Book Critique- Making of 1963 Baptist Faith and Message WORD PDF

Preview

Summary

Download Book Critique- Making of 1963 Baptist Faith and Message WORD PDF

Description

1 The Making of the 1963 Baptist Faith and Message. By A.J. Smith. Eugene, OR: Wipf and .Stock, 2008, 201pp. +xi, $31.00 In The Making of the 1963 Baptist Faith and Message, A.J. Smith clearly states the thesis of his work when he writes, “This work will argue that Herschel Hobbs through his work on the BFM sought to avert an immediate denominational split through the reformulation of key historic Baptist doctrines, wording some broadly to allow for widely divergent interpretations without sacrificing the Convention’s conservative base” (p. 2). Upon further reading it must be noted that Smith in some ways accomplishes the task that his thesis sets out to prove, while at the same time having weaknesses in the full support of his thesis. This book critique will show that Smith succeeds in providing evidence of Herschel Hobbs’ effectiveness in averting a denominational split, but the evidence pointing to Hobbs ability to put forth wording in the 1963 . BFM that did not sacrifice the Convention’s conservative base is insufficient In seeking to prove his thesis, Smith covers a wide range of influences that affected the inspiration, formatting, adjusting, and completion of the 1963 BFM. The first of these influences that lead to the formation of a committee to makes updates and changes to the 1925 BFM was the rise in progressive thought with regards to theology. This led to the formation of the committee which sought to find a common ground upon which to stand for those conservative pastors and laypeople, as well as the advocates for progressive views within the seminaries. The growing progressivism issue mixed with societal and other doctrinal issues led to the necessity for a committee to revisit the 1925 BFM to provide clarity of doctrine and belief for Southern Baptist Churches. With Hobbs as the chair of the committee, along with other faithful men such as Ward, Moody, and Garrett, they painstakingly produced the 1963 BFM in order to, as Smith notes, “not only to tell the world what Baptists believed, but also to check doctrinal departures on .( the part of churches, church members, and pastors” (p. 83 The making of the 1963 BFM was important for more than just providing direction on what Baptist’s believed, it sought to unify the denomination in the midst of growing concerns in different areas such as society and doctrine (p. 40). In response to these concerns, Hobbs sought to produce a biblically sound confession that ran the middle course between liberalism and fundamentalism (p. 54). The evidence Smith provides for Hobbs’ effectiveness in maintaining the middle ground and not alienating anyone is one of the major strengths of his work. In chapters 7 and 8 in his writing about the changes in the BFM, multiple times Smith writes of Hobbs’ and the Committee’s ability to find “a way to word the document broadly and satisfy an increasingly diverse Southern Baptist Convention” (p. 152). Smith portrays clearly Hobbs’ ability to to effectively produce statements that were biblically true, yet with regard to theology were able to cover like a blanket the differing viewpoints that spanned the Southern Baptist .Convention The second area of strength in Smith’s work is his effectiveness in showing the ability of Hobbs and the Committee to reformulate certain key Baptist doctrines from the way in which they were portrayed in the 1925 BFM. Smith outlines the ways in which the 1963 BFM made adjustments in the key areas of Scripture, anthropology, soteriology, and ecclesiology. Most of the changes were somewhat small, but others sought to avoid incoherent theology or even the possibility of heresy. Ultimately, Smith notes that, “In the end the Committee succeeded in producing a document significantly modified from its predecessor, yet modified in such a way as .( to find ready acceptance among Southern Baptists” (p. 156 While Smith’s work does contain many strengths in supporting his thesis, he does have

2 his weaknesses as well. His first area of weakness is in his inability to sufficiently prove that Hobbs and the Committee were able to uphold conservative doctrinal views. Smith quotes Hobbs in saying of his intentions in conducting the 1963 BFM, “Let me assure you that should any changes be made in the 1925 Statement they will not be toward liberalism” (Smith 2008, 54), but it seems that Hobbs does have some willingness to allow teachings outside of the conservative window to creep into the final statement. One example of this is in the statement on man and the fall. Smith points out that although conservative voices like A.H. Strong stood in opposition to the New Haven School of Theology’s view of sin, he writes that the 1963 BFM “reflected the influence of the New Haven Theology on sin and the fall, as well as the influence of Charles Finney” (p. 143). While the Committee sought to broadly word the document to satisfy the diverse opinions of the SBC, it must be realized that this shift away from theological conservatism would put a strain on the relationship of the conservative base and the Committee .of the SBC This leads into the second weakness in Smith’s pursuit of proving his thesis, which is his inability to fully prove that the conservative base was not somewhat sacrificed in pursuit of vague and diverse views that were permeating the SBC. Smith himself even notes that, “Inasmuch as Hobbs’s intention was for the confession to be an expression of what Southern Baptists in 1963 believed, the BFM reflected shifts in Baptist thinking and practice during the first half of the twentieth century” (p. 152). In his conclusion, Smith notes that “Hobbs never intended to sacrifice the Convention’s conservative base” (p. 155) with the insinuation being that while this was not his intention, it was the reality. Smith ultimately recognizes the Committee’s lean away from the conservative base and historical Baptist voices in an attempt to include .( diverse opinions lead to the Conservative resurgence in 1979 (p. 156 Smith’s work in providing the history in the making of the 1963 BFM is thorough, detailed, and effective in painting a clear picture of the time period, the necessity for revisiting and modifying the 1925 BFM, and the issues that were being faced by the Convention during this time. He does well in proving Hobbs’ and the Committee’s effectiveness in avoiding a denominational split by reformulating key Baptist doctrines. Yet his shortcoming is in his claim that Hobbs and the Committee were able to avoid sacrificing the conservative base in the process. While the blowback from conservatives may not have been immediate with regards to . their action, it did soon lead to a conservative push in the years to come Matthew Dickey Liberty University, Lynchburg, VA...