Post Reply
Page 1 of 5  •  1 2 3 4 5 Next
Switch to Forum Live View Jehovah in NT in Scoffield Reference Bible marginal notes - need help finding online references
3 years ago  ::  May 05, 2012 - 8:46PM #1
Newtonian
Posts: 12,196
You all - I have the original Scoffield Reference Bible which has the name Jehovah frequently in the marginal notes to various NT (Christian Greek Scriptures) Scriptures, e.g. Romans 10:13 and Matthew 22:37.

The New Scoffield reference Bible has removed Scoffield's scholarly note, which is likely a crime to put Scoffield's name on a translation after his death that removes his notes.


Should this be criminally prosecuted?


Also, I am having difficulty finding any reference online to these marginal notes where Scoffield puts the name "Jehovah" in the margins for many NT verses. 


Even search engines that say "Jehovah" have thus far removed this name in the actual links from the search engines!


So, if anyone can help me find online reference to these notes, it would be appreciated.


Or, if not, if anyone can find out why this is being removed from the many online references - that would also be appreciated.                  

Of course, as I was brought up with this translation while Lutheran and still have two copies in print (one is falling apart from use!) I know these marginal references are there in black and white!


Do any of you actually have a copy of the Scoffield Reference Bible, not the New Scoffield Reference Bible which removes Scoffield's scholarly notes?     
Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  May 05, 2012 - 9:00PM #2
57
Posts: 23,959

I'm not quite sure what you are getting at but,


Romans 10:13 uses the word Lord.  


The word used is Strong's 2962.  


Matthew 22:37 uses Strong's  2316  which means...God. 

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  May 05, 2012 - 9:45PM #3
mrjordan
Posts: 2,266

Well Newt, lets have some fun with this. As everyone knows, I have the last name of Jordan. What does that mean?


en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_%28name%29


After reading that, and I change my online name to Mr Yarden from here on out. Could you tell my post from another person calling themselves Mr Jordan?


Much like the name Jehovah.


en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jehovah


If I was to say YHWH is the one and only true God, would you know who I was talking about?



Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  May 05, 2012 - 11:40PM #4
Kemmer
Posts: 16,842

May 5, 2012 -- 8:46PM, Newtonian wrote:

You all - I have the original Scoffield Reference Bible which has the name Jehovah frequently in the marginal notes to various NT (Christian Greek Scriptures) Scriptures, e.g. Romans 10:13 and Matthew 22:37.

The New Scoffield reference Bible has removed Scoffield's scholarly note, which is likely a crime to put Scoffield's name on a translation after his death that removes his notes.



Sounds like someone has come to his senses.

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  May 06, 2012 - 3:34AM #5
Theo
Posts: 4,691

Newt:

The New Scoffield reference Bible has removed Scoffield's scholarly note, which is likely a crime to put Scoffield's name on a translation after his death that removes his notes. Should this be criminally prosecuted?



Probably not a crime. Scoffield himself might object to the publishing house changing the notes in his original work... but then he is dead and according to JWs, he no longer exists. Obviously, somebody owns the rights to Scoffield's works; but frankly I do not know who owns them and don't really care. My guess would be that the publisher edited them out because they are un-necessary, in as much as every edition of the Scoffield Study Bible uses the designation LORD everywhere YHVH appears in the Hebrew Text. So anybody who bothers to read the preface, would know that - thereby making these particular footnotes nothing more than a potential weapon to be used against uninformed Christians by the likes of JWs and other holy name nuts.


Anyone who has been a Christian for a while, and has done more studying than to just read the text of the KJV, is going to know the name of God is not the LORD, but that the translators used the LORD in these verses to protect the Holy Name from being used in vain. Pretty simple stuff, but at least you guys have more of a clue than Mormons about this issue, if not more light.


~ Theophilus

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  May 06, 2012 - 5:09AM #6
Newtonian
Posts: 12,196

May 6, 2012 -- 3:34AM, Theo wrote:


Newt:

The New Scoffield reference Bible has removed Scoffield's scholarly note, which is likely a crime to put Scoffield's name on a translation after his death that removes his notes. Should this be criminally prosecuted?



