro Meyer's sermons, explaining all of these issues, I have nothing more to say until you do.

But more importantly, what has any of this to do with the validity of the doctrine of the rapture or the doctrines of dispensationalism? You must somehow mistakenly think that by destroying Scofield's reputation you can destroy those doctrines as well. But it doesn't work that way. Do you think that if I could find someone who taught a doctrine that you believe is true and could expose him as a fraud that that would mean the doctrine that he taught would then be invalidated?

When did I say I wanted to destroy the doctrines of dispensationalism or the rapture doctrines?

Bro Meyer does talk of those issues, but my main point is to warn the Christian brothers and sisters not to trust what scofield wrote and said. His unrepentant attitude towards his family is proof enough that he wasn't qualified to preach or teach on the Word of God.
Your the one that keeps harping on the rapture and dispensationalism, in just about every post.

And one more time I gave you a quick summary of what bro Meyer talked about in this series of sermons, and I explained that you need to listen to it if you want to know, as it is extensive.
But you keep denying the very avenue of understanding what he said, by not listening to him.
Your intentionally putting your head in the sand, then asking why you can't see anything.

So what exactly are you trying to accomplish in this thread? Is it only that you are just so outraged at Scofield that you had to expose him? Or are you really only using Scofield to attack the doctrines of the rapture and dispensationalism?

See above.

By your own admission the doctrine of the rapture existed at least 200 years before Scofield. And John Nelson Darby, who is credited with the first systematization of dispensational theology following the Reformation, died in 1882 long before Scofield published his study Bible. All of these doctrines existed before Scofield and they have continued long after Scofield. Even if you could completely remove Scofield from history the doctrine of the rapture and the dispensational doctrines would continue substantially unchanged.

And again I say, my point is to reveal that scofield was not fit to preach or teach on the Word of God, because he denied the Word with his own actions, after he supposedly became saved.

The question is, why have you harped on dispensationalism this entire threads life?

And about the rapture, I really don't care if it was talked about in the 1600's or 300 AD: It is still a lie of the devil.

If you want to believe it, that's your choice. But don't run off at the mouth in this thread about your quest to defend the pre trib rapture or dispensationalism.

[somoprepper08]

I'm not posting for your convenience. I'm posting info to help people realize that scofield was not a Godly man, and his reference bible should not be trusted.

Being that you persist on not listening to bro Meyer's sermons, explaining all of these issues, I have nothing more to say until you do.



When did I say I wanted to destroy the doctrines of dispensationalism or the rapture doctrines?

Bro Meyer does talk of those issues, but my main point is to warn the Christian brothers and sisters not to trust what scofield wrote and said. His unrepentant attitude towards his family is proof enough that he wasn't qualified to preach or teach on the Word of God.
Your the one that keeps harping on the rapture and dispensationalism, in just about every post.

And one more time I gave you a quick summary of what bro Meyer talked about in this series of sermons, and I explained that you need to listen to it if you want to know, as it is extensive.
But you keep denying the very avenue of understanding what he said, by not listening to him.
Your intentionally putting your head in the sand, then asking why you can't see anything.



See above.



And again I say, my point is to reveal that scofield was not fit to preach or teach on the Word of God, because he denied the Word with his own actions, after he supposedly became saved.

The question is, why have you harped on dispensationalism this entire threads life?

And about the rapture, I really don't care if it was talked about in the 1600's or 300 AD: It is still a lie of the devil.

If you want to believe it, that's your choice. But don't run off at the mouth in this thread about your quest to defend the pre trib rapture or dispensationalism.

Ok, I must be a bit dense. But what does this guy Scofield have to do with anything that I, and others, believe?
And who the heck is Bro Meyers?

[Rob_0126]

Ok, I must be a bit dense. But what does this guy Scofield have to do with anything that I, and others, believe?
And who the heck is Bro Meyers?

It is for the brothers and sisters that believe in scofields doctrine and teachings. And ones that use his reference bible.

A lot of denominations base their doctrine on what he taught in his reference bible.

I am here to warn those folks that they are being dupped.

If you don't believe in scofields teachings by his reference bible, then don't worry about it.

About Brother David J Meyer, here is a short biography of him.
http://www.pastormeyer.org/biography.html

He was an occultist that came out of it, surrendered his life to Jesus Christ, and started preaching against the occult since the early 70's.
He died in 2010 at the age of 60.

He also did a monthly newsletter since the early 80's, exposing the occult practices in our country and abroad.
The online newsletter archive goes back to 1994.

The sermon archive can be found here.
http://ltmstudios.org/audio/djm/A.html

[Forty9er]

When did I say I wanted to destroy the doctrines of dispensationalism or the rapture doctrines?

I guess it must be all in my imagination.

Or maybe not ...

And about the rapture, I really don't care if it was talked about in the 1600's or 300 AD: It is still a lie of the devil.

I am here to warn those folks that they are being dupped.

If you don't believe in scofields teachings by his reference bible, then don't worry about it.

You are doing exactly what you claim not to be doing. Do you really think people don't understand that what Scofield taught was mainline dispensational theology and by demonizing "scofields teachings" you are also demonizing all of dispensationalism? And yet you claim you are only trying "to reveal that scofield was not fit to preach or teach on the Word of God". That is being disingenuous at best.

[Rob_0126]

You are doing exactly what you claim not to be doing. Do you really think people don't understand that what Scofield taught was mainline dispensational theology and by demonizing "scofields teachings" you are also demonizing all of dispensationalism? And yet you claim you are only trying "to reveal that scofield was not fit to preach or teach on the Word of God". That is being disingenuous at best.

Actually I did not know that he taught 'mainline dispensationalism'. Like I said, Im not a seminary graduate, so I don't understand all the .75 words that you speak.
I have to go and search for what they mean, then come back and give you an answer.

Like I said, Bro Meyer does talk about the rapture, and how scofield distorts the meaning of it all in Revelation.
As far as dispensationalism, I didn't know what that meant, so I just went on what he said about the rapture, mainly.
So I must plead ignorance with that topic. If you want to fill me in on exactly what it is, in regards to scofield, then do so.

All I know is, by biblical standards, scofield should not have been allowed to be a minister. (1 Tim 5-8 )
That is one of many, but should have been enough to disqualify him from teaching anything from the Word; Much less producing a reference of it.

This is not about who wins or loses a 'debate', but a crying out for the souls that have been deceived by satan and his people.
I'll admit when I'm ignorant. Pride just gets in the way.

[Forty9er]

Actually I did not know that he taught 'mainline dispensationalism'.

All you needed to do to understand that is read the very first sentence in the Wikipedia article on Scofield. Since you started a thread specifically to discredit him I would have thought you would have at least done a minimum of research on what he taught.