1919 Bible Conference

, and the far-reaching theological scope of the discussions would generate considerable controversy.

Historical setting

The 1919 Bible Conference occurred during the height of a series of prophetic conferences held in the United States by conservative evangelicals toward the end of and soon after World War I. These prophetic conferences drew attention to the imminent second coming of Jesus, but most Adventists who attended these meetings could not accept their dispensationalist views. Out of these prophetic conferences a coalition of militant evangelicals would coalesce into what has become known historically as the Fundamentalist movement reaching its heyday during the 1920s. Despite obvious eschatological (end-time) differences, at the outset of the 1919 Bible Conference Adventist leaders would cite the example of these other prophetic conferences as an inspiration for their own meeting.

Introduction

All together there were 65 individuals in attendance accompanied by between 7 and 9 stenographers. The Conference was the first academic Bible Conference of its kind where a significant number of participants had advanced training in theology, history, and biblical languages. The meeting was by invitation only so that those present could “exercise care and good judgment” while discussing varying viewpoints. [“Report of Bible Conference,” [hereafter RBC] , July 1, 1919, 3]

Debate concerning Ellen White

While not on the original agenda, other historical and theological issues would be incorporated into the conference—-most significantly, the inspiration and role of Ellen White. George B. Thompson, field secretary of the General Conference, noted: “If we had always taught the truth [regarding Ellen White] we would not have any trouble or shock in the denomination now”. [RBC, Aug. 1, 12-13] Thompson’s statement represents a growing rift between participants over the nature and role of inspiration. Much of the debate revolved around problems in prophetic interpretation. Many of those present at this conference were personally acquainted with Ellen White and knew that her writings were far from inerrant (that inspired writings contain no mistakes) as advocated by Fundamentalists (see Biblical inerrancy). A. G. Daniells, W. W. Prescott, and H. C. Lacey would publicly denounce the concept of inerrancy in relationship to Ellen White’s writings, but differentiated her writings from those of the Bible which they argued were inerrant. [RBC, July 24, 1919, 1175]

The suggestion that Ellen White’s writings might not be inerrant appears to have met with hostility, especially by B. G. Wilkinson. Some of these younger leaders bucked against older church leaders. Interestingly, much of the debate on inspiration revolved around historical revisions in the 1911 edition of "Great Controversy". Whereas Daniells and Prescott had been intimately involved in these revisions, some of the younger delegates did not understand the nature of this work, and the far more important question of how the denomination should go about making revisions now that she was dead. D. E. Robinson, who had been Ellen White’s secretary for 13 years, and who had also assisted on the 1911 revision, referred to some “slight inaccuracies in the historical work [Great Controversy] ” and stated that Ellen White desired “to make everything accurate.” He said,:“I know that Sister White appreciated the work of Brother Prescott and others in calling attention to some of these slight inaccuracies in the historical work; and when the plates were worn out and a new edition became necessary, she did instruct us as her workers to do everything we could to make everything accurate. I think that Brother [C. C. Crisler| [C. C.] Crisler] and myself spent nearly six months in the study of Great Controversy. There were many points raised. I will say this, that not all the suggestions that were sent in by our brethren were followed. And as a personal testimony, I want to say that in all my experience with Sister White I had nothing that more distinctly confirmed my faith in the divine guidance than the work we did in the revision of Great Controversy. As Bible and history teachers, you know how hard it is to write history and how even the best historians err” (cf. Robert W. Olson, “Historical Discrepancies in the Spirit of Prophecy”. [R. W. Olson, “Historical Discrepancies in the Spirit of Prophecy” Shelf Document, Ellen G. White Estate]

It is not clear what the consensus of the delegates was toward the inspiration of Ellen White. Some were concerned that church members would become “terribly upset if they should discover that Ellen White was fallible”. [ibid., 7] No decision was officially made as to what to do, and eventually it was decided not to publish the conference transcripts. One delegate, John Isaac, remarked: “The study was a wonderful help to me. I always believed the testimonies, but quite often when I was asked questions I had to say I don’t know, I don’t understand, but . . . [now] I have received wonderful help from these meetings”. [RBC, n.d., 1088] Even Daniells remarked afterward, “I think I can truly say that at the close of this important meeting, we stand together more unitedly and firmly for all the Fundamentals than when we began the meeting”. [A. G. Daniells to Willie C. White, July 20, 1919, Ellen G. White Estate)] Yet the suspicions of J. S. Washburn and Claude Holmes, among others, were aroused, and they saw “this Bible Institute” as one of “the most terrible thing [s] that has ever happened in the history of this denomination”. [J. S. Washburn, “An Open Letter to the General Conference,” 1922] Together Holmes and Washburn would work to secure Daniells’ dismissal at the 1922 General Conference Session, as well as remove other key participants of the 1919 Bible Conference.

The conference was then nearly forgotten until 1975 when the Conference transcripts were discovered in the General Conference Archives. Transcripts excerpts were first published in 1979 by "Spectrum", ["Spectrum" 10:1 (May 1979), p.23-57 ( [http://www.spectrummagazine.org/spectrum/archive06-10/index10-1.html index] ). " [http://www.spectrummagazine.org/spectrum/archive06-10/10-1couperus.html The Bible Conference of 1919: Introduction] " by Molleurus Couperus, 23-26; " [http://www.spectrummagazine.org/spectrum/archive06-10/10-1prophecy1a.html The Use of the Spirit of Prophecy In Our Teaching of Bible and History: July 30, 1919] ", 27-44; " [http://www.spectrummagazine.org/spectrum/archive06-10/10-1prophecy2a.html Inspiration of the Spirit of Prophecy As Related to The Inspiration of the Bible: August 1, 1919] "] and are now available in their entirety from an official church website. [cite web
last =
first =
authorlink =
coauthors =
title = Report of 1919 Bible Conference
work =
publisher = General Conference of Seventh-day Adventists
date =
url = http://www.adventistarchives.org/documents.asp?CatID=19&SortBy=1&ShowDateOrder=True
format = DjVu
doi =
accessdate = 2007-02-26]

ee also

*1888 Minneapolis General Conference
*1952 Bible Conference
*History of the Seventh-day Adventist Church
*Prophetic gift of Ellen White

External links

* [http://www.sdanet.org/atissue/books/1919bc/index.htm The 1919 Bible and History Teachers Conference: Selected Materials] from SDAnet AtIssue
* [http://www.adventistarchives.org/documents.asp?CatID=19&SortBy=1&ShowDateOrder=True Report of 1919 Bible Conference] DjVulink. Adventist Archives

References