The 1917 Scofield Reference Bible

[@livingwithfaithbiblereview3413]

Another great video! thanks for the time and effort you put in.

[@RGrantJones]

Thank you for watching and commenting.

[@g.p.ryecroft]

wow, what a fascinating, informative, and comprehensive review. You invested a lot of time uncovering unique notes. I especially liked your contrasting them with the '67 revision. I just bought my first 1917 Scofield. I was raised in the Assemblies of God in the late '70s when the Dake Study Bible was the standard. Dake piled on the notes and is Scofield on steroids. I'm excited to revisit the OG study Bible, especially after your presentation. Thank you!

[@RGrantJones]

Thank you for your kind comment!

[@skjones91199]

You are on point about the index. One of the great strengths of this Bible. Also, the Subject References are great! I'm going through the Scofield Bible this year, reviewing every note and most of the subject references. Very interesting so far! Thanks for the thorough review!

[@raeboyd5596]

I searched for a review of this bible because I got one at the thrift store. it's very old, very yellow and some brittle pages. soft supple leather with morraco leather liner. I also have one that is Oxford New scofield reference bible cc 1967, so I know the other one is older than this. it doesnt say old scofield or new. I had no idea it could be purchased new! What a wonderful edifying review!

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for the comment, Rae. You can find some real treasures in used book and thrift stores!

[@seawynd99]

The Scofield has long been my 'go-to' SB. Thanks for the objective and unbiased review. Quite refreshing considering what else is out there when it comes to the Scofield system.

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks, Joseph. I sometimes stray from objectivity when it comes to red letters, glossy paper, ghosting, poor translations, and that sort of thing, but I try to express myself in an neutral way in these videos on theological issues.

[@richardbrown7441]

@@RGrantJones 1 Corinthians chapter 15 verses 1-4.the gospel

[@richardbrown7441]

Timeline charts maps by rose publishing order on Amazon..and order the spirit world by clarence larkin get all his books and order the power of faith by Derek prince and order watch your mouth by tony Evan's get all his books and order 101 weapons of spritual warfare by dr.olukoya and order a book called deliverance and spritual warfare manual by John eckhart and order Christian tracts to pass out to the lost souls and the blind and to the unredeemed...moments with the books order online there number is 814 -623-8737..and check out a pastor by the name of Richard Jordan by the messenger of Grace his number is 814-623-8737

[@tomf1028]

I don't own this kind of Bible, but I really appreciated this video of yours from beginning to end. So thanks for the closer look at it. I would've been happy to watch a much longer review on this as well. I kept finding myself pausing it to read the notes & look up a lot of the Scriptures listed to see if it made sense to me or see where he was coming from or trying to go with it. I've heard much about ppl liking this Bible & the notes so thanks for the review! Have you made a video giving your testimony? If not I'd be happy to watch it one day. All this time I thought you were much younger - listening to you throw years out there in this one👍

[@RGrantJones]

Tom, I'm glad you found it worthwhile. I try to keep the personal to a minimum in these videos, though sometimes I let an anecdote slip. Incidentally, the friend who was trying hard to convert me in those days -- who invited me to see "The Late Great Planet Earth" -- went on to attend a Baptist college in the Chattanooga, Tennessee area. While there, he became involved with the Twelve Tribes (the Yellow Deli People) and dropped out of school. When he found out a few years later that I had become a Christian, he *apologized* if he had been a factor in my conversion!

[@tomf1028]

@@RGrantJones wow, crazy! Never heard of that group before. Just looked them up. Thanks for sharing all that.

[@PrentissYeates]

I had a NIV Berkshire leather Scofield study Bible. Wonderfully bound in the USA. John Walvoord was the general editor. Alas someone spilt grape juice all through it and it was beyond use afterwards.

[@RoastBeefSandwich]

There is now a "Standard" Old Scofield that is the same pagination and layout as the old Scofield you reviewed, but has been digitally typeset in a modern font (looks like Times New Roman to me). It's the version of the old Scofield I use most just because with the new typesetting the lines have a bit more breathing room - but you lose the bold type - I can live with that. The bad thing is since the red and black print are on different plates, and since these are basically $25 books nowadays, the red and black are out of register by a fraction of an inch. I typically ignore Scofield's notes when reading a Scofield, for what it's worth.

[@RGrantJones]

That's good information. I haven't looked at any of the newer printings of the old Scofield, so what you say is news to me. I do have an NKJV Scofield III (I think that's what it's called) with a very nice typeset. I like almost everything about it. The characters are attractive and printed darkly, though they're narrow, as in most modern fonts. The line spacing is excellent. The Bible itself is quite a bit larger than this old Scofield, but it's far from huge. My only problem with that one is the bright red letters.

