Baylