The Problem With The Baptist Faith and Message

What is the purpose of the BFM? Supposedly to confess what the SBC believes about particular Biblical subjects. However, now we are debating about the meaning of the BFM. Soon we will need a new confession to confess what the SBC believes about the BFM.

To know what does the BFM says about this issue (or any issue), it would be best to look at the writings of its authors when they composed it (i.e., E.Y. Mullins, H.H. Hobbs, etc.). Of course, they all don’t agree on what it means. But since the BFM2000 does not alter much of the BFM1963, then we should probably focus on Hobb’s intention. Of course, since Hobbs was a “student” of Mullins and Mullins composed the first BFM, perhaps we should focus first on Mullin’s intention in the BFM1924 and then temper that with the updated BFM1963 by Hobbs. Of course, Mullins is no longer respected in today’s SBC and both the composers of the 2000BFM and other SBC leaders blame Mullins for the “moderate” SBC. And Hobbs is also no longer appreciated because he is held responsible by many SBC leaders and 2000BFM composers for neo-orthodoxy in the SBC and the problems deemed inherent in the BFM1963 which made necessary the composition of the BFM2000.

However, since each confession was confirmed by majority vote of the SBC messengers to each of the respective “confessional conventions”, then perhaps we should look at how the messengers who voted on the BFM understood the issues when they voted their approval. Of course, then we have to decide which groups of messengers we should focus: SBC messengers in 1924, SBC messengers in 1963 or SBC messengers in 2000?

Whatever the focus of our inquiry on what the BFM says, we are still basing how we practice our faith on the unknown whims of a mostly unknown minority of people on one day in history.

Of course, since the current prologue states that “confessions are only guides in interpretation, having no authority over the conscience” then this whole issue is moot.