[@RoastBeefSandwich]

R. Grant Jones yes I love my NKJV Scofield III as well, it’s excellent. No getting around Oxford’s bright red letters though. Oxford still prints the Old Scofield facsimiles, they’re known as Classic Old Scofields today. I’m not sure when this new setting and the rebrand to Classic for the facsimile was made. I’m guessing just a few years ago for the 100th anniversary.

[@fnjesusfreak]

I have, FWIW, a 100th Anniversary edition of the Scofield from Oxford. Printed in Korea, but it's the exact same textblock as the one in the video. The red letters are bright PINK.

[@RoastBeefSandwich]

sarachikorita yes Oxford’s red letters are not great.

[@OrthodoxJourney359]

I was a die hard Dispensationalist for years until a couple years ago, after reading NT Wright, Demar, Gentry and many others.

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for commenting, A Victorious Church! I've never been a dispensationalist. I read DeMar, Gentry, and other postmillennial authors back in the '80s, but remained unconvinced. You mentioned Wright: What do you think about the New Perspective on Paul?

[@recoveringknowitall1534]

i have both the 1909 and the 1917 editions. the scofield bible kjv was my first real bible at 15yrs old.

[@cdavid6437]

A very good detailed review as always. Thank you.

[@kal-el-vinist1507]

Another fantastic and thoughtful review. Thanks, brother!

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks, Stacy!

[@gypsylane8723]

thank you for going over Scofield notes, great review.

[@RGrantJones]

You're welcome, gypsy. When I was first beginning to take Christianity seriously, back in the early 1980s, I bought a 1967 Scofield and tried to make sense of the notes. I knew so little about the various approaches to Biblical interpretation that I couldn't have told you what was distinctive about the Scofield Reference Bible, nor did I have any idea that it was controversial, or who disagreed with it. Now all that it much more clear to me. I hope that, by pointing to some of the more distinctive notes, I'll save someone else a bit of effort and time. Thanks for watching!

[@fnjesusfreak]

In contrast to Scofield's comment that "Israel rashly accepted the law", I conjectured that an oral prototype of the written law of Moses existed from the beginning, which the patriarchs knew.

[@RGrantJones]

I just saw this interesting video on that topic: kzbin.info/www/bejne/bJOoopiAiN-WjJo .

[@Airik1111bibles]

I just bought an Oxford handsize genuine leather edition. Their print is not good now, I'd recommend people look for older editions. I only own one Scofield now , gave all my other ones away. Guess I should have kept atleast one of those nice ones I reviewed 🤷‍♂️ oh well .

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for commenting, Airik1111! Oxford Bibles in my experience - as far as I can recall - were printed well, and on very nice paper. Sad to hear that Oxford's print quality (at least in that edition) has gone downhill.

[@Airik1111bibles]

@R. Grant Jones The paper is good same with the binding but that print is very inconsistent, it could be a bad run .

[@AmericanShia786]

Excellent review. I forgot about the article at the beginning of the Scofield Bible. So, I just ordered an inexpensive pocket edition of the Scofield. It was some of the notes I came to disagree with, not the Bible itself, that led me to switch to a KJV Thompson Chain in the Middle 1980s. Your review reminded me of the time I spent studying the Scofield in my late teens and early twenties. I can't believe I bought into Classic Dispensationalism in my late teens and early 20s. I haven't owned one for about 30 years. I was a "mid-tribber" for about 5 years until I dropped Dispensationalism all together by age 30. I had forgotten what I did like in the Scofield Reference Bible. So, thanks for the reminder.

[@RGrantJones]

For me, never having been a dispensationalist, it provides useful insight into an unfamiliar way of thinking. Thanks for the comment, Philip.

[@REVNUMANEWBERN]

GREAT info at the beginning, would you sell that bible?? I had a Old Scofield that was a PERFECT cary/travel size in 1976/80, it was stolen in my lugage while visiting Seattle Wa. I have NEVER been able to replace it since I cannot match it up, is there ANY referance materiels JUST on these referance bibles LIKE having them segregated BY SIZE and when produced?

[@deandrabrown2493]

Very good review. Thank you

[@RGrantJones]

Thank you for commenting, Deandra!

[@vrixphillips]

that's wild about premillennialism. Kinda makes you wonder what they thought would happen /before/ most Protestant churches started teaching that all believers would be taken up before the tribulation.

[@wayne4134]

Excellent review! I appreciate how the Scofield does not overwhelm the reader with notes although I prefer the 1977 Ryrie - more notes yet not overwhelming. Have you considered reviewing the ESV Gospel Transformation Bible (1st edition sells for $20 at CBD); or the KJV Study Bible by Nelson? Both have a nice balance of notes and text. I have also been enjoying the unique notes in the KJV Henry Morris Study Bible - although show through and cheap paper are an issue. I have the new NIV Study Bible with comfort print - the red letters are bold and clear (although I prefer black letter)?

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks for the kind words and the recommendations!

[@wayne4134]

@@RGrantJones You are ,"go to" source for thorough Bible reviews! Thanks for the time and effort you put into each review!

[@garythomas3150]

Thank you, Mr. Jones. I was thinking about getting a CBP Scofield, but was concerned his doctrine would conflict with my beliefs/theology. Your review helped me make my decision. Thanks!

[@johnbrowning741]

I Suppose I would whisper if I were selling that .

[@RGrantJones]

LOL. But I'm not selling it, just reviewing it. Thanks for commenting!

[@ymshao]

Is this typeface the same as that used in KJV Cameo?

[@RGrantJones]

No. It's similar, but not the same. Thanks for the question!

[@fnjesusfreak]

Anyone who thinks they know when the end of the world will be is wrong. Mark 13.32 - if even the Son of God is not entrusted with this knowledge, how much less a mere mortal!

[@RGrantJones]

The historicist interpreters seemed to think it was their role not only to assign specific historic events to the visions of the Apocalypse (e.g., the rider on the white horse was Constantine; the fifth trumpet = the Islamic conquest), but also to predict the end of the world on the basis of the day=year equation. My guess is that these bizarre historical assignments made literal interpretations appealing by contrast, and the failed predictions plowed the ground for the imminent second coming theory. Literal interpretation plus an imminent second coming sounds a lot like Darby. So I find it curious that some of Darby's modern heirs love to assign the visions of the Apocalypse to specific modern inventions (e.g., Cobra attack helicopters) and predict the end based on historic events (the establishment of the state of Israel) and the generation=40 years theory.

[@Airik1111bibles]

OK I'm officially jealous of that TopGrain LCBP, biggest mistake I made was never buying one 😏 okay now I will watch the rest of your video LOL....This is my pattern now for your vids LOL 😂

[@RGrantJones]

One of these days I'll review that Bible and your jealousy will melt away. The cover is nice, but the printing job -- not so much.

[@Airik1111bibles]

You nailed the pro's perfectly, that's why I like the Scofield...As for his dispensation notes oh well LOL I'm part dispensational I guess but not in the denominational sense BLAH😲 I'm also a conditional security guy and not full OSAS and find my self nodding in agreement with calvanist 90% of the time. Its a bit like what my dad used to say when I asked him about our heritage ....He said our blood was like Heinz 57 sauce, a bit of everything ROFL😂 Good video brother, I just received a large print from 1996 updated Oxford Scofield in genuine leather that I'm going to review. Your video was perfect timing cause I will refer them to your video. What a great review my friend thanks for sharing Scofield without bashing his character, I like the Scofield I don't agree with all his notes I just like the Oxford text and chapter headers with verse by verse. The bashing of the guy has become some kind of weird bandwagon thing for a some folks. I had a commenter who wouldn't let the bashing go, he called Scofield a" heretic sinner who is now in Hell" 😲 yikes that's a bit much....Disagreeing with someone's views of scripture is normal but throwing a dead man under the bus and tossing him in Hell is just wrong. As for the pre rapture stuff...If the "dead in Christ" who are to "RISE FIRST" then those who lose their heads for believing in Jesus and not taking the mark would have to take place so they can be part of that right😂 For the dead to rise first and for those alive to meet them in the air means the pre rapture cant happen tell ALL THOSE LIVE BELIEVERS BECOME DEAD ONES... ROFL😂😂😂 can't make God a liar now can we LOL😂 rapture stuff causes so many weird beliefs and arguments. Yep that's my super private interpretation, I might make my own Common Mans End Times Bible 😂😲😛😜😲😝😳😱😂

[@livingwithfaithbiblereview3413]

I got the heinz57 from my family too...after I got my DNA test (not 100% reliable) back a couple years ago I realized i'm not as mixed up as I was told. I just feel it though.

