The Naked Bible

Neal Pollard

It is indeed tragic that D.S. Burnet would eventually be most associated with the American Christian Missionary Society, presiding over and drafting its constitution (McCoy 215).  At one time, he published “a revised edition of (Alexander) Campbell’s first journal, the Christian Baptist” (Foster, et al, 103), a publication dedicated to the promotion of pure New Testament Christianity and to the opposition of unauthorized, man-made innovations.  Though Campbell backed the idea of a national organization to engage in mission work, many quickly opposed it on scriptural grounds.  Dabney Phillips summarizes these concisely, as follows:  “First, the society became a substitute for the church.  Second, the society caused division. Third, it was felt that the society would, and in fact did, dictate to the congregations. Fourth, the society made for a poor investment financially (nearly half of contributions going to operations and bureaucracy, NP)” (158-159).

However far off track, doctrinally, Burnet would become, his beginning was admirable.  The subject of a biographical sketch in a December 10, 1859, edition of the Philadelphia Press, the Cincinatti man identified in the article as a member of the “Disciples of Christ”  and who preferred to be called “Elder” rather than “Reverend” was a well-educated and successful man.  Though born to a Presbyterian family, he rejected the idea of original sin, infant baptism, and sprinkling taught by that denomination.  According to the article, he found greater theological kinship among the Baptists.  The teenager was asked by the Baptist denomination whether or not he believed certain of their articles of faith, told that his acceptance into the group hinged on such acceptance.  Not knowing what the Bible said about those matters, the young Burnet “said that he must therefore refuse to profess his unqualified belief in anything else than the naked Bible” (2).  What could they say?  Though their union would be short-lived, his argument was hard to overcome.

People like to study what the scholars and Bible critics say, what other preachers and professors think, what commentaries have written about things, and what contemporary human thought is about religious matters.  These are fine as subordinate aids.  However, too often they clothe the Bible with erroneous ensembles, layers of lies, and anti-biblical accessories.  It is then that one must cling to the philosophy of the young Burnet, wanting only “the naked Bible.”  If only Burnet had held fast to that view all of his life.  What a warning for us, constantly exposed to humanistic philosophy and worldly wisdom as long as we live.  We can start to dress up our Bibles with the devil’s doctrines, not even knowing we are doing it.  May we always long for plain, simple, and unadulterated, Bible truth!