Probably not a crime. Scoffield himself might object to the publishing house changing the notes in his original work... but then he is dead and according to JWs, he no longer exists. Obviously, somebody owns the rights to Scoffield's works; but frankly I do not know who owns them and don't really care. My guess would be that the publisher edited them out because they are un-necessary, in as much as every edition of the Scoffield Study Bible uses the designation LORD everywhere YHVH appears in the Hebrew Text. So anybody who bothers to read the preface, would know that - thereby making these particular footnotes nothing more than a potential weapon to be used against uninformed Christians by the likes of JWs and other holy name nuts.


Anyone who has been a Christian for a while, and has done more studying than to just read the text of the KJV, is going to know the name of God is not the LORD, but that the translators used the LORD in these verses to protect the Holy Name from being used in vain. Pretty simple stuff, but at least you guys have more of a clue than Mormons about this issue, if not more light.


~ Theophilus




Hi Theo!   Well, the New Scoffield Reference Bible doesn't just change Scoffield's notes - it REMOVES them!   If it isn't a crime, it should be!


Worse, as I stated, I cannot find any link online that has those notes!   Considering how much is online, I find that unbelievable!  


And, since I do have the original Scoffield Reference Bible, I may as well create such a link in this thread by simply documenting what is in front of me in print in my copy - starting with Matthew chapter 1, of course. 


Hey, if anyone can find a link that already does this, please post it!


I do have Scoffield's notes according to E-Sword.   Unfortunately that source also removes Scoffield's scholarly marginal notes - so the removal is quite thorough in all the sources I have found.  


What is especially remarkable is that even where AOL search has "Jehovah" referring to Scoffield's notes - when actually clicking on those links, the name Jehovah is removed!!!


So, again, if anyone can find a link that actually has these removed marginal notes, please post the link.   I would like to fully document this crime so someone who dislikes plagiarism may be encouraged to prosecute.   And I do believe plagiarism is a crime - as in attaching Scoffield's name to a counterfeit version.


As for me, I have never taken anyone to court and I am not about to start now!


But I have always hated misrepresentation of anyone's work, so in my next posts, along with responding to you all of course, I will post some of Scoffield's marginal notes.


And, in contrast, I will also post the notes in E-Sword's references to Scofield on the specific verses in question that are not removed but are still present.   And while it will take too long to list all of the removed marginal notes - I will add others besides the actual notation of "Jehovah."

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  May 06, 2012 - 5:47AM #7
Newtonian
Posts: 12,196

OK, you all, these are some of the removed marginal notes for Matthew chapter 1 as found in my print copy of the original Scoffield Reference Bible:


The first marginal note is on Matthew 1:2.  Of course, Scoffield has the KJV in the main text, and KJV reads "Judas" in Mt. 1:2.  Scoffield uses small english letters in his marginal notes, in alphabetical order - hence this first note is "a."  In the margin, Scoffield notes:


"a Judah Gen. 29:35"


Now, KJV reading "Judas" is not wrong - the Greek here is a form of Ioudas (actually Ioudan) which is G2455 in Strong's Greek dictionary, to wit (from Strong's via E-sword):


G2455 Ἰουδάς Ioudas ee-oo-das' Of Hebrew origin [H3063]; Judas (that is, Jehudah), the name of ten Israelites; also of the posterity of one of them and its region: - Juda (-h, -s); Jude.


Note that E-Sword as well as other counterfeit Scoffield reference note sources has removed this marginal note.


As a tangent, I should note that the title "Jew" likely comes from this name.    Also you should note that the prefix of Jew, Judah (long and short forms), Judith, etc. actually have the first two letters of the Divine Name in the prefix - but most sources do not note the word Jew actually means praiser of Jehovah and simply say it means "praise" or the like!


