An All-round Baptist View by E.Y. Mullins

The brief editorial below entitled “An All-round Baptist View” by E. Y. Mullins was first published in The Baptist Chronicle in 1903. It was later gathered in a compilation volume published by The Sunday School Board of the Southern Baptist Convention entitled The Baptist Message: All the Gospel for All the World (1911). The introduction and Mullins’ editorial are reproduced below:

AN ALL-ROUND BAPTIST VIEW.
Editorial in Baptist Chronicle.

All of the utterances that we have read from Dr. E. Y. Mullins prove him to be not only one of the clearest thinkers, but one of the soundest Baptists of this age. In an article before us, written in 1903, we have an all-round Baptist view clearly defined, which we give as follows:

“In a sentence, Baptists stand for the whole Gospel for the whole world.

"1. Baptists stand for the whole doctrine of God. Most of the troubles among us have come from a fragmentary grasp of the truth. The Allah Akbar of Mohammed, God is great, is only a fragmentary statement about God and it has wrought out the hideous

E.Y. Mullins, Southern Baptist theologian and president of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary (1899-1928)

and tyrannical system of Mohammed. God is indeed great, but he is more. To shun error and fanaticism we must have a whole conception of God. The three persons of the Trinity must be apprehended with all of their attributes if we are to get a wholesome conception of God, one which will keep us from error on one hand and upon the other build us up in the truth.

 

“2. Baptists stand for a whole doctrine of man. We believe in Adam as the head of the race; that he fell and involved the race in sin, helpless until Jesus came to break its reign. I have heard of a great eagle which came and entangled its wings in the meshes of a fowler's net which had ensnared little birds, and then, rising in might, tore the net in shreds and liberated the captives. This poorly illustrates what Jesus did in breaking the reign and mastery of sin in the lives of the race.

“A Gospel with no sin in it is no Gospel. If sin is a cypher, as Christian Science says it is, then a cypher can do away with it, and at once there is no Gospel and no character. In short, man was made in the image of God, fell under dominion of sin, and was redeemed by the vicarious sacrifice of Jesus Christ.

“3. Baptists believe in a whole Bible. The first Seminary article is very comprehensive and satisfactory, telling as it does of the loyal faith of Baptists in the complete Bible. The teachings of the Bible make up the written will of God in and through Jesus, and, for all things of spiritual enlightenment and guidance, is absolute.

“4. Baptists believe in a whole salvation. This means all that is locked up in the finished work of redemption, the vicarious atonement, the movings of the Spirit and the repentance and faith of the individual. In one sense it is completed then, but it takes in also the final completion of the character, even unto sanctification. It involves also God's election of the sinner, and God's direction and sustaining of the sinner. His eternal principles always work out in nature and man. In the beginning, God, and in the end, God, for he is in all, through all and over all.

“To talk only of God's goodness to man is to develop man into a weakling. To have a full salvation man must have a full conception of God, of his justice and might and holiness, as well as of his other attributes. Clear conceptions of a whole salvation enable us to understand the doctrine of freedom, the doctrine of hell, and along with these of the individual's repentance, his faith, his baptism. It cuts up the very roots of infant baptism and the confessional.

“5. Baptists stand for a whole doctrine of the church. Historically, Baptists have ever held two doctrines of the church; a universal or spiritual church and a local church. So far as I know, no Baptist denies the first except an editor of whom I recently heard. The Seminary creed teaches the present existence of this universal church. If we do not agree on this subject, let us be brothers and agree to disagree. There are some Baptists who will not be a brother to any other Baptist unless he is a twin brother. In their local churches Baptists stand for baptism by immersion, and by immersion only, and that of believers. They stand for the mission of Baptists to the whole world as the Lord commanded in the great commission.

"Brethren, we need to think over again our great doctrines. I am trying to do that. They are great and glorious doctrines, given to us of God for the salvation of the world. They are the tried and trusted sword which has won us many battles through the years, a sword equal to every contest until the coming of Christ to reign over the world.''

Alexandria La.

 --E.Y. Mullins, The Baptist Message: All the Gospel for All the World. Nashville: The Sunday School Board of the Southern Baptist Convention. 1911. pp.10-13

Comments

[Mark]

Peter,

Great post.

The kind of "discussion" that is occuring regarding doctrine within the SBC, has become so personal it is making it difficult for me to identiful the kind of "Love" in 1 Corithians 13:13, among the leadership in the SBC.

