1Henry Smith, “Salvation in the Face of Many Faiths: Toward a Hermeneutic of Optimism,” in Southwestern Journal of Theology, Spring 1993, pp. 26-31. Smith asks, “Why not rejoice that God the Creator and Redeemer has many and various ways of revealing himself to people, whether or not they know the specifics of the Christian gospel?” In interpreting the Cornelius event in Acts, Smith wrote, “Luke’s long story about Cornelius does not speak of the great steps God takes to get the gospel to someone who might believe; it speaks of the great steps God took to open the racially, culturally, and religiously conditioned community of early believers to God’s own redemptive work in the larger world.” Jesus’ own ministry shows that “good deeds manifest a person’s faith in God, regardless of the cognitive content of that person’s faith” [emphasis mine]. It is a matter to be appreciated that Southwestern took action to remedy the problem of having this theological position taught in its missions classes.

2E. Glenn Hinson, Jesus Christ. (N. P.: McGrath Publishing Co., 1977), p. 112.

3 Clark Pinnock, “Acts 4:12: No Other Name Under Heaven,” in Through No Fault of Their Own? (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1991), pp. 112, 113. In this article Pinnock has one paragraph entitled “If So, Why Missions?” After giving his rationale for continuing foreign mission involvement, he says, “It is easy to see the necessity of world missions on the exclusivist paradigm, and admittedly less easy in the lenient framework. But world missions can be seen to be vitally important once one moves away from the hell-fire concept of salvation to the fuller concept outlined above” (p. 115).

4Bill Leonard, “A Moderate Responds,” in History and Heritage, October 1993, p. 15. Leonard does not advocate this return but assumes that the vast majority of Southern Baptists, including a majority of “SBC evangelicals,” will be dissuaded from too vigorous a historical argument by that reminder.

5Henry Smith, SWJT, p.30.

6Paul Basden, Has Our Theololgy Changed?, p. 71.

7Walter D. Draughon, III, “The Atonement,” in Has Our Theology Changed?, p. 113. Draughon represents virtually every movement away from the influence of Calvinism as beneficial to Southern Baptist ideas on the gospel and missions. He does say, however, that Moody’s doctrine of the cross represented an over-reaction to Calvinism.

8Annual, Illinois Baptist State Association, 1907, pp. 5, 12. See also Robert J. Hastings, We Were There: An Oral History of the Illinois Baptist State Association, 1907-1976 (Springfield, IL: Illinois Baptist State Association, 1976) pp. 2-18. W. P. Throgmorton wanted no part of fellowship with “Unitarians” or with the liberalism that had infiltrated American Baptist life in Illinois through the influence of the University of Chicago under the leadership of William Rainey Harper. “Close communion” also was an important issue to Throgmorton and he considered the Southern Baptists to be “free of open communionism” (Hastings, p. 13). Throgmorton did not encourage the Landmark resistance to the organization of cooperative efforts through boards but rejected Gospel Missionism and openly espoused the legitimacy of the “Board” system. He knew, also, that the newly-formed state association needed cooperation with some organized body to engage in missions. The Northern Baptist mission societies were too influenced by liberalism and non-Baptist ideas and the Southern Baptists were free of both. The convention in Baltimore in 1910 voted to seat the messengers from Illinois.

9Annual, Baptist General Convention of Arizona, 1928, p. 27.

10Letter of Lottie Moon To H. A. Tupper, July 27, 1886.

11Letter of Tupper to Bell, January 20, 1881 on microfilm at Foreign Mission Board, Richmond, Va.

12Letter of Tupper to Boyce, May 21, 1881 on microfilm at Foreign Mission Board, Richmond, Va.

13Minutes of the Foreign Mission Board, June 21, 1881, and June 24, 1881 (pp. 434 – 436).

14Letter of Tupper to L. Moon, July 1881. Though the importance of Toy’s theological impact has been noted many places, I will not take it for granted that the reader knows it. Toy, a brilliant young teacher at Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, who formerly had taught Miss Moon also at Albemarle Female Institute, resigned from his teaching position at the seminary in 1879. This resignation came as a result of Boyce’s disallowing his teaching the new critical theories which, flowing out of Europe, especially Germany, were beginning to inundate biblical studies in America. Toy had come to believe that there were inaccuracies and discrepancies in the biblical text. Its religious message, therefore, had to be separated from its historical setting if one were to continue to believe its “religious” truth. Toy was willing to do this in order to continue his reconstruction of the biblical history on an evolutionary model. Eventually, even his advocacy of the religious message of the Bible underwent severe amendment. For Toy’s story see Bush and Nettles, Baptists and the Bible (Chicago: Moody Press, 1980) pp. 221-241. It seems that Lottie Moon was not aware of the real details of Toy’s view and felt that Southern Baptists had over-reacted. She felt very joyful with his continued attentions toward her. The Bell and Stout incident greatly sobered her appraisal of the situation, led to a more detailed study of the issue, and closed a long chapter of tragic romance in the life of Lottie Moon.

15Lottie Moon, Foreign Mission Journal, September, 1880, pp. 3, 4.

16I am under the embarassment of not knowing the volume number of this issue. I failed to copy the lead page when doing my research. The page number, however, is 139!