Did the Rothschilds Fund Scofield? (Candace Owens Debunked)
Candace relies on certain rhetoric when she talks..
Rhetoric is the art of persuasion.
I am going to point out her rhetoric as she speaks to nullify it to you.
Always pay attention to the screen. She will be paused momentarily when a new
text appears.
Candace Owens:
"Again, what is Christian Zionism? Okay? What is dispensationalism? What is it
that these people believe?"
Candace is trying to make you believe (that) this is a conspiracy that she
unveiled.
Notice the tone of her voice will change.
Candace Owens:
"And so when I started doing the research, I..."
This should be taken with a grain of salt, because what she says is a near
verbatim regurgitation of what John Rich said on the Tucker Carlson podcast.
Candace Owens:
"...went 'Aha! There is this thing called the Scofield Bible.' Most people don't
know, because you're raised, you go to church, you go to a Baptist church in the
South and you read the Bible, and the Bible's got notations, and..."
The Bible in question is a Scofield Reference Bible. Candace is attempting to
make this a universal issue; indirectly, she is telling you, 'All these people
are just blindly reading this without knowing what it says,' when in actuality,
it's a skill issue on her part.
Candace could have looked at the cover of the Scofield Bible and asked someone
or searched the internet (she was born in 1989).
Literally nothing prevented her from finding out what the Scofield Reference
Bible was or why there were annotations.
It should be meditated upon that Candace's church used a Scofield Bible. She was
never curious why her Bible was annotated, nor did she ever ask. When she found
out that it was a STUDY version, she assumed that no one else is ever curious
about their surroundings.
Candace wants you to distrust the Scofield Bible. In reality, it was a skill
issue: she simply didn't do the research.
It speaks to Candace Owens' mindset that she fails to seek out information and
blindly accepts what she is given.
It's a skill issue.
Proverbs 14:15
"The simple believeth every word: but the prudent man looketh well to his
going."
Candace Owens:
"And then you have a pastor who's telling you what all of these verses mean: the
King James Bible, and 'This is what this is what this verse means, and take it
to the bank.' And you never stop and ask yourself, 'Well, who made these
notations?'"
There is, once again, nothing stopping an average person from researching
Scofield.
Candace Owens:
"And then you have a pastor who's telling you what all of these verses mean: the
King James Bible, and 'This is what this is what this verse means, and take it
to the bank.' And you never stop and ask yourself, 'Well, who made these
notations? What inspired Scofield to make these notations?' Of course, right
when I had it on my heart to start speaking about this particular Bible, and
it's taken me a lot of time because I don't wish to offend Chris, other
Christians. I don't..."
Candace is trying to appear nice, yet she spent the entire video mocking
Christians.
She is performing this 'niceness' to create the illusion of sincerity.
Candace Owens:
"...wish to offend the people who, really a large part of everything that I've
been through in this pull that brought me back to the Catholic faith, I owe a
large part of my career to so many Christians around the world who have
supported me from the very beginning. And so I've struggled with how to have
this conversation, and I realize that there is no right moment to tell people
the truth."
Candace uses guilt as a rhetorical tool, presenting her video as a selfless
service.
She claims she is 'paying it back' because of the help she once received, and
she implies that the audience owes her gratitude for 'unveiling' this
conspiracy.
Candace Owens:
"And, of course, at the moment that I made up my mind to tell people the truth,
I then saw that Tucker Carlson had on John Rich, the country artist John..."
Candace is framing herself as a victim, claiming she was 'inconvenienced' by
John Rich because he beat her to the punch just as she was about to do it
herself.
As she puts it: 'And, of course, at the moment that I made up my mind...'"
Candace Owens:
"...Rich, and believe it or not, just a couple of weeks ago, they were talking
about the Scofield Bible. Take a listen."
John Rich: "Have you ever heard of a Scofield Bible?"
Tucker Carlson: "Yes, I have."
John Rich: "Okay. So, C. I. Scofield was a basically a student of John Darby."
Scofield was not strictly a student of John Darby. While James H. Brookes was
the greatest influence on Scofield, Scofield himself claimed that his system for
dividing the Bible came from his own independent study.
You may say, "John Rich said 'basically.'"
But how is "basically" an excuse to spread misinformation?
There is a difference between using "basically" for simplification and Rich's
usage, which is just misinformation.
[Visual Document: Academic Thesis / Biography Excerpt - Page 82]:
"Darby, Brookes, and Scofield did share strikingly similar dispensational views
though Dr. Brookes and Dr. Scofield each claimed they acquired their views based
on spiritual illumination during personal Bible studies rather than from Darby.
Even though Scofield said he learned dispensational truth from Brookes, he also
claimed in the Life Story that his intensive study in Dallas revealed the
'beginning truths' of his dispensational scheme..."
[Visual Document: The Life Story of C. I. Scofield, Pages 60–61]:
Excerpts detailing Scofield's conversion, his study under Dr. Brookes in St.
Louis, his pastorate in Dallas, his weekday evening Bible study classes, and his
publication of the 1888 work Rightly Dividing the Word of Truth.
John Rich:
"And he adopted that part of the doctrine, and he incorporated that into the
Bible. It was the first Bible ever made that had study notes with it."
It wasn't.
[Visual Document: Blue Letter Bible – Geneva Bible Study Notes & Author's
Biography]:
Explaining that the Geneva Bible (first published in 1560) was the first English
Bible to include extensive textual, theological, and explanatory study notes and
annotations directly in the page margins, preceding Scofield by more than 300
years.
John Rich:
"We have all kinds of Bibles now that have, you know, concordances and study
notes and all kinds of stuff that go along, but this was the first one that was
ever, ever made. It became so popular. Every Christian was reading it. Every
minister was reading it. And this continues today, to this exact second. My own
dad, when he went in seminary and was, you know, wanting to become a minister,
they said, 'Make sure you have a Scofield Bible now when you come to class. Have
your Scofield Bible.' Scofield Bible also adopted that entire John Darby
philosophy of Christians will not be here when the bad stuff starts to happen."
I'll skip ahead to the part where he returns to Scofield. If you want a video
debunking Rich's theology, check it out below.
(Displays thumbnail of YouTube video: '"SEVEN YEAR TRIBULATION" (Blue Collar
Study) Reloaded Study' by Don Nesbitt).
John Rich: "If I can, can I just read if we have time? That's why I love the
thought of this interview."
Tucker Carlson: "Just Oh, I do, too. But just to be clear, you're What you're
saying is the Scofield Bible, its theology is deceptive."
John Rich: "I'm saying that the same way the media takes a factual situation and
twists it and gives you a version of it, which we all know we're force-fed every
single day, that same exact tactic was used in 1830 by John Darby. And guess who
he was connected to, by the way?"
There is not a single piece of evidence linking John Darby to the Rothschilds.
The claim that John Darby worked for the Rothschilds comes from Paul Fahy, who
provided no evidence for it. He simply asserted it to be true, just as Candace
and John Rich do.
You may say, 'But Paul Fahy cited Dr. John Coleman, and that PDF was found on a
computer in the Abbottabad compound.'
The only evidence is a quote from a man WHO CLAIMED TO BE an intelligence
officer; he merely asserts it happened, but never proves it.
[Visual Document: Excerpt from John Coleman's Conspirators' Hierarchy: The Story
of the Committee of 300, p. 11, paragraph 12]:
"Darby, an employee of the British East India Company, was chosen to set up
Christian fundamentalism in the United States. Darby’s teachings were later
popularized by Cyrus Scofield through the publication of the Scofield Reference
Bible, financed by the Committee of 300 through its agents in New York and
London."
Rich got this from Paul Fahy, who got it from a guy pretending to be James Bond
with zero evidence to prove it.
This is a search for 'Rothschild' inside two theses about Darby.
The result: Darby never worked for the East India Company.
[Visual Screen Recording]:
- Searching PDF of The Shaping of John Nelson Darby's Eschatology by Peter
David Lee (University of Wales, 2004) for "rothschild" (0/0 results) and
"british east india company" (0/0 results).
- Searching PDF of John Nelson Darby: His Contributions to Contemporary
Theological Higher Education by Winston Terrance Sutherland (University of
North Texas, 2007) for "rothschild" (0/0 results) and "british east india
company" (0/0 results).
You may see claims like the Facebook post shown here, but remember: it all
traces back to a James Bond LARPer.
[Visual Document: Facebook Post]:
A viral post from We are Sii Muslim (Southeast Asia) Debate group alleging
Oxford University Press was owned by the Rothschilds, Darby's family owned Leap
Castle, and Darby worked for the East India Company.
John Rich: "The Rothschilds."
Tucker Carlson: "Interesting."
John Rich: "Yep. He was connected to the Rothschilds family, back in the day."
He goes on about Darby's theology. Not relevant here.
Candace Owens:
"And there's more, by the way. There's there's actually a lot more, and I'm
grateful that John said all of this publicly, and I'm definitely going to have
him on the show to talk about this at length, and he said a lot of important
things there. So..."
Candace is making herself an authority by saying, 'And I've said it many times.'
Candace Owens:
"...what happened is, what I've said to you many times, history is just being
erased second by second. You guys have no concept of what was happening in this
country in the early 19th century."
Earlier, Candace positioned herself as an enlightened individual who saw beyond
the veil, and just seconds ago, as an authoritative figure.
Now, she is portraying herself as knowing no more than the average viewer to
appear relatable, likable, and ultimately more trustworthy.
Candace Owens:
"I had no concept, by the way. I didn't want to speak to you as if I'm so
educated that I know more than you because I thought all the same things that
everybody thought. I thought that what I was learning in church was real, and
was authentic, and was the true history, and it really took when I was in
studying with a priest, actually..."
Candace is now trying to earn your trust by implying that you are 'enlightened'
and not like those who know nothing.
Candace Owens:
"...last year, and he looked up to me and he said, 'You know, you Americans know
nothing. You just know nothing.' And he said, 'You don't even know that your
country was founded for, by a bunch of Freemasons. Freemasons went there and
they were battling for America, and someone won, right? One of the Freemason
groups won America.'"
After using the trust she just gained by implying you aren't like the
'unenlightened' masses, she makes a false claim: that Scofield was Theodor
Herzl's 'Plan B.'
Candace Owens:
"The truth of the matter is is that the Catholic Church was approached by
Zionists, and it was approached by Theodor Herzl in Italy. He went over, Theodor
Herzl, the person that they credit with founding Israel, and he wanted the
Catholic Church to support them taking over Israel. Now, this is before World
War II, guys. We're talking about about 1904. And the Catholic Church told
Theodor Herzl to kick rocks. And that was a problem for the Christians were not
going to support them taking over Israel."
Let's look at Herzl's actual diary entry versus Candace's conspiratorial
narrative.
[Visual Document: The Complete Diaries of Theodor Herzl, Vol. IV, pp. 1601–1605
(Audience with Pope Pius X on January 25, 1904, recorded January 26, 1904, in
Rome)]:
"January 26, Rome
Yesterday I was with the Pope [Pius X]. The route was already familiar to me
from my visit with [Cardinal] Merry del Val.
Passed by the Swiss Guards who looked like giants with their halberds. The Pope
was waiting for me in his small study. He received me standing and held out his
hand, which I did not kiss. Lippay had told me I must, but I did not.
I believe that this spoiled my chances with him, for everyone who approaches him
kneels and at least kisses his hand. This hand was shown to me, but I merely
shook it.
I submitted my request briefly. He, however, perhaps annoyed by my refusal to
kiss his hand, gave me a stern, categorical answer:
'Non possumus' [We cannot]. We cannot favor this movement. We cannot prevent the
Jews from going to Jerusalem—but we could never favor it. The ground of
Jerusalem, if it were not always sacred, has been sanctified by the life of
Jesus Christ. As the head of the Church, I cannot say otherwise. The Jews have
not recognized our Lord, therefore we cannot recognize the Jewish people.
Hence the conflict between Rome and Jerusalem, represented by the two of us, was
joined.
At the beginning, to be sure, I tried to be conciliatory. I recited my little
piece about extraterritorialization, res sacrae [holy places]. It did not make
much impression on him. Gerusalemme, he said, must not get into Jewish hands.
'And its present status, Holy Father?' I ventured to ask.
'I know,' he replied, 'it is not pleasant to see the Turks in possession of our
Holy Places. We have to put up with it. But to support the Jews in the
acquisition of the Holy Places, that we cannot do.'
I said that our only concern was with the secular land; the Holy Places would be
extraterritorialized.
'Of course, they would not be subject to your authority,' he said.
'And so,' I continued, 'we are not asking for Jerusalem, but for Palestine—only
the secular land.'
'We cannot be in favor of it,' said the Pope. 'If you come to Palestine and
settle your people there, we shall have churches and priests ready to baptize
all of you.'
Count Lippay had knelt down when he entered; the Pope had motioned him to rise.
He now sat down at a small writing table, and motioned me to a chair at his
right.
I said: 'The Jewish distress is terrible...'
'I know it,' said the Pope, 'and it is painful to me. In Mantua, where I was
bishop, Jews lived in large numbers. And I have always been on friendly terms
with Jews. Only the other day two Jews were here to see me. There are other ways
of helping them than by leading them to Jerusalem.'
I said: 'Our movement is not a religious one, but a national one.'
The Pope replied: 'The Jewish religion was the foundation of our own; but it was
superseded by the teachings of Christ, and we cannot concede it any further
validity. The Jews, who ought to have been the first to acknowledge Jesus
Christ, have not done so to this day.'
'Terror and persecution,' I broke in, 'were probably not the right means for
enlightening the Jews.'
He retorted simply: 'Our Lord came without power. He came in peace. He
persecuted no one. He was persecuted. He was abandoned even by His apostles.
What He became, He became only through His Church. It took three centuries for
the Church to develop. The Jews therefore had time to acknowledge the divinity
of Christ without any pressure. But they did not do so to this day.'
'But, Holy Father, the Jews are in terrible misery. I do not know if Your
Holiness is aware of the full extent of this tragedy.'
'I know it,' said the Pope. 'It is a great sorrow to me. But we cannot favor
this movement. If you settle in Palestine, we shall prepare churches and priests
to baptize all of you.'
The interview was over. The Pope arose, took my hand once more, and dismissed
me. He spoke without bitterness, in a kindly, clear manner."
From Herzl's diary. Far less conspiratorial, isn't it?
Candace Owens:
"So they hatched out a plan. They said, 'Well, if we can't get the Catholics to
support us, we certainly can get the Protestants to support us.' And they
funded, and I'm referring to Zionists, funded the Scofield Bible."
This is false. From the origin of this lie by Robert Singer to its
solidification by Paul Fahy, no evidence has ever been produced.
There isn't a single entry in Herzl's diaries or any other historical document
to prove this event occurred.
Furthermore, here are the people who funded the Reference Bible.
[Visual Document: Scholarly Historical Records of Scofield's Benefactors]:
Primary documents listing actual donors who supported Scofield: Christian
businessmen including Arno C. Gaebelein, Alwyn Ball Jr., John T. Pirie, and a
documented $1,000 contribution from Lyman Stewart, head of Union Oil Company.
Candace Owens:
"Scofield himself was a actually a horrible man, he was a drunk, there was the
story that you hear about him coming to an aha moment. No, he left his wife and
kids, and basically somehow landed in Dallas where he met some Freemasons..."
I am at an impasse. If I spend time defending Scofield's character, the video
becomes too long and fewer people will watch, rendering the point moot.
But if I don't defend him, Candace can use this against Dispensationalism.
I've chosen a third option. Candace's entire narrative relies on the claim that
Cyrus Scofield was funded by the Rothschilds to subvert Christianity.
Everything she says is designed to convince you of this one point.
It is beside the point to defend Scofield's personal character.
According to 2 Timothy 2:15, we are told to:
'Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be
ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.'
While Darby, Brookes, and Scofield all claimed to 'rightly divide' the word, the
doctrine didn't start with them.
As early as 1755, John Wesley taught that God was not finished with Israel and
that His promises to them remained.
This is a form of Dispensationalism that predates Scofield by over a century.
(See my Ian Carroll response for more on this).
Biblically, a man's character does not always negate the truth he speaks. King
David was 'a man after God's own heart,' yet he was an adulterer who
orchestrated a murder (2 Samuel 11). Later, he failed to act when his son Amnon
raped his daughter Tamar, or when Absalom murdered Amnon in revenge (2
Samuel 13). David was deeply flawed, yet God still used him.
You don't have to like Scofield, but remember: many others (Wesley) reached
Dispensationalist conclusions over 120 years before him. Even if Scofield were
guilty of everything Candace claims, though the Rothschild/Freemason links are
demonstrably fake, he is still not the originator of this theology.
Keep in mind: she is highlighting his personal shortcomings to manipulate you
into believing a false narrative, that this theology is a Jewish conspiracy to
enslave Christians.
Candace Owens:
"They introduced him to Sam Untermyer..."
Scofield having Freemason handlers originated from Paul Fahy in 2015.
[Visual Document: Biography Excerpt & Wikipedia Page on Lyman Stewart]:
Primary sources showing Lyman Stewart's background and Christian philanthropic
donations.
Claiming Scofield worked with Untermyer just because they were members of the
same club is a massive leap. This is what 'guilt by association' looks like when
you have zero evidence.
This is exactly what it looks like when people claim Scofield and Untermyer were
co-conspirators just because they belonged to the same club.
[Visual: Map of Vienna 1913–1914]:
Showing Adolf Hitler, Sigmund Freud, Leon Trotsky, Joseph Stalin, and Emperor
Franz Joseph all living in Vienna concurrently.
Did Franz Joseph fake his death so his friends Hitler and Stalin could
orchestrate a 'fake fight' to establish a Jewish state?
Was that plan co-signed by Freud and Trotsky too?
Candace Owens:
"...very who's known I guess, you know, most notoriously for for blackmailing
Woodrow Wilson in order for him to have the Supreme Court Justice Louis
Brandeis, he's basically said, he blackmailed Woodrow Wilson to get Louis
Brandeis the Supreme Court nomination..."
I researched this claim. The story that Untermyer blackmailed Woodrow Wilson
originates with Benjamin Freedman, a Holocaust-denying Jewish convert to Roman
Catholicism. Freedman claimed to have been in the room when the blackmail
occurred, yet he never provided a single shred of evidence to prove he was
actually there.
Candace Owens:
"And Samuel Untermyer allowed this guy, Scofield, entry into the Lotus Club."*
[Visual Document: Lotos Club Minutes (New York City), April 20, 1901]:
"Meeting of the Committee on Admissions , April 20, 1901
The following gentlemen were favorably reported and recommended for election to
membership in the Club:
For Non-Resident Membership:
- Candidate: Cyrus I. Scofield
- Residence: Northfield, Massachusetts
- Profession: Clergyman / Author
- Proposed by: Horatio N. Fraser
- Seconded by: John Elderkin
Upon motion duly made and seconded, the Secretary cast a ballot in favor of
the candidate, and Dr. Cyrus I. Scofield was declared elected to
Non-Resident Membership."
(Note: Horatio N. Fraser was a manufacturing chemist and pharmacist; John
Elderkin was a journalist and one of the founders of the club. Samuel
Untermyer was neither the proposer nor the seconder).
Candace Owens:
"The Lotus Club was a remarkably Jewish club in New York City."
Candace likely found her claim in an article stating that: "Helena Jews...
maintained the Lotus Club as a primarily Jewish social space."
[Visual Document: Google Search Results / Encyclopedia of Arkansas]:
"In 1895, the Jewish community of Helena established the Lotus Club, which
served as a prominent Jewish social club and gathering place for local Jewish
families and civic leaders in Phillips County. The club hosted dances, community
dinners, and literary readings, maintaining a distinct Jewish social space in
the Arkansas Delta until its eventual dissolution in the 1920s."
You might think, "That proves it!" But there's a major problem: that article is
talking about the Lotus Club in Helena, Arkansas (established in 1895).
The club Scofield and Untermyer belonged to was the Lotos Club (spelled with an
'o') in New York City, founded in 1870.
[Visual Document: Wikipedia entry for the Lotos Club, New York City].
While the small-town Arkansas club was a Jewish social organization, the
prestigious New York Lotos Club was not.
Candace is confusing two different clubs in two different states because she
didn't check the spelling.
Candace Owens:
"The majority of the club was Jewish people supporting the Zionist cause. Out of
nowhere, this poor guy, this poor pastor, suddenly has enough money to go be
funded overseas, and he meets their friends who are running the Oxford
University Press, and they give him a book deal before the book is even
written..."
[Visual Documents: Biography Pages on Scofield's Oxford University Press
Agreement]:
Documents demonstrating that Scofield had prepared notes over several years,
traveled to England, was introduced to Henry Frowde through established
Christian publisher friends (such as Mr. Scott of Morgan & Scott), and secured
publication through standard literary channels.
Candace Owens:
"...and he's going to do notations on a Bible. And then he spends some time in
Switzerland at the same time that the Zionist Congress was held in Switzerland.
And suddenly, it took him just a couple of years after shaking hands with the
Oxford University Press, a man that had no experience, wasn't even a university
grad, had no professional background, gets a a book deal so massive that
suddenly they begin printing this Bible which featured, just as John Rich said,
notations. We're supposed to believe Scofield wrote that? How long would it take
you if you had to put notes for every verse in the Bible? How quickly could you
do that?"
I have already shown how these are false. Candace is distorting the truth.
Look at her facial expressions.
[Visual Document: Historical Table of Zionist Congresses & Route Map]:
Showing that in 1907, while Scofield was in Montreux, Switzerland, the 8th
Zionist Congress was held in The Hague, Netherlands—over 770 kilometers away
across three international borders.
[Visual Document: Excerpts from Historical Records on Scofield's Timeline]:
Explaining Scofield's work on his Bible study outlines dating back to 1882
and 1888.
As shown earlier, Scofield balanced his writing with his pastoral duties
from 1902 to 1905.
He had actually been developing the idea since 1882.
That represents 23 years of planning before he committed to the project fully
in 1905 and finished four years later in 1909.
This timeline is perfectly plausible if you actually look at the primary
sources.
Candace Owens:
"It's amazing how quickly he did it, and suddenly, because it was funded by
Zionists, it became a Bible that was the most massive in print."
She is phrasing this as secret history to make you "in on it" and not like the
unknowing.
Candace Owens:
"That's the story of the Scofield Bible, that's the real, hidden story of the
Scofield Bible."
Notice she has to emphasize three times that she is not lying to you.
Candace Owens:
"John Rich is not lying, I've never spoken to John Rich about this, and I am not
lying to you, okay? I am not lying to you."
The lady doth protest too much, methinks.
Candace Owens:
"And what they decided to do there was to boil the frog, was to take the King
James Version of the Bible and to essentially just put notations of how people
should read, so a word removed here, a word removed there, and the next thing
you know, guys, you wouldn't believe this, but Christian Zionism was born."
This is completely false. Here we have a 1769 Oxford Bible and a 1917 Scofield
Bible. The Scofield version does not remove a single word from the scripture.
Candace is lying to you. If you do not believe me, compare the 1769 Oxford to
the Scofield for yourself.