Now how is it possible this doesn't rub off in local churches or for that matter in Gov't?

If Leaders in the SBC lack love toward each other, how is it possible for congregations to love one another. There appears to be no love loss in Congress or the Senate.

Even the way monetary policy in the Fed is effecting the cost effectiveness in churches and may be linked to the lack of Love I see in churches today, which exacerbates more sin among believers.

Maybe instead of focusing on doctrinal differences which is creating a toxic environment within the SBC, the focus should be on the sin of not loving our brother.

Which is something I know I'm guilty of. I also in saying this out of no disrespect toward our former Stealth New Calvinist Pastor, but I failed to see him preach on Love during his sermons for a year before I dismissed myself from hearing anymore of his messages.

[peter lumpkins]

Hi Mark,

I think you're essentially correct. It's hard to deny the skimpiness of love, at least so far as "tone" in concerned, on many SB blogs. I think we all get that; that is, the reality of it. The only thing to do about that is to monitor ourselves and not personally allow ourselves to go down the drain with others who insist on loveless actions and/or words. Easier said than done for sure.

My own practical standard is I try not to pen something about which I would be ashamed if my family or church saw and read it. Some things I see written (and have been the brunt end of by the way) I don't know how the person would justify such words to his or her church. Only this week in a sharp disagreement with a brother did he write to me "I don't think you are even regenerate." This kind of hatred-filled, judgmental slop is routine among some who even are pastors of local churches. I don't know how I could explain to one of my church members how insulting, damning insults like this toward a fellow pastor is in any way 'sanctified' language.

My resolve is I will under no uncertain terms say or write this about a brother in Christ.

[Mark]

Peter,

Thanks, oddly even a more potent question that should be asked for self-examination is:

"Whether we are in Leadership in the SBC or not, if by our actions or our own personal Methodology toward one another we struggle to embrace or practice 1 Corinthians 13:13 how is it possible that we can claim that we are saved?"

[Lydia]

Mark, I am reading the most fascinating book right now. It sorta speaks to this from another perspective as to how Christianity got so off track concerning love/justice historically. It is by Leonard Verduin, "The Anatomy of a Hybrid". (A huge problem is the demand for conformity in confession)

I think it is out of print as I could only find a used copy. I cannot tell you what a deep thinker he is.

If you have not read his book, "The Stepchildren of the Reformation", read that one, too. He is one of those treasures that got lost and then found just at the right time.

[peter lumpkins]

Lydia

Isn't is interesting that Verduin himself was a REFORMED believer? :^)

[Lydia]

Peter, Yep. NT Wright is another interesting "Reformed" writer/scholar/preacher who really makes us think.

[Adam Harwood]

I love Mullins' line: "In a sentence, Baptists stand for the whole Gospel for the whole world."

I remembered this to be similar to the theme of the worldwide evangelism conference Amsterdam 2000. So I Googled the phrase. The first entry, of course, was this blog post. The second Google entry? Dr. Russell Moore's recent inaugural speech, in which he states: "Let’s fight for the whole gospel for the whole world, equipping churches for tough questions in troubled times."

Great emphasis.

Blessings,
Adam

[Mark]

Lydia,

Thank You

[Scott Shaver]

Baptist fresh air courtesy E.Y. Mullins.

"The teachings of the Bible make up the written will of God IN and THROUGH JESUS, and for all things of spiritual enlightenment and guidance is absolute."

Additionally:

"Baptists believe in a whole salvation. This means all that is locked up in the finished work of redemption, the vicarious atonement, THE MOVINGS OF THE SPIRIT and repentance and faith of the INDIVIDUAL ....

... It cuts up the very roots of infant baptism and the confessional."

Who Dat?

[Tim Rogers]

Who Dat?

"Dat's Baptists". To be more specific, "Dat's Suthr'n Baptists"

[Scott Shaver]

Love the spelling Tim.

If things ever evolve to traditionalists forming their own collective it could be spelled exactly that way, SUTHR'N.

SUTHR'N BAPTISES ...we could run with that.

[JND]

"There are some Baptists who will not be a brother to any other Baptist unless he is a twin brother."

102 years later. . . .

[Scott Shaver]

Didn't agree with that statement when it was penned JND. Still don't.

I believe it was Mohler who coined the term "marginalization" for SBC consideration and useage.

102 years later.