Our literature used to note this, but not recently:


 


"Again, are you aware that you can have a part in the fulfillment of the prophecy at Zechariah 8:21-23 (AS), which says: “Ten men shall take hold . . . of the skirt of him that is a Jew, saying, We will go with you, for we have heard that God is with you”? How is that? This Jew, or praiser of Jehovah, is following Jehovah’s way." - "The Watchtower," 9/1/59, p. 531.



See my thread on Amos 9:12 - though I have not posted this point on that thread yet!  However, since the first two letters of the Divine Name are in the source name Jehudah/Judah and hence in Jew, the Jews were called by God's name.   Thus in English it is not just coincidence that Jew, Jesus and Jehovah all begin with Je!


However, I have not been able to find any links testifying to this either - though, of course, all sources showing the Hebrew letters of these names make the point obvious - they all begin with the same first two letters in Hebrew (in the long form) or the first letter only (in the short form).


It is also interesting that most sources do agree the first vowel is "e" not "a" as in Yahweh - oh, and the last vowel is "a" not "e" as in Yahweh again - i.e. Yahweh has both vowels wrong!   Of course, the names Jew, Jesus and Jehovah have the first vowel correct!  (The Je in Jew comes from the long form Jehudah, not the short form Judah).


So, again, Scoffield's original marginal note a is:


"a Judah Gen. 29.35"

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  May 06, 2012 - 6:04AM #8
Newtonian
Posts: 12,196

The second marginal note in the Scoffield Reference Bible on Matthew chapter 1 is for Matthew 1:3.


The counterfeit version of Scoffield in E-Sword removes this note, as do all the online sources for Scoffield which I could find.   Again, if any of you can find an online source that still retains Scoffield's marginal notes, please post the link!


KJV reads "Phares" in Matthew 1:3 - Scoffields note b on this word reads in the margin:


"b Pharez, Gen. 38.27"


Some other translations read "Pharez" here, while others read "Perez."  KJV is correct from the Greek again (as with Judas in Mt.1:2) - KJV is giving an English from Greek version of this name (hence: Judas, Phares), while most translations and Scoffied's marginal note give an English from Hebrew version of this name (Hence Judah, Pharez, Perez).


Scoffield's third marginal note "c" in on Matthew 1:5 which reads "Booz" in KJV which is correct as the Greek reads "Booz" (transliterated directly from Greek to English letters, of course).   Most translations read Boaz here (Darby does read Booz).


Scoffield's marginal note "c" on Mt. 1:5 reads in the margin:


"c Boaz 1 Chr. 2:11"


Again, E-Sword's counterfeit Scofield version removes this marginal note- as do all online sources I have yet been able to locate -again, if anyone can find an online source that retains Scoffield's scholarly notes, please post a link to it!


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  May 06, 2012 - 6:29AM #9
Newtonian
Posts: 12,196

OK, since E-sword removes ALL of Scoffield's marginal notes, as do all online sources I have found so far - I will stop stating that to shorten my posts.  Also, since most translations read the way Scofield notes rather than the way KJV reads, I will stop noting that fact.


The reason is obvious - Scofield is helping the Bible student to link back to the corresponding names in English from the Hebrew in the Old Testament/Hebrew Scriptures (OT) - so Judah in OT is Judah in NT, etc. (and, of course, Jehovah in OT is Jehovah in NT also - though as you will see, Scoffield notes Jehovah in OT verses where KJV removes Jehovah in OT) 


Marginal note "d" is on Mt. 1:6 where KJV reads Urias.  The note:


"d Uriah, 2 Sam. 11.3"


Since this Bible name contains the Divine Name in the suffix (which usually is translated "ah" in English as in Jehovah in English, not Yahweh) - I will note Strong's Hebrew dictionary on this name:


H223 אוּריּהוּ    אוּריּה 'ûrı̂yâh  'ûrı̂yâhû oo-ree-yaw', oo-ree-yaw'-hoo From H217 and H3050; flame of Jah; Urijah, the name of one Hittite and five Israelites: - Uriah, Urijah.


