The Crisis of Scripture in Southern Baptist Life: Refl ections on the Past, Looking to the Future David S. Dockery David S. Dockery has served as The Southern Baptist Convention is com- publicly at the famous 1979 Houston Con- President of Union University in Jackson, prised of over 16 million church members vention. The fi fty-year period represents Tennessee, since 1995. Previously he in about 40,000 churches in all fi fty states the period since the death of W. T. Conner, held the post of Vice President and of the United States, making it the larg- the convention’s last “shaping theologian” Academic Dean at The Southern Baptist est evangelical denomination. It is also and generally the time period since the Theological Seminary. Dr. Dockery is the often the most misunderstood Protestant rise of programmatic emphases in the author or editor of over twenty books, group in America. The SBC has tended to Convention’s so-called “glory days” (such including Theologians of the Baptist exist separately from the rest of American as the “million more in ‘54” campaign). Tradition (Broadman and Holman, Christianity because of its sectarianism, 2001) and Shaping a Christian World- its inability to separate itself from South- The SBC Theological Matrix view (Broadman and Holman, 2002). ern culture, its parochialism, and its self- During their fi rst 160 years, Southern He has written numerous articles and suffi ciency, though these indicators are Baptists have changed in several obvious book reviews and serves as the Chair- beginning to show signs of change. ways. What was once a small, Southern, man of the Board for the Council for For roughly the past twenty-fi ve years, predominately white denomination Christian Colleges and Universities in the SBC has been embroiled in a heated has become large, multi-regional, and North America. controversy concerning both theological multi-ethnic. Southern Baptists now wor- issues and denominational polity. As a ship and serve in dozens of languages result, many have become more inten- throughout the United States. tionally self-conscious about the SBC’s The fi rst hundred years were largely theological identity and its theological shaped by a handful of major theologians: heritage. We will not, however, attempt J. P. Boyce (d. 1888), Basil Manly, Jr. (d. to wrestle fully with matters of Southern 1892), John A. Broadus (d. 1895), B. H. Baptist identity and heritage. Instead, we Carroll (d. 1914), E. Y. Mullins (d. 1928), A. will focus on the doctrine of Scripture T. Robertson (d. 1934), and W. T. Conner in Southern Baptist life over the past 125 (d. 1952). From the early years of Boyce to years, as well as think about the pres- the death of Conner, Southern Baptists ent and the future in light of our past. witnessed the diminishing infl uence of We will focus on the past fi fty years in Calvinism, the decline of postmillen- general and the last twenty-five years nialism, the rise of revivalism, and an in particular. The time period of the last advancement in the understanding of twenty-five years has been chosen for Baptist origins and identity. Also there obvious reasons, having been selected was during this time the basic introduc- because it represents the time period since tion into SBC life of such matters as his- the public beginning of the battle for the torical criticism, theistic evolution, and Bible in the SBC, which was launched experiential apologetics. We could say 36 that Southern Baptist theology moved become president of Georgetown College. from a hermeneutic of divine sovereignty The fact that he returned following the with J. P. Boyce, John A. Broadus, and Toy controversy again confi rms Boyce’s Basil Manly to one of personal revelation confidence in Manly’s position on the and experience with E. Y. Mullins, and to subject. a lesser degree with W. T. Conner. From The key to understanding these two these changes a growing consensus giants is to recognize their common emerged by the middle of the twentieth opposition and response to the work of century around the moderate Calvinistic Crawford Howell Toy. Boyce and Man- theologies of Mullins and Conner with ley disagreed with Toy’s adaptation of additional programmatic, pragmatic, and historical critical methods and the prac- revivalistic emphases. Shaped by these tical implications it had for the doctrine shifts and concerns, Southern Baptists of inspiration. Manley’s own work on navigated their way through the first the doctrine of inspiration defi nes their century of their existence. But let us back position. up just a little because when the conserva- Both Boyce and Manly built their tives began to proclaim the importance understanding of Scripture on the work of an inerrant Bible in 1979, many moder- of their Princeton mentors, Archibald ates claimed that this had never been the Alexander and Charles Hodge, as well as Baptist way of understanding the nature Alvah Hovey, and J. L. Dagg, all of whom of Scripture. affi rmed the inspiration and inerrancy of Holy Scripture. In his Abstract of Systematic James P. Boyce (1827-1888) and Theology, Boyce stated that the teachings Basil Manly, Jr. (1825-1892) of the Bible “are matters of pure revela- James P. Boyce and Basil Manly, Jr. tion” and “infallible.”1 For Boyce, infalli- formed half of the original faculty of The bility meant “without error” and there is Southern Baptist Theological Seminary nothing in his writings that would imply when it opened in 1859. Boyce previously that he distinguished between infallibility taught at Furman University and Manly and inerrancy. was principal of the Female Institute of The most important and informative Richmond, Virginia. Both were equally work on the inspiration and authority adept at administrative work as well of Scripture in the shaping early years as teaching theology. While each made of Southern Baptist life was certainly important contributions in several areas, Manly’s The Bible Doctrine of Inspiration. Boyce’s major work was his Abstract of Manly argued that an uninspired Bible Systematic Theology (1887) and Manly’s would furnish no infallible standard of primary effort was his The Bible Doctrine thought, no authoritative rule for obedi- of Inspiration (1888). Both volumes were ence, and no ground for confi dence and the results of their class lectures. everlasting hope.2 Manly was careful to Manly’s milestone volume was pub- distinguish inspiration from revelation, lished as a response to the resignation which he defi ned as “that direct divine of Old Testament professor, C. H. Toy. infl uence that secures the accurate trans- Though Manly was an original member ference of truth into human language by of the faculty, he had departed in 1871 to a speaker or writer, so as to be communi- 37 cated to another.” orthodoxy was closely associated with While affi rming plenary inspiration, his doctrine of Scripture. he carefully refuted and rejected any For Carroll the Bible was understood theory of mechanical dictation because “it to be the written revelation of God. This ignores any real human authorship what- affi rmation undergirded Carroll’s entire ever in the Scriptures.” He maintained theology and exegesis of Scripture. While that infallible truth and divine authority noting the close relationship between characterizes every part of scripture. With revelation and inspiration, Carroll also almost a pedantic thoroughness, Manly went to great lengths to differentiate showed the strengths of his own position inspiration from both revelation and on biblical inspiration and refuted the illumination. challenges to his position.3 Revelation is the divine disclosure Inspiration, for Manly, was basically of hidden things. Inspiration is that equated with infallibility, a description gift of the Holy Spirit which enables that could be employed interchangeably one to select and arrange material to a defi nite end and inerrantly record with inerrancy. In doing so, Boyce and it. Illumination, another gift of the Manly, where possible, emphasized the Spirit, enables one to understand a revelation or to interpret the facts of positive aspects of science and biblical an inspired record.5 criticism. They dealt seriously with both the human authorship and the divine Carroll emphasized that inspiration origin of the Bible and kept this tension in insured a perfect standard of instruc- balance. Perhaps with less scholarly eru- tion, conviction, and a profi table work for dition, but with equal or superior impact correction and instruction in righteous- and persuasive power, B. H. Carroll trum- ness.6 peted similar notes in the southwest as the Carroll believed that inspiration did twentieth century began. not apply to the writers, but the writings. He carefully set his argument for biblical B. H. Carroll (1843-1914)4 inspiration within a Baptist context. The B. H. Carroll was the founder and beginning and concluding paragraphs of fi rst president of Southwestern Baptist his work, Inspiration of the Bible, are little Theological Seminary (1908-1914). Unlike more than a word-for-word quotation Boyce and Manly, who were educated at from Article One of the New Hampshire Princeton, Carroll lacked formal training Confession of Faith (forerunner to all in theology. Both at Baylor, where Carroll three versions of the Baptist Faith and taught prior to the founding of South- Message). western Seminary, and at Southwestern, Carroll, like Manly, but to an even Carroll taught the entirety of the English greater degree, built his case by piling Bible in four-year cycles. These lectures up evidence for the Bible’s inspiration have been published in a multiple vol- from the Bible itself. Carroll vehemently ume series entitled An Interpretation of the defended the inspiration of every word in English Bible.