[@Airik1111bibles]

@@livingwithfaithbiblereview3413 😂😅😉

[@RGrantJones]

Airik, Scofield was a sinner -- like me. If I had to stick to the theological commentaries of perfect people, I'm sure I wouldn't find any to read. I think the number old school Darby/Scofield dispensationalists has to be falling, so I'm not sure why anyone thinks they're a threat. I still find them on the radio, but they seem to be a minority, or they're no longer comfortable expressing themselves openly. It's also interesting to me how dispensationalism started strong among Presbyterians and Episcopalians, and now it's migrated almost entirely to Pentecostals and Independent Baptists. (It hasn't been that long since Donald Gray Barnhouse and James Boice preached dispensational eschatology, and both of them were Presbyterians, I think. But it seems almost all Presbyterians are amillennialists these days.) Even John MacArthur, who teaches the pretribulation rapture and keeps Israel and the Church distinct, seems by teaching Lordship salvation to have slipped away on what is really the key concern of dispensationalism -- to regard works as entirely irrelevant to salvation. I'm looking forward to your review of the large print 1996 updated Scofield. Unless it's what Oxford was calling the Scofield III, I'm sure it will be new to me. And thanks for mentioning my videos from time to time. I have no doubt you've helped quite a lot in building my subscription base. I really appreciate it. I have the LCBP Scofield I showed, a couple of old Ryries, and an NKJV Scofield III to review at some point. I'd also like to do a review that focuses on changes between the 1917 and the 1967, especially in the notes. That would interest me, even if no one else watches! I like your idea of publishing The Airik1111 Common Man's End Times Bible. I hope you print a black letter option -- and be sure to advertise the porosity of the paper in Airiks!

[@Airik1111bibles]

@@RGrantJones I worded that wrong "unrepentant sinner" LOL.. Its as though they were alive in early 1900s and not just stalking Mr Scofield but actually with him when he died asking him to repent of his adultery 😂 I know we got really really really really really old guys😉 in this bible geek community but, I'm guessing they ain't that old nor all knowing. Now that Dark ages thing is new to me I gotta check that out....Is this also connected to the " blind them with red letter conspiracy😂"😅

[@johndisalvo6283]

Hello. What is the copyright date? Great review!

[@RGrantJones]

1945. You can see that at the 5:14 point. Thanks for the comment!

[@johndisalvo6283]

@@RGrantJones Thank you! My phone couldn’t zoom in that clear. God bless!!

[@ChrisLilly-e9b]

Scofield's main error, like most overs, was in presuming to question the King James Text - the only ones I know of who never did that were Peter Ruckman, David Allan Hoffman and perhaps Frank Charles Thompson, along with Dean John Burgon - a lot of them were writing at the time the new versions started to slither out from between the moss infested stones of textual criticism. Accept anyone good they say, but eschew any correction to the text of God's Holy Word.

[@basjanssen838]

how can I purchase a copy of the bible

[@skjones91199]

Ebay is great for these BIbles! I just saw the same copy he reviewed for a decent price on there (

[@colonyofcellsiamamachine6175]

I prefer the kjv scofield study bible III since it is newer.

[@REVNUMANEWBERN]

So would you sell this one??

[@RGrantJones]

Sorry for the delay in responding, Numa! I just saw your question. No, this Bible isn't for sell at the moment.

[@businesspage3404]

I do know that the rapture doctrine came out in 1837 by a woman who name is Margaret McDonald and I think they believe that God or Jesus Christ is going to meet them halfway so I don't believe that God will do such a thing this I do know that the NIV bible on the book Ezekiel chapter 13 verse 20 it talk about people being rapture and on the KJV same book Ezekiel chapter 13 verse 20 God is against people who teach people to fly away so I do believe the NIV bible is sold by satan himself if you look it up you will see that the same company that sells NIV bible are selling satan bible and a book named how to have joy with gay sex that very evil so stay away from NIV bible and read Ezekiel chapter 13 verses 20 KJV so you can stand up against the antichrist and his rapture doctrine

[@1sthird]

How many Scofield Bibles have been printed?

[@skjones91199]

By 1940, Oxford said that over 2 million had been printed.

[@Magic818100]

The commentaries of the Scofield bible does not match a lot of the Bible reference first of all they don't even mention Matthew 21 when Jesus told who was the last prophet that God sent to the tribes of Israel he told them for now on the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and it will be given to a nation that will bear fruit. --- that is one verse you don't see no Christian Church in America touch

[@warblerab2955]

1867 Scofield?

[@RGrantJones]

Sorry, Warblerab 295 -- I don't understand your question.

[@warblerab2955]

AT 23:06 in the video you make reference to a 1867 Scofield. I am pretty sure no such Scofield Bible exists. I think you meant the 1967 Scofield.

[@RGrantJones]

Thanks! I don't always enunciate very clearly, and my voice certainly isn't very clear at that point in the video. But the closed captioning thinks I said 1967. Usually, it struggles to make sense of what I say, but it got it right this time.

[@warblerab2955]

Sorry, I didn't have the captions on. It sounded like 1867.