Jah is the abbreviation of the Divine Name most common in the Hebrew (yah from Hebrew to Jah in English).   Note many Bible names end in "ah" (e.g.: Jehovah - first letter plus last two letters of the Divine Name is Jah) for this reason - though not all.


Scoffield has two marginal notes for Matthew 1:7.   "e" is for Roboam in KJV and reads:


"e Rehoboam 1 Kings 11:43"


"f" is for Abia in KJV and reads: "f Abijah 2 Chron. 11:20"


Since Abijah also contains the Divine Name in the suffix, here is Strong's Hebrew dictionary note on this Hebrew name:


H29 אביּהוּ    אביּה 'ăbı̂yâh  'ăbı̂yâhû ab-ee-yaw', ab-ee-yaw'-hoo From H1 and H3050; father (that is worshipper) of Jah; Abijah, the name of several Israelite men and two Israelitesses: - Abiah, Abijah.


Notice the variable "yahu" in Hebrew - less common thatn "yah" but frequent enough to take note of.   Again, in English this becomes "Jah" and hence Abijah - as the Hebrew Y always becomes J in English (hence Jehovah is correct in English, while Yahweh is incorrect in English  but more correct from Hebrew - albeit with the wrong vowels! - btw this is because Yahweh puts the suffix abbreviation into the prefix!)

Quick Reply
Cancel
3 years ago  ::  May 06, 2012 - 6:58AM #10
Newtonian
Posts: 12,196

Scoffield marginal note "g" is on Matthew 1:8 which I have already posted on elsewhere.  KJV reads Josaphat, whereas most translations read the longer form JehoshaphaNt.  Scoffield's note reads:


"g Jehoshaphat 1 Chr. 3:10"


Note that the Greek reads "Iosaphat"


From Strong's Greek dictionary:


G2498 Ἰωσαφάτ Iōsaphat ee-o-saf-at' Of Hebrew origin [H3092]; Josaphat (that is, Jehoshaphat), an Israelite: - Josaphat.


This is another example of the short form prefix using the middle vowel of the tetragrammaton, namely "o" - and thus is further testimony that Yahweh is wrong as it omits the middle vowel "o" along with all the other errors in this spelling - while Jehovah correctly retains the middle vowel.


So, Josaphat uses the prefix "Jo" from "Io" in Greek but "Yo" in Hebrew.   The other short form prefix, as in Jesus, is "Je" which uses the first letter and first vowel of the tetragrammaton.


Btw, the same thing is true of Josaphat and Jesus in that the Greek uses the short form - Iesous in Greek for Jesus (short form prefis "Ie" in Greek to "Je" in English from "Ye" in Hebrew - the first two letters of the tetragrammaton).


Thus the name Jesus is Joshua (short form prefix Jo) and Jehoshua (long form prefix "Jeho"), again showing Yahweh is incorrect, and Jehovah is correct.   It should be noted that while KJV consistently uses a Greek to English version of the names, most translations do this only for Jesus and for virtually all other names uses the form that is actually Hebrew to English.  Of course, Jesus would be Jeshua in Hebrew to English - a form less common than Joshua but also present in the Hebrew Scriptures (OT).   However, most translations use "Lord" (from the extant Greek NT mss.) rather than Jehovah as in Scoffield's marginal notes from the Hebrew text to English - thus Scoffield is also consistent - he is simply showing the English from Hebrew versions of these names - hence Jehovah from Hebrew 3068 Yehovah (from Strong's).


Again, Scoffield notes the long form Jehoshaphat in his marginal note (long form prefix "Jeho" for the Divine Name in this name) while KJV and the Greek text use the short form prefix "Jo" (similar to Joshua short form, Jehoshua long form, Jesus short form from the Greek text).


Or, in short, names with the Divine Name in the prefix are normally translated either the short forms "Je" (where the first vowel of the tetragram is found) or "Jo" (where the middle/second vowel of the tetragram is found) or the long form "Jeho" where the first four letters of the tetragram are found.


 

Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 1 of 5  •  1 2 3 4 5 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook