C. I. Scofield: Villain or Vilified? His Multifaceted Influence on American Culture

C. I. Scofield: Villain or Vilified?

His Multifaceted Influence on American Culture1

Introduction

On the Acknowledgements page of the book Progressive Covenantalism, the authors

write “‘Always reforming’ is necessary as we seek to bring all of our thoughts captive to God’s

Word, but we also realize that when treasured theological systems are questioned, resistance is

often experienced.”2

If one fast-tracks back in time to 1909, an ex-Confederate soldier, alcoholic, lawyer-

turned-minister-theologian by the name of Cyrus Scofield shook the theological world even to

this very day by questioning the status quo of the Christian Church which had been held since

the second century, even though it was not his intention to do so. The dominant consensus of the

church was known as “supersessionism,” a belief that the Christian Church has “superseded” or

replaced the Jews in God’s program. Supersessionism is in the DNA of church theology.

Cyrus Ingerson Scofield (1843-1921) is most recognized for the dissemination of

dispensationalism in The Scofield Reference Bible.3 Anyone who undertakes to compile the life

1 Tim Skinner is Assistant Professor of Bible, Theology, and Apologetics at Luther Rice College & Seminary. Professor Skinner has been associated with Luther Rice College and Seminary since 1997. His area of interest is eschatology, Israel, and Jewish studies. Professor Skinner grew up in Atlanta, Georgia and has been teaching the Bible since 1991 in Atlanta-area colleges. He is currently enrolled at Liberty University and is a member of First Baptist Church Jonesboro.

2 Stephen J. Wellum, Brent E. Parker, Progressive Covenantalism (Nashville: B & H Academic, 2016), ix.

3 Originally published as The Scofield Reference Bible (New York: Oxford University Press, 1909, 1917), the title was changed to The Scofield Study Bible. “Except for this change of

story of C. I. Scofield finds a lack of primary source material. The foremost biography of him

was written by a close personal friend and does have the advantage of being written during

Scofield’s lifetime, and checked by Scofield himself before its publication.4 On the other hand,

Joseph Canfield’s The Incredible Scofield and His Book (independently published) was designed

to destroy the reputation of Scofield and his Bible.5 That the story of Scofield’s life has only ever

been told by those aiming to canonize him or demonize him “has further muddied the waters of our understanding, making the southern minister appear as a rather shadowy figure.”6 Many

attacks on Scofield have focused on his personal life and foibles in an attempt to discredit his

teachings on dispensationalism, prophecy, the Jews, Zionism etc. These ad hominem attacks are

attacks on the person rather than addressing the substance of the teaching.

C. I. Scofield and The Scofield Reference Bible

What C. I. Scofield published in 1909 as a Bible study tool to help the average layperson

became an American cultural phenomenon. The Scofield Reference Bible’s influence on

American culture cannot be denied, as it is listed in the top 100 most influential books in

title, the book remains as it was when Dr. C. I. Scofield finished his task. Not one word has been altered, added, or deleted” (The Scofield Study Bible, p. ii). All quotations in this article will be taken from The Scofield Study Bible.

4 William BeVier, “C.I. Scofield: Dedicated and Determined,” Fundamentalist Journal (October, 1983), 37-38. See Charles Trumbull, The Life Story of C. I. Scofield (New York: Oxford University Press, 1920).

5 Joseph M. Canfield, The Incredible Scofield and His Book (Asheville, N.C: 1984). This is the most quoted source for those attacking Scofield..

6 R. Todd Mangum, Mark S. Sweetnam, The Scofield Bible: Its History and Impact on the Evangelical Church (Colorado Springs, CO: Paternoster Publishing, 2009), 2-3.

American history.7 Nothing quite like it had ever been offered to the Christian public as a study

Bible with a commentary of the Bible interwoven with the text of Scripture itself. Scofield

annotated many portions of Scripture, which made it the first Bible to include a commentary

within the same book since The Geneva Bible in 1560.8 One critic of the Scofield Bible wrote:

“It may fairly be called one of the most influential books – perhaps it is the most influential

single work thrust into the religious life of America during the twentieth Century.”9 Notable

British Bible teacher and evangelist Herbert Lockyer (author of over 100 books and pamphlets

including the “All” series), once referred to The Scofield Reference Bible as the single greatest

tool the Christian can possess.10 One critic of Scofield, dispensationalism, and the rapture notes

that The Scofield Reference Bible is perhaps the most important single document in all of

fundamentalist literature: “With sales in the millions, it became the version of the Bible through

which Americans read their scriptures throughout much of the twentieth century. Scofield’s

notes and headings were woven in with the biblical text itself, elevating dispensationalism to a

level of biblical authority that no previous writing had.”11 The Scofield Reference Bible became

the largest single force in spreading dispensational teaching.12 Ernest Sandeen adds: “His

7 William J. Petersen. Randy Petersen, 100 Christian Books that Changed the Century (Grand Rapids: Fleming H. Revell, 2000), 27-28.

8 Mangum and Sweetnam, The Scofield Bible, 54-58.

9 Albertus Pieters, The Scofield Bible (Swengal, PA: Reiner Publications, 1965), 4.

10 Herbert Lockyer, The Fascinating Study of Prophecy (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1957), 15.

11 Barbara R. Rossing, The Rapture Exposed (New York: Basic Books, 2004), 23.

12 M. James Sawyer, “Dispensationalism,” in The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Modern Christian Thought, ed. Alister E. McGrath (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishers, 1993), 108.

Reference Bible is perhaps the most influential single publication in millenarian and

fundamentalist historiography.”13 Within fifty years of its publication (1909), three million

copies of The Scofield Reference Bible were printed in the United States.14 The Scofield Bible

has never ceased to be in publication.

Mal Couch so aptly notes: “At the beginning of the twentieth century, dispensationalism

was one of the most important forces in fundamentalism and evangelicalism.”15 John Hannah,

Christian history professor at Dallas Theological Seminary commented: “The Reference Bible is

widely recognized as the most important literary production of the Bible conference/institute

movement. Scofield, by editing the text of the Bible with carefully placed notes, articulated the

dispensational understanding of Scripture for the lay audience as never before accomplished.”16

Pastors and laypersons alike were studying The Scofield Reference Bible despite the

resistance of their church associations and denominational leaders.17 One current source boldly

affirms: “Dispensationalists belong to many denominations, and they often identify with the

13 Ernest R. Sandeen, The Roots of Fundamentalism: British & American Millenarianism 1800-1930 (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1970), 222.

14 Robert G. Clouse, ed., The Meaning of the Millennium: Four Views (Downer’s Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1977), 12.

15 Mal Couch, “Foreword,” in Dictionary of Premillennial Theology, ed. Mal Couch (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1996), 9.

16 John Hannah, “Cyrus Ingerson Scofield,” in Dictionary of Premillennial Theology, ed. Mal Couch (Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1996), 392.

17 Couch, “Foreword,” 9. Cf. Albertus Pieters, The Scofield Bible (Swengel, PA: Reiner Publications, 1965), 8, 9, 22.

Scofield Reference Bible and generally interpret the Scriptures according to its notes and

outlines.”18

Dispensationalism provided the impetus for the explosion of missionary activity in the

twentieth century. It has been suggested that the striking success of the parachurch movements in

the United States is due in measure to the de-institutionalization of grace which has characterized

dispensationalism.19 The following schools and mission agencies have been traced to the driving

force of dispensationalism: Moody Bible Institute; Biola University/Talbot School of Theology

(originally The Bible Institute of Los Angeles); Dallas Theological Seminary; Grace Theological

Seminary; Campus Crusade for Christ; Jews for Jesus; Friends of Israel; SIM (Sudan Interior

Mission); Central American Mission (CAM) (founded by C. I. Scofield himself);20 Africa Inland

Mission (AIM International); Africa Evangelical Fellowship; Baptist Mid-Missions; etc.21 It was

the publication and popularity of The Scofield Reference Bible that brought recognition to the

rise of a new parachurch movement and spawned the development of a distinctive systematic

theology (even though that was not Scofield’s initial purpose).22 By the twentieth century, the

18 Elmer Towns, Thomas Ice, “Dispensationalism,” in The Harvest Handbook of Bible Prophecy, eds. Ed Hindson, Mark Hitchcock, Tim LaHaye (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 2020), 96-97.

19 Sawyer, “Dispensationalism,” 111. 20 Charles Trumbull, The Life Story of C. I. Scofield, (New York: Oxford University Press, 1920), 71.

21 Sawyer, “Dispensationalism,” 108-109.

22 Mangum and Sweetnam, The Scofield Bible, 191.

Bible conference movement, the Bible college movement, and Scofieldianism had become

virtually synonymous.23

Scofield’s purpose was not to promote a distinctive theological system. As Scofield

himself wrote, he wanted to summarize, arrange, and condense the mass of material from biblical

scholarship of the last fifty years which had been inaccessible to most Christian workers.24 His

purpose was to gather and make accessible existing teaching – not to produce doctrinal

innovation. He wanted to represent the consensus of Bible-believing interpreters of Scripture and

interact with all the major doctrines of Christianity.25 Mangum and Sweetnam suggested that

Scofield did not seem to have regarded his dispensational scheme as out of the norm and does

not seem to have anticipated these positions as becoming controversial. Rather, he seems to have

regarded his work as reflecting the consensus of a broad coalition of Bible-believing interpreters

of Scripture.26 However, of course, a theological perspective did come through. The level of

eschatological detail has drawn more attention positively and negatively than any other feature of

the Bible. The prophetical aspects, the rapture, tribulation, Armageddon are what many think of

when they hear the term “dispensationalism.”27 But the emphasis in Scofield’s notes is mostly on

23 Mangum and Sweetnam, The Scofield Bible, 181.

24 C. I. Scofield, The Scofield Study Bible (New York: Oxford University Press, 1909, 1917), iv.

25 Mangum and Sweetnam, The Scofield Bible, 54.

26 Mangum and Sweetnam, The Scofield Bible, 85.

27 Mangum and Sweetnam, The Scofield Bible, 93, 189-190, 197. Under the term, “the new Christian Zionism,” there is an attempt to distance Zionism from association with dispensationalism with an emphasis on an end-times scenario, and to avoid date setting and other

the distinction between the old and new dispensations, and that God has a plan and purpose for

Old Testament Israel.28

C. I. Scofield’s Multifaceted Influence on American Culture

His Influence on Dispensationalism

“Historically speaking, The Scofield Reference Bible was to dispensationalism what

Luther’s Ninety-Five Theses was to Lutheranism, or Calvin’s Institutes to Calvinism.”29 Mal

Couch so aptly notes: “At the beginning of the twentieth century, dispensationalism was one of

the most important forces in fundamentalism and evangelicalism.”30 According to anti-Zionist

Stephen Sizer, “Dispensationalism is one of the most influential theological systems within the

universal church today. Largely unrecognized and subliminal, it has increasingly shaped the

presuppositions of fundamentalists, evangelicals, Pentecostal and charismatic thinking

concerning Israel and Palestine over the past one hundred and fifty years.”31 As ordinary

Christians made The Scofield Reference Bible their Bible of choice, dispensationalism came to

have greater and greater influence on ground level populist Christianity. Its pragmatic usefulness

questionable teachings associated with classic dispensationalism. See Gerald McDermott, ed., The New Christian Zionism (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2016), 11.

28 Mangum and Sweetnam, The Scofield Bible, 189-190.

29 Mangum and Sweetnam, The Scofield Bible, 195.

30 Couch, “Foreword,” 9. Even critical scholars as Barbara Rossing admit such. See Barbara Rossing, The Rapture Exposed (New York: Basic Books, 2004), 23.

31 Stephen Sizer, “Dispensational Approaches to the Land,” in The Land of Promise, ed., Philip Johnston, Peter Walker (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2000), 142.

made room for its dispensational distinctives to gain influence.32 Robert G. Clouse admits: “The

extent of this influence has been so vast that in many evangelical circles today the dispensational

interpretation prevails.”33

After the 1970s interest in dispensationalism began to decline within the mainstream of

conservative evangelicalism.34 While not as popular as it was in its classical period,

dispensationalism is still widely held and propagated through various authors, schools, colleges,

seminaries, publishing houses, conferences, study Bibles, etc. The Bible institute movement

historically was almost totally dispensational and many of the leading Bible institutes, Bible

colleges and seminaries today still teach this system of interpretation. The writings of Dallas

Theological Seminary presidents and professors have been more at the forefront of promoting

dispensationalism in academia, and Charles Ryrie’s book Dispensationalism is without a doubt

the premier defense of classic dispensationalism that silenced many of its critics.35 The

movement has been popularized by Hal Lindsay’s Late Great Planet Earth, and more recently

by Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins’s fictional Left Behind series. The scheme of the ages outlined

in Scofield’s notes, has in fact, become an organic part of biblical exposition and prophetic interpretation.36 A plethora of books still on the market reveal that it is still alive and well.

32 Mangum and Sweetnam, The Scofield Bible, 133.

33 Clouse, The Meaning of the Millennium: Four Views, 12.

34 Couch, “Foreword,” 10. 35 Frank Gaebelein, “Foreword,” in Dispensationalism, Charles C. Ryrie (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2007), 7-8.

36 Mangum and Sweetnam, The Scofield Bible, 150-151, (cf. p. 173).

Dispensationalism has undergone revisions since the time of Scofield. Most theologians

make a distinction between classical dispensationalism (also known as historic

dispensationalism) as taught by Scofield, and progressive dispensationalism as modified by

Darrell Bock, Craig Blaising and Robert L. Saucy.37 However, the sine qua non of

dispensationalism as defined by Ryrie has been left intact.38 Dispensationalists of all stripes hold

that there is a national future for a literal Israel in the eternal plan of God. Progressive

dispensationalists distinguish between Israel and the Church, allowing that Israel means a

particular national people in accordance with the early covenants and promises of Scripture that

will be literally fulfilled.39

His Influence on Premillennialism

The Scofield Reference Bible has been one of the greatest tools for promoting

premillennial teaching. Prior to the Civil War evangelicals were largely postmillennialists. As

such, they believed that human effort could help bring about a Christian society that would be

37 See Robert L. Saucy, The Case for Progressive Dispensationalism (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993) and Craig Blaising, Darrell L. Bock, Progressive Dispensationalism (Wheaton: Victor Books, 1993).

38 Charles Ryrie, Dispensationalism (Chicago: Moody Publishers, 2007), 45-48. The word sine qua non refers to the “absolutely indispensable part of the system.” The sine qua non of dispensationalism is a literal national Israel. Ryrie’s classic definition was missing the “absolutely indispensable part of the definition” originally, a restored literal nation. Even Reformed theologians acknowledge a difference between Israel and the church in Romans 11, so that in itself is not a distinguishing qualifier of dispensationalism. Ryrie comes closer to clarifying this on page 51 and his footnote #43 on page 50 of his book. Ryrie also notes that the millennial kingdom will be Jewish in character and nature so a literal nation is understood (p. 46).

39 Ryrie, Dispensationalism, 28-29, 193.

followed by the return of Jesus Christ. This belief encouraged social activism. Michael Gerson

explains: “Early evangelicals were an optimistic lot who thought that human effort could help

hasten the arrival of the Second Coming.”40 However, fundamentalism (which Scofield and

others advocated) saw the current age not as progressing, but as declining into moral decadence

as secular theories of evolution and higher criticism undermined faith in the Bible. From an

evangelical standpoint, a new and better age would not be ushered in through social progress and

activism, but by the second coming of Jesus Christ. Scofield insisted that world renewal was not

the responsibility or capability of the church.41

Craig Keener and Michael Brown suggest that World War I challenged postmillennialism

which was prominent at the time and made premillennialism and dispensationalism more

palatable in the early 20th Century, a belief they admit was popularized by The Scofield

Reference Bible.42 While modernism was optimistic about social progress, dispensationalism was

pessimistic. While modernists tended to emphasize evolutionary development, dispensationalists

accentuated the supernatural and God’s intervention in the historical process.43 Scofield and

other dispensationalists placed virtually no value on human achievement, stressing instead the

40 Michael Gerson, “The Last Temptation: How Evangelicals Lost Their Way,” The Atlantic (April 2018), 46-47.

41. 41 C. I. Scofield, Addresses on Prophecy (Greenville: The Gospel Hour Inc., 1967), 38,

42 Michael L. Brown, Craig S. Keener, Not Afraid of the Antichrist (Grand Rapids: Chosen Books, Baker Publishing Group, 2019), 62.

43 Edward L. Queen II, Stephen Prothro, Gardiner H. Shattuck Jr., eds., The Encyclopedia of American Religious History (New York: Facts on File Inc.,1996), 185.

absolute sovereignty of God over history.44 Richard Mouw, a Reformed author and former

president of Fuller Theological Seminary acknowledged that dispensationalists were right

regarding their philosophy of history and that dispensationalism has been vindicated.45

Dispensationalism has proven to be tremendously influential in evangelical circles and is

the most accepted teaching about Christ’s second coming in American fundamentalist churches today.46 The second coming of Jesus Christ is one of the fundamentals of the Christian faith and

was vigorously held by Scofield. Daniel Fuller clarifies: “Postmillennialism made the event of

the millennium the great object of hope; but Darby, by his insistence on the possibility of

Christ’s coming at any moment, made Christ Himself, totally apart from any event, the great object of hope.”47 New Testament scholar George Eldon Ladd commented: “We must recognize

our debt to dispensationalism . . . . To all intents and purposes it revived the doctrine of the

second advent of Christ and made it meaningful in the churches.”48

44Queen, Prothro, and Shattuck, The Encyclopedia of American Religious History, 184. See Vern Poythress, Understanding Dispensationalists (Grand Rapids: Academie Books, 1987). Poythress acknowledges that “… (Scofield’s) emphasis on the divine plan for all history would naturally harmonize with a high view of God’s sovereignty” (p. 20). 45 Richard Mouw, “What the Old Dispensationalists Taught Me,” Christianity Today (March 6, 1995), 34.

185. 46 Queen II, Prothro, and Shattuck, The Encyclopedia of American Religious History,

47 Daniel P. Fuller, “The Hermeneutics of Dispensationalism” (Th.D. Dissertation, Northern Baptist Theological Seminary, Chicago, 1957), 92-93.

48 Sawyer, “Dispensationalism,” 111.

His Influence on Fundamentalism

Noting the era and the theological climate in which The Scofield Reference Bible was

produced, S. R. Spencer observes:

Challenged by higher criticism, Darwinism, and the prevailing cultural optimism of modernist and liberal theologies, dispensational premillennialists rallied believers to biblical fidelity and world evangelization, impelled by the shadow of prophetic signs.49

The Scofield Reference Bible was published just as the fundamentalist-modernist battles were

reaching the height of their intensity. In fundamentalist circles, Scofield’s reference Bible has been most revered because of its faithfulness to the Authorized King James Version. 50 This

loyalty to the King James Version won him a place dear to the heart of most fundamentalists.

The fundamentalist movement was boosted by Scofield and by the popularity of

premillennialism and dispensationalism, both of which were popularized and spread throughout

America by The Scofield Reference Bible. For over 100 years Scofield’s reference Bible has been

a mighty force for fundamentalism because of its strong stance and belief in the inspiration and

literal nature of the Bible and interpretation of the prophetical portions of Scripture consistent

with a literal hermeneutical interpretation. Perhaps the popularity and influence of The Scofield

49 S. R. Spencer, “Cyrus I. Scofield: (1845-1921),” in Historical Handbook of Major Biblical Interpreters, ed. Donald K. McKim (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1998), 610.

50 The editorial board of The New Scofield Reference Bible, like Scofield, originally rejected the inclusion of critical scholarship and modern textual criticism, choosing to stick with the King James Version instead of the more critical version at the time, the Revised Standard Version. See Raymond Surburg, “The New Scofield Reference Bible,” The Springfielder 31, no. 4 (1968), 17. While the scholarly world rejected Scofield’s teachings and notes, it became most popular with fundamentalists who revered the King James Version of the Bible. Scofield noted in his Bible, “Introduction: (To Be Read)” “After mature reflection it was determined to use the Authorized Version. None of the many Revisions have commended themselves to the people at large” (The Scofield Study Bible, p. iii).

Reference Bible was due to the alignment of Scofield and his editors with fundamentalism, as

these men were well-known in fundamentalist circles and exerted a great influence on American

Christianity.51

However, according to George Dollar and a book published by the fundamentalist Bob

Jones University, Scofield was never involved in the battles of fundamentalism though he

supplied preaching materials for many militant fundamentalists.52 Authors Mangum and

Sweetnam believe that perhaps it is too presumptuous to read much into a rigid distinction

between fundamentalism and evangelicalism at the time Scofield lived and participated in Bible

conferences and writing. While he certainly held the same beliefs as most fundamentalists, The

Scofield Reference Bible could hardly be described as militant.53 The authors have made it a

point to argue that Scofield was not interested in pressing for a militant theological position but

providing a commentary and Bible that would find agreement among a broad range within

orthodox Christianity. They clarify: “In the end, perhaps what Scofield illustrates is that

fundamentalism and evangelicalism were part of one cut of cloth, not distinguishable at the time

he ministered and wrote. . . . Rather, Scofield seems to have regarded his work as reflecting the

consensus of a broad coalition of Bible-believing interpreters of Scripture.”54 Scofield wanted to

51 Raymond F. Surburg, “The New Scofield Reference Bible,” The Springfielder 31, no. 4 (1968), 6-8.

52 George W. Dollar, A History of Fundamentalism in America (Greenville: Bob Jones University Press, 1973), 359.

53 Mangum and Sweetnam, The Scofield Bible, 83-85.

54 Mangum and Sweetnam, The Scofield Bible, 85. See also their comments on pages 5354, 136-137, 209, etc.

harmonize Christian orthodoxy in order to be utilized by a large swath of the church thus

crossing denominational lines.55 Although his name was associated with fundamentalism, “he was not a prominent controversialist.”56

Reformed theologian Albertus Pieters praised Scofield for his commitment to doctrinal

orthodoxy at a time when Protestant churches and denominations were abandoning the faith:

Many Christian people have been profoundly disturbed during the last forty years over the growing denial of these things, on account of the increasing modernism in the churches. Often they fail to hear any clear testimony of the gospel from their own pastors, even in Presbyterian and Methodist churches. For such people it is a relief and a most welcome assurance to take up the Scofield Bible, and to find in its notes no suggestion that the old gospel is out of date or that the great doctrines are to be doubted. This is the most vital and valuable service that the Scofield Bible has rendered to the Christian faith and life of our country, and its importance cannot easily be over-estimated. It has undergirded the faith of God’s people in a remarkable manner, and from that point of view even we who see much fault in it, and seriously deprecate its influence in other respects, must thank God for it.57

Fundamentalist forces were formidable in the 1920’s because at the center of conservative

Protestants were dispensational premillennialists who had been promoting dispensational

teaching through prophecy conferences, Bible institutes, evangelistic campaigns, and The

Scofield Reference Bible.58 Marsden confirms: “Dispensationalists emphasize that their views are

55 Mangum and Sweetnam, The Scofield Bible, 173. The authors have made a valid point in their observation that Scofield accomplished this by even bridging Pentecostalism despite the fact that Scofield’s notes do not support Pentecostal theology. See P. H. Alexander, “Scofield Reference Bible,” in Dictionary of Pentecostal and Charismatic Movements, eds. Stanley Burgess, Gary Mckee (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1988), 771.

56 Spencer, “Cyrus I. Scofield: (1845-1921),” 611. 57 Pieters, The Scofield Bible, 5-6.

58 George F. Marsden, Understanding Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdman’s Publishing Company, 1991), 57.

based on literal readings of Scripture, especially of biblical prophecies. For instance, they

predicted the literal return of the Jews to Israel, as the Bible indicates.”59 The Scofield Reference

Bible gave the American public hope that the Bible was in fact the Word of God during a critical

period in American history.

His Influence on Christian Zionism

What was also unique about The Scofield Reference Bible was its emphasis on the Jews

and the nation of Israel, especially at a time before there even was a Jewish homeland in 1948.

Scofield taught a literal fulfillment of literal prophecies made to the Jewish nation in the Old

Testament which would be fulfilled at a later time in the future, preceding and even pointing to

the second coming of Christ. John Nelson Darby, who was most influential to Scofield in this

area “Was also a pioneer in the development of a consistent Israelology, which today provides the theological basis for the majority of Christian Zionists.”60 In the context of prophetic enquiry

in which Darby moved, there was a keen interest in the Jewish question and the exact status in

the present age of God’s ancient people. Darby’s answer to the question of the Jews was vital to his interpretive system.61 Although Darby’s influence on Scofield cannot be denied, it is

interesting to note that neither in the “Introduction” to The Scofield Reference Bible, nor in any

of his writings does Scofield acknowledge his indebtedness to Darby.62 However, Miss Emily

59 Marsden, Understanding Fundamentalism and Evangelicalism, 40.

60 Thomas Ice, “Foreword,” in Paul Richard Wilkinson, For Zion’s Sake (Eugene, OR: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2007), xvii.

61 Mangum and Sweetnam, The Scofield Bible, 70.

62 Sizer, “Dispensational Approaches to the Land,” 151.

Farmer, who was assigned as Scofield’s assistant in his work on the Bible stated that the two sets

of reference books on his desk to which he referred constantly were The Synopsis of the Books of

the Bible by John Nelson Darby and The Numerical Bible by F. W. Grant.63 Scofield was also

highly influenced by his pastor in St. Louis, James H. Brookes, as well as by A. C. Gaebelein.64

According to Samuel Goldman, it was not John Nelson Darby that influenced Christian

Zionism originally, but centuries of belief preceding him with many American theologians and

politicians who already accepted the beliefs of Zionism. Goldman does admit that it was The

Scofield Reference Bible that found a receptive audience among American Christians who were

already primed for a Jewish homeland.65 Scofield was writing as early as 1909 of a Jewish return

63 John Reid, F. W. Grant: His Life, Ministry, and Legacy (Plainfield, NJ: John Reid Book Fund, 1995), 27-28.

64 Dr. A. C. Gaebelein, although the youngest in years, was perhaps the most influential of all the consulting editors of the Scofield Bible as he was the last surviving member of the editorial staff of consulting editors. Dr. Scofield considered Gaebelein superior in knowledge to any other individual in the area of prophetic teaching. See A. C. Gaebelein, The History of the Scofield Reference Bible (Spokane: Living Words Foundation, 1991), 55-56. Gaebelein’s influence on Scofield is also noted by R. Todd Mangum, Mark S. Sweetnam, The Scofield Bible: Its History and Impact on the Evangelical Church (Colorado Springs: Paternoster Publishing, 2009), 86-88. Scofield credited his pastor, James H. Brookes, with influencing him in making plain, “dispensational truth.” See also Charles Trumbull, The Life Story of C. I. Scofield (New York: Oxford University Press, 1920), 35.

65 Samuel Goldman, “The Real Reason Americans Support Israel (Hint: It’s Not AIPAC),” Tablet Magazine, February 15, 2019, 4. https://www.questia.com/magazine/1G1580545210/the-real-reason-americans-support-israel-hint-it-s. See also Gerald McDermott, Israel Matters (Grand Rapids: Brazos Press, 2017), 33-41.

to their land as promised in the Old Testament.66 He departed from the restorationist67 tradition

in his account of the Jewish return to the land of Israel. Classic restorationists assumed that Jews

would adopt Christianity before or in conjunction with that great event. Scofield pushed off

conversion to the last minute before the second coming of Christ and taught that Jews would

have returned to Palestine in unbelief. This modification made fundamentalism compatible with

Zionism in a way that the old restoration theories did not.68

Even though support for the nation of Israel is declining among millennials, it is still a

very strong tenet among evangelicals. Christians, particularly white evangelical Protestants who

populate the Southern Baptist Convention are now the largest pro-Israel constituency in the

United States.69

His Influence on Bible Study

Mangum and Sweetnam observed: “That he conceived of, completed, and published a

Bible study tool that millions across the world have testified to being a help in their

understanding of the Scriptures and their Christian walk serves as a capstone accomplishment.”70

66 Scofield, Addresses on Prophecy, 97-98; Scofield, The Scofield Study Bible, 881. See also C. I. Scofield, Dr. C. I. Scofield’s Question Box (Chicago: The Bible Institute Colportage Association, 1917), 66.

67 The term “restorationist” was the term used before Zionism became a movement at the end of the 19th Century.

68 Samuel Goldman, God’s Country (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2018), 148. Cf. C. I. Scofield, The Scofield Study Bible (New York: Oxford University Press, 1909), 1337, 881. (Emphasis in original).

69 Walker Robins, Between Dixie and Zion (Tuscaloosa: The University of Alabama Press, 2020), front cover flap.

70 Mangum and Sweetnam, The Scofield Bible, 51.

The marketing trend of study Bibles today is geared to find a study Bible that is most relevant for

the public’s situation (e.g. The Women’s Ministry Bible, the Businessman’s Bible, the African-

American Study Bible etc.). This was the starting assumption and goal of The Scofield Reference

Bible, and it was the first of its kind for American Bible readers. The Scofield Reference Bible

started it all.71 Dispensationalism has asserted the primacy of the Scriptures and the ability of the

layman to interpret and understand them.72 The Scofield Bible encouraged personal, individual

study and Bible reading. Even Albertus Pieters, a Reformed scholar who was highly critical of

Scofield gave him this fitting tribute:

Those who use this work are, in other respects, among the best Christians in our

churches, those with the deepest faith in the Holy Scriptures, and with the most sincere

devotion to the Lord. . . . Through its influence there have arisen here and there

‘tabernacles’ and ‘undenominational’ churches, composed of people no longer at home in

the established orthodox denominations, because they do not get there the sort of teaching

they find in the Scofield Bible.73

The whole series of devotional Bibles offered by Christian publishing houses, dispensationalist

or not, are rooted in the phenomenon of The Scofield Reference Bible as a Bible study tool.74

Todd Mangum suggests that its popularity was due to the fact that it made sense not only of

71 Mangum and Sweetnam, The Scofield Bible, 197 (cf. 171-173, 214).

72 Sawyer, “Dispensationalism,” 111.

73 Pieters, The Scofield Bible, 4, 5.

74 Mangum and Sweetnam, The Scofield Bible, 197-200.

biblical teaching but also of current events at the time. Scofield provided exegetical rationales for

a general belief that ethnic Israel would be revived in the last days. “It was only a matter of time

before someone would come along seeking to correlate his general ideas more specifically with

current events – Scofield Reference Bible in one hand, newspaper in the other.”75 Scofield was

especially concerned about the sane and scriptural interpretation of prophecy.

Stephen Sizer notes how the course of history turned: “Darby’s dispensational views

would probably have remained the exotic preserve of sectarian Brethren were it not for the

energetic efforts of individuals such as William Blackstone and D. L. Moody. Above all, they

were propagated by Scofield, who introduced them to a wider audience in America and the

English-speaking world through his Scofield Reference Bible.”76 Albertus Pieters, who offered

one of the first critiques of Scofield in 1938 made an interesting point along the same lines that

had Scofield published his notes separately by themselves as a commentary, rather than being

interspersed along with the biblical text itself, they would have long been forgotten.77 Whether

this is true or not or if the divine plan of God meant otherwise may be up to the theology of the

75 Mangum and Sweetnam, The Scofield Bible, 169, 175-176.

76 Sizer, “Dispensational Approaches to the Land,” 151. 77 Pieters, The Scofield Bible, 7.

individual reader.78 “Scofield’s greatest legacy is a host of Bible students, whether Scofieldians or not.”79

C. I. Scofield: Villain or Vilified?

The mention of the word “dispensation,” associated with C. I. Scofield usually evokes an

immediate reaction. To most in the Reformed theological tradition, it is a dangerous teaching that

borders on heresy and it is a primary threat to the Reformed theological system of interpretation

known as covenant theology.80

Attacks on Scofield came vehemently and furiously, as if dispensationalism was the most

dangerous heresy since the early days of the church. George Dollar observed some fifty years

ago that “The Scofield Reference Bible is openly attacked as almost an enemy of men’s souls.”81

For example, one reviewer noted in 1938:

This book must be pronounced from the standpoint of the Reformed theology, and with a view of the peace and prosperity of our churches, one of the most dangerous books on the market. Its circulation is no aid to sound Bible study and true Scriptural knowledge, but rather the contrary. Its use should be quietly and tactfully, but persistently and vigilantly

78 Vendyl Jones suggests that it was converts from Judaism (Gaebelein?) that insisted that the Scriptures should be taken literally, and that Israel was distinct from the church. It was the Jewish influence within the church which brought Christian theology out of the dark ages. See Vendyl Jones, Will the Real Jesus Please Stand? (Arlington, TX: Institute of Judaic-Christian Research, Inc., 1983), xi. The timing of these voices suggests that it may be more than coincidental if one does agree that dispensations are under the sovereign control of God as these authors have suggested and was the main point of Scofield’s belief. 79 Spencer, “Cyrus I. Scofield: (1845-1921),” 614. 80 Charles L. Feinberg, Millennialism: The Two Major Views (Winona Lake, IN: BMH Books, 2008), 79.

81 Dollar, The History of Fundamentalism in America, 268.

opposed; and our congregation should be diligently instructed in a better interpretation of the Word of God.82

The faculty of the Louisville Presbyterian Theological Seminary saw it necessary to address

Scofield in their book, The Church Faces the Isms, which they note is the most familiar, current

source of dispensationalism. Professor W. D. Chamberlain wrote: “There are some good notes in

The Scofield Reference Bible, but many that are false, even pernicious. They have become a

menace to the faith of the Church.”83 The same author had praised dispensationalists earlier in

the chapter for their intent to be completely loyal and faithful to the Scriptures.84

Chamberlain further adds: “We need badly to recover the biblical doctrine of the Church.

Dispensationalist error makes this imperative, unless we are to be carried away into an apostasy

resulting from false teaching.”85 Reformed scholar Arthur W. Pink referred to dispensationalism

as a “modern and pernicious error,” and “a device of the enemy.”86 One self-published author

82 Pieters, The Scofield Bible, 26.

83 W. D. Chamberlain, “Dispensationalism,” in The Church Faces the Isms, ed. Arnold Black Rhodes (Nashville: Abingdon Press, 1958), 109. What the author means here is that the Bible was so popular that it was forcing pastors and church officials to confront it head on as Pieters notes in his book, The Scofield Bible, 4-5.

84 W. D. Chamberlain, “Dispensationalism,” 97. What is somewhat ironic is that the professors listed dispensationalism in the section of the book they titled “Isms Predominantly Biblical!” (Part II, p. 7). 85 W. D. Chamberlain, “Dispensationalism,” 103. 86 Arthur W. Pink, The Application of the Scriptures (Canton, GA: Free Grace Publications, 1985), 2.

ended his pamphlet with a prayer: “In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ we rebuke Cyrus Ingersall (not his real middle name) Scofield in the name of our Father and Kingdom.”87

John Wick Bowman of Union Theological Seminary wrote: “It (dispensationalism) represents the most dangerous heresy currently to be found within Christian circles.”88

Chamberlain further adds: “The very zeal of dispensationalism is a part of its danger because it is

misdirected; it is bent to preserve a special status for the Jews for which the New Testament

offers no hope.”89 “Dispensationalism has become increasingly in recent years a seriously divisive factor in evangelical circles.”90 Critics have labeled it a dangerous heresy, and Scofield

has been labeled as a pawn of the Zionists, a swindler, an embezzler, a dubious character who

abandoned his wife and children.91 “It seems like a harsh judgment, but in the interest of truth it

must be uttered: Dr. Scofield in this was acting the part of an intellectual charlatan, a fraud who

pretends to knowledge which he does not possess, like a quack doctor, who is ready with a

87 Nord Davis, Jr., Cyrus I. Scofield: Pope of Premillennialism (Mountain City, TN: Sacred Truth Ministries, n.d.), 16.

88 John Wick Bowman, “The Bible and Modern Religions: Dispensationalism,” Interpretation 10 (April 1956), 172.

89 Chamberlain, “Dispensationalism,” 97. What an incredible statement this is! Even if one did not believe in a national restoration of the Jews, there is still Romans 11:26 which almost all Reformed scholars admit now is a reference to ethnic Jews and cannot refer to the church. See John Goldingay, “The Jews, the Land, and the Kingdom,” Anvil 4, no. 1 (1987), 10.

90 Oswald T. Allis, Prophecy and the Church (Philadelphia: The Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Company, 1945), vi.

91 Rossing, The Rapture Exposed, 23.

confident diagnosis in many cases where a competent physician is unable to decide.”92 Clarence

Bass, who wrote a distinguished history of dispensationalism adds: “Has not dispensationalism

contributed largely to this default of the church’s mission [of taking the gospel to the world] and

made of it a detached, withdrawn, inclusively introverted group, waiting to be raptured away

from this evil world?”93 Bass does admit that Scofield’s synthesis of Darby’s principles form the guideline for dispensational hermeneutics.94 John Gerstner calls dispensationalists “false teachers” and is concerned about their souls.95 The late apologist R. C. Sproul confesses that

dispensationalism should be discarded as being “a serious deviation from biblical Christianity.”96

Oswald Allis, a prominent Reformed author of yesteryear commented: “The result is a situation that is deplorable. It is more than deplorable; it is dangerous.”97 Texe Marrs advertises that C. I.

Scofield “was a crooked, adulterous lawyer who abandoned his wife and was paid handsomely

by New York Jewish plotters to betray the Christian faith by promoting a Jewish kingdom and an

earthly Zionist New World Order to be ruled over by a god-like Jewish race.”98

92 Pieters, The Scofield Bible, 9. The great irony is that Pieters had so praised Scofield in the very same book for his commitment to Christian orthodoxy in doctrine and was in agreement with Scofield in so many areas (see footnotes 57 and 73).

93 Clarence Bass, Backgrounds to Dispensationalism (Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdman’s Publishing Company, 1960), 149.

94 Bass, Backgrounds to Dispensationalism, 150.

95 John Gerstner, Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth (Brentwood, TN: Wolgemuth & Hyatt Publishers Inc., 1991), 262-263.

96 R. C. Sproul, “Foreword,” in John Gerstner, Wrongly Dividing the Word of Truth, xi.

97 Allis, Prophecy and the Church, vii.

98 Texe Marrs, “The Shocking Truth about C. I. Scofield,” Jesus is Savior.com, www.jesus-is-savior.com/wolves/Scofield.htm (Accessed July 23, 2019).

According to some critics, dispensational theology and the eschatological time frame that

Scofield propagated justifies racism, supports an “ethnic” cleansing of Palestinians, advocates an

exclusive Jewish political agenda, and advocates an apocalyptic eschatology likely to become a

self-fulfilling prophecy.99 Author of the emergent church movement Brian McLaren accuses

Christian Zionists and “deterministic dispensationalists” of using a discredited hermeneutic to imply that God shows favoritism and to create bigotry and prejudice against Muslims.100

McLaren equates dispensationalism and Zionist theology with the racism that was prominent in

the United States during the 1950’s and 1960’s and urged those who held these views to “have

the courage to differ when racism was acceptable and even justified in most American

churches.”101 Philip A. F. Church wonders if Christian Zionism should not be labeled a heresy.102

Left Behind theology (to a large extent patterned after dispensationalism)103 has been

labeled “a most dangerous fiction” and “promoting ‘right-wing’ politics” as Lutheran professor

Barbara Rossing claims: “The political agenda driving the Left Behind storyline is the most

dangerous aspect of the Left Behind phenomenon.”104 She further adds: “They

99 Sizer, “Dispensational Approaches to the Land,” 167. 100 Brian McLaren, “Four Points Toward Peace in the Middle East,” Sojourners Magazine, April 16, 2009. http://sojo.net/article/Four-points-toward-peace-Middle-East.com (Accessed March 24, 2020).

101 McLaren, “Four Points Toward Peace in the Middle East.” 102 Philip A. F. Church, “Dispensational Christian Zionism: A Strange but Acceptable Aberration or a Deviant Heresy?,” Westminster Theological Journal 71, no. 2 (Fall 2009).

103 Mangum and Sweetnam, The Scofield Bible, 179-180, 218-221.

104 Rossing, The Rapture Exposed, vii-xiii.

(dispensationalists) are eager for events to precipitate Jesus’ second coming and set the prophetic end-times script in motion.”105 “With their warlike end-time script, dispensationalists have

supported an all-or-nothing mentality of conquest for Israel, and they look forward to more

violence in Israel as the so-called prophetic countdown to the end approaches.”106 Mangum and

Sweetnam quip that Scofield could never have imagined that his study Bible and inferences

would one day form a major plank of American foreign policy with his views on Israel!107

The explanation from those on the political and religious Left goes something like this:

“Evangelicals believe that the rebirth of Israel is hastening not just the second coming of Christ,

but a particular kind of second coming, one that includes fire, fury, and war that will consume

the Jewish people.”108 In reality, the exact opposite is true. Romans Chapter 11 concludes with

the promise not that all Israel will be burned up in the apocalypse, but rather with the statement

that “all Israel will be saved.”109 Accusations of dispensationalist anti-Semitism are bizarre given

that the very teaching of dispensationalism – which Scofield advocated – is the restoration and

re-establishment of a Jewish nation in which Jews will be the elect people chosen by God and

105 Rossing, The Rapture Exposed, 61.

106 Rossing, The Rapture Exposed, 47.

107 Mangum and Sweetnam, The Scofield Bible, 196-197.

108 David French, “The Real Reasons American Evangelicals Support Israel,” National Review, March 22, 2019. https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/03/the-real-reasons-americanevangelicals-support- israel.

109 David French, “The Real Reasons American Evangelicals Support Israel,” 2.

blessed above all nations in a future millennial kingdom. A charge of anti-Semitism would be the

exact opposite of the teaching and beliefs of Christian Zionists who in fact love Jews.

110

But in spite of all of the hype, hysteria, and horror stories, Fuller Theological Seminary

president Richard Mouw, who grew up on a steady diet of dispensationalism and a Scofield

Bible, is on record: “I was to hear many negative things said, especially by my Reformed

colleagues, about dispensationalism’s ‘heresies.’ But the criticisms never quite rang true.”111 The

dangers of dispensationalism so badly threatening the world and church have failed to

materialize.

Social media coverage of C. I. Scofield is persistently antagonistic. Some caricatures are

patently absurd, linking his ideas with Illuminati conspiracies and nefarious Jesuit plots. A

search for “C.I. Scofield” on YouTube retrieves the following videos: “C. I. Scofield was a

Racist;” “Scofield’s Hyper-Zionists: the Useful Idiots of Talmudic Judaism;” “Dispensationalism

Debunked: C. I. Scofield is Burning in Hell;” “Was Satan Behind Scofield, Darby, and

Dispensationalism?;” “C. I. Scofield, the Illuminati, and the Plymouth Brethren;” “C. I. Scofield

and the Strange Woman;” “Exposing the Heretical Doctrines of C. I. Scofield;” “Scofield

Attacks the Resurrection of Jesus Christ;” “C. I. Scofield: False Prophet;” “The Evil of

Scofield;” “Scofield’s War on the King James Version;” “How Christians Were Hoodwinked by

the Scofield Bible;” “Scofield was a Deceiver;” “The Perverted Scofield Study Bible;”

Jews. 110 See Scofield’s Addresses on Prophecy, 55, 66-67, 94, and 42-67 for his views on the

111 Mouw, “What the Old Dispensationalists Taught Me,” 34.

“Dispensationalism Debunked 101: 100% Proof its Satanic;” “Was Scofield an Evil Man?;”

“Scofield Study Bible and the Hijacking of American Evangelicals;” “Christian Zionism and

How They Injected the Bible (with verses for Jews);” “The Roots of Christian Zionism: How

Scofield Sowed Seeds of Apostasy;” “Was C.I. Scofield a Crypto-Jew?;” “C. I. Scofield was a

Liar” ad infinitum.

Conclusion

Mangum and Sweetnam address the accusations made against Scofield by concluding:

“Someone once said, ‘God can draw a straight line with a crooked stick.’ How straight was the

line drawn through the life of Scofield and how crooked the stick of Scofield the man are points

that remain in dispute. But that the life and work of Scofield manifests the truth of this proverb

no one really can dispute.”112

Scofield’s biographer, Charles Gallaudet Trumbull, wrote about the numerous struggles

and health threats Scofield faced in the publication of The Scofield Reference Bible, a Bible that

would be a major influence on pastors, missionaries, colleges, seminaries, and ordinary

Christians and Bible students to this very day over 100 years of American history:

Of course Satan tried desperately, over and over again, to block the work upon, and prevent the publishing of, a Reference Bible which he could see was going to mean regrettable inroads upon his domain in human lives.113

Biographer Edward Reese concludes:

It is nothing short of amazing to realize that what has been the world’s most sought after study Bible was compiled by a man who was not converted until age 36, who never

112 Mangum and Sweetnam, The Scofield Bible, 51.

113 Trumbull, The Life Story of C. I. Scofield, 108.

received a formal education in theology, yet won the respect of the greatest scholars of his time.114

As of April 2021, a fundamental, independent Baptist church in Florence, South Carolina is

advertising and selling Scofield Bibles in their church bookstore for the price of $48, genuine

leather. In this small South Carolina town, C. I. Scofield, “being dead, yet speaketh.”

114 Ed Reese, The Life and Ministry of Cyrus I. Scofield, 1843-1921 (Lansing, IL: Reese Publications, n. d.), 7.