I agree however it should raise a question in the minds of critical thinking people. If you have a man that is teaching something and that man has a questionable background. Another man is that had dedicated his life to Christ in all ways has an opposing view should we not challenge the first? Should we not demand evidence from scripture? And if such evidence is missing or if it must be cut and pasted from scripture should we then blindly accept it?fatherfisher wrote:How much do you really know about Cyrus Scofield ?
But . . . whether we're talking about Scofield, Darby, or Dake for that matter . . . their personal history may be interesting to read about, but it has no bearing on the validity of their teachings unless we believe in imputing guilt by association. The validity of their teachings must depend on whether or not what they taught is what the Bible teaches.
Once again and look at how the whole concept came into being. A young girl of unknown backgroung has a dream that she later shares with a preacher. That preacher has a friend that is writting a study bible and he shares it with him. They both they go about the country side promoting the concept and the acceptance of the concept almost insures a sell of the Bible.
Aside from any spiritual reality one has to see the physical realities that will would be realised in this whole thing. In all probability the names of Darby and Scofield would not be nearly as well known. Notice also none of us have the name of the young woman that had the dream on the tip of our tongues.