Intro: Which BFM: 1963 or 2000
It occurs to me, after the first post about Baptist Doctrines, that many of our readers are not aware that there is more than one accepted version of the Baptist Faith and Message (BFM). There are a couple of things we all should be aware of when discussing the BFM.
First, Baptist have never accepted a creed, which is a written statement of doctrine that is formally accepted by denomination and churches as an authoritative summary of scripture.
Secondly, the BFM is not a creed, but instead a simple summary of basic doctrines that have, over the years, come to signify what most Baptist believe.
Thirdly, Baptist have traditionally been fiercely independent in their thinking and more likely to be anti-establishment than not.
So, as we walk through these basic beliefs, we are not seeking to establish a litmus test by which we evaluate other believers. We are simply reading scripture in hopes of understanding better what Christians, who are also Baptists, need to do in order to follow God and obey the Bible.
Fourth of all, the Southern Baptist Convention felt the need to further enhance the 1963 Version of the BFM in order to better address some current social issues (such a women in ministry and the family as a cultural institution). The new version is known as the 2000 BFM. While on the surface the changes seemed to enhance this Baptist expression of faith. However, several changes concerning the role of Christ and Scripture in the faith process proved more controversial than helpful. Politically speaking, the SBC (national convention) has moved forward with the new statement, while the Texas Convention (BGCT) has remained loyal to the 1963 BFM. The division has been so pronounced that the SBC has promoted a new state convention with greater loyalty to the designs of the national convention (Southern Baptists of Texas, or SBTC).
At this point, my goal is to simply state that we will focus on the 1963 BFM, and bring in the 2000 BFM where appropriate. Of course, anyone may respond with either version, for the edification of the reader and writer alike.
First, Baptist have never accepted a creed, which is a written statement of doctrine that is formally accepted by denomination and churches as an authoritative summary of scripture.
Secondly, the BFM is not a creed, but instead a simple summary of basic doctrines that have, over the years, come to signify what most Baptist believe.
Thirdly, Baptist have traditionally been fiercely independent in their thinking and more likely to be anti-establishment than not.
So, as we walk through these basic beliefs, we are not seeking to establish a litmus test by which we evaluate other believers. We are simply reading scripture in hopes of understanding better what Christians, who are also Baptists, need to do in order to follow God and obey the Bible.
Fourth of all, the Southern Baptist Convention felt the need to further enhance the 1963 Version of the BFM in order to better address some current social issues (such a women in ministry and the family as a cultural institution). The new version is known as the 2000 BFM. While on the surface the changes seemed to enhance this Baptist expression of faith. However, several changes concerning the role of Christ and Scripture in the faith process proved more controversial than helpful. Politically speaking, the SBC (national convention) has moved forward with the new statement, while the Texas Convention (BGCT) has remained loyal to the 1963 BFM. The division has been so pronounced that the SBC has promoted a new state convention with greater loyalty to the designs of the national convention (Southern Baptists of Texas, or SBTC).
At this point, my goal is to simply state that we will focus on the 1963 BFM, and bring in the 2000 BFM where appropriate. Of course, anyone may respond with either version, for the edification of the reader and writer alike.
posted by Randy Rogers at
10:24 PM
0 Comments
