A Brief Critique of “The Trail of Blood” by J. M. Carroll

Click image for larger view

This link takes a while to load

http://ia601509.us.archive.org/7/items/TheTrailOfBlood/41344433-The-Tra…

I have heard about this book. I believe it is a favorite among IFB Pastors, and I have frequently seen it stocked at churches over the years. I also read or heard, somewhere, that it was shoddy history and not worth my time.

Does it promote Landmark-ism or the Baptist Brider madness? Is that an angle that Carroll was going for?

I have recently grabbed a host of Baptist history material, from Leon McBeth and others. I won’t be reading Trail of Tears for authentic history anytime soon, unless somebody here gives me a different take on it.

The reviewer’s bold assertion that the Baptist church cannot be traced back to the Book of Acts is interesting. If he is speaking against a Landmark or Brider mentality, then I agree with him. If he is denying faithful that Christians baptized by immersion in the Book of Acts after salvation, then he is surely wrong (Acts 2:41)!

I’ll skim through Trail of Tears tonight.

I was given Trail of Blood by my Pastor back when I was a new Christian (1969). I bought it hook line and sinker. It wasn’t until I took Church history in seminary 10 years later that I saw it as hokum. It’s convenient history but not true history.

Tyler,

Yes to both Landmarkism and Briders claiming authenticity from Trail of Blood. And yes to Jim’s characterization of it as hokum (never knew how to spell that).

Leon McBeth is excellent - accurate and fun to read (at least to a pastor and a history teacher) :) He actually has a history and a companion volume out (sorry, not able to get titles off my bookshelf right now) that I have used teaching Baptist/church history.

Chip:

I believe you’re referriing to the history volume The Baptist Heritage and the companion volume A Sourcebook for Baptist Heritage. I have them both, just haven’t read them. I love history, but haven’t delved into church history yet. I am taking a graduate survey of Christian History this semester and am really looking forward to it.

Since you’re in education, Chip, do you know of any Seminaries with good post-grad programs in Church History? I am thinking of going that route in the years to come.

I can only speak in generalities, but I have been pretty impressed with Detroit (where I almost ended up moving myself), Central in MN, Masters and SBTS. I have had quite a bot of good interaction with men from BJ, MBBC and Faith as well. Charlie would probably be a better resource on this as he seems much better informed in higher education than I am.

[TylerR]

I have heard about this book. I believe it is a favorite among IFB Pastors, and I have frequently seen it stocked at churches over the years. I also read or heard, somewhere, that it was shoddy history and not worth my time.

Does it promote Landmark-ism or the Baptist Brider madness? Is that an angle that Carroll was going for?

I have recently grabbed a host of Baptist history material, from Leon McBeth and others. I won’t be reading Trail of Tears for authentic history anytime soon, unless somebody here gives me a different take on it.

The reviewer’s bold assertion that the Baptist church cannot be traced back to the Book of Acts is interesting. If he is speaking against a Landmark or Brider mentality, then I agree with him. If he is denying faithful that Christians baptized by immersion in the Book of Acts after salvation, then he is surely wrong (Acts 2:41)!

I’ll skim through Trail of Tears tonight.

Tyler, “Trail of Tears” is a reference to the forced migration of 1000’s of Native Americans from their native lands in the Southern United States…it is a blight in American History.

Less notable, less historical, but equally appalling is the anachronistic “Trail of Blood” by Carroll. It is a wonderful piece of historical revisionism. It is completely bereft of academic research and blatantly disregards the actual details of history. Somehow, Carroll finds 2000 years of Baptist history, whereas most scholarly works focus on the 400 years of actual Baptist history. Unflappable in the singularity of his position, Carroll spends a scant 90 pages developing his thoughts. Other than that…it is a good book.

Todd:

I was not in my right mind when I wrote that!

I figured as much…I just like being “that guy” sometimes…. :)

MBBC doesn’t have a church history program (though Dave Saxon is an excellent church historian and I highly recommend any of his classes). Bob Jones does have a dedicated church history program. If I’m not mistaken, Southern also has a very good church history program.

That was the second ridiculous mistake I made in a post this afternoon. I work nights, got up a few hours ago and scanned SI while I woke up. That’s probably not a good idea without espresso in the future!

I am taking my graduate survey with Saxon this semester.

From what I hear, Trail of Blood is made up of the handouts and charts Carroll used in his lectures on the subject, Thus, it leaves a lot of what he said in person out. So, at best, it’s a Reader’s Digest version of Baptist History.

Me, back in the Dark Ages (1977-1981), I learned the Spiritual Kinship Theory as taught by Dr. Richard Weeks at Maranatha. Our text was John Christian’s A History of the Baptists. Pastoral Studies majors were encouraged to also purchase Thomas Armitage’s Baptist History. The SKT posits modern day Baptists have kinship back through the years and various movements to the churches of Acts. It rejects the “Chain Link Theory” because there are no surviving physical links back before the +/-1400s. It also rejects the “English Separatists Theory” as this would include the RCC in the Baptist lineage.

Here is a link to a Maranatha Baptist Seminary Journal article on the Landmark Movement:

http://more.mbbc.edu/journal/volume-two/the-landmark-controversy/

Fred,

Fantastic work on Landmark-ism. I’d like permission to copy the article and include that in a class I’m teaching here at SVBC in the summer.

Is it right that MBBC and Seminary’s view of Baptist History is a kind of mix between Anabaptist Kinship and English Separatist view? Is there a diversity there on the question of Baptist heritage with the faculty?

Just curious,

Straight Ahead!

jt

Myron Houghton wrote his dissertation on the subject of Lendmarkism. It is supposed to be excellent.