[Visual Document: Direct Side-by-Side Comparison of 1769 Oxford KJV vs. 1917
Scofield Reference Bible (Luke 16:16–17)]:
On-screen notice: "PAUSE TO READ"
| Column 1: 1769 Oxford King James Bible | Column 2: 1917 Scofield Reference Bible (Page 1102) |
| :-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | :-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| **Luke 16:16**<br>"The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it." | **Luke 16:16**<br>"The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it." |
| **Luke 16:17**<br>"And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail." | **Luke 16:17**<br>"And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than one tittle of the law to fail." |
Scofield's Actual Marginal Footnote (Printed at the bottom of the page, NOT in
the biblical text):
"[Note on Luke 16:16]: The dispensational division between the Old and New
Covenants. The law and the prophets were the divine rule until John the Baptist.
With John, the preaching of the kingdom of God began in the person of the King.
Compare Matt. 11:12–13."
Every single English word of the King James Bible text is identical. Not a
single word, clause, or verse was deleted or altered in Scofield's Bible.
Candace Owens:
"That's it. That's the truth, that is the reality, that is how Christian Zionism
was born in America, and it's credited with the Scofield Bible."
Citations:
- From Confederate Deserter to Decorated Veteran Bible Scholar: Exploring the
Enigmatic Life of C.I. Scofield 1861-1921.
https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/1380/
- The life story of C.I. Scofield by Trumbull, Charles G. (Charles
Gallaudet), 1872-1941
https://archive.org/details/lifestoryofcisco0000trum/page/n5/mode/2up
- Annotations
https://www.blueletterbible.org/geneva-study-bible/
https://www.studylight.org/commentaries/eng/gsb.html
- Paul Fahy
https://web.archive.org/web/20260000000000*/https://www.understanding-ministries.com/docs/The%20depths%20of%20deception%20right%20now.pdf
- James Bond LARPer
https://web.archive.org/web/20171208193608/https://www.cia.gov/library/abbottabad-compound/4A/4A92FD2FB4DAE3F773DB0B7742CF0F65_Coleman.-.CONSPIRATORS.HIERARCHY.-.THE.STORY.OF.THE.COMMITTEE.OF.300.R.pdf
- The shaping of John Nelson Darby’s Eschatology, Lee, Peter David (2010),
Doctoral thesis, University of Wales Trinity Saint David
https://repository.uwtsd.ac.uk/id/eprint/2235/1/2235%20Lee%2C%20P.%20Shaping%20%282010%29.pdf
- JOHN NELSON DARBY: HIS CONTRIBUTIONS TO CONTEMPORARY THEOLOGICAL HIGHER
EDUCATION, Winston Terrance Sutherland, B.S., Th.M.
https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc3609/m2/1/high_res_d/dissertation.pdf
https://www.facebook.com/groups/846070616339979/posts/1487008668912834/
- Herzl
https://ia903407.us.archive.org/2/items/the-complete-diaries-of-theodor-herzl/The%20Complete%20Diaries%20of%20Theodor%20Herzl.pdf
- Lyman Stewart
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyman_Stewart
- Untermeyer claims. Notice no evidence or proof.
https://archive.org/stream/thebenjaminh.freedmanfiles-uneditedwillardhotelspeechmuchmore-audiovideopdf/Benjamin%20Freedman%20on%20World%20Wars%20I%2C%20II%2C%20and%20III_djvu.txt
- Arkansas
https://www.isjl.org/arkansas-helena-encyclopedia.html
https://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2025/sep/17/helenas-jewish-heritage/
https://archives.cjh.org/repositories/3/resources/6377
https://www.nwaonline.com/news/2025/apr/26/website-pays-homage-to-since-vanished-jewish/
- Lotos Club
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotos_Club
- Hague to Montreux
https://www.google.com/maps/dir/Hague,+Netherlands/Montreux,+Switzerland/
- 1769 Oxford Edition
https://archive.org/details/kjv-1769-oxford-edition-full-bible/page/n763/mode/2up
- 1917 Scofield Bible
https://archive.org/details/scofieldreferenc0000revc
- If you want to buy a 1917 Scofield Bible:
https://kjv1611.org/products/the-old-scofield-study-bible-classic-edition-1917-notes-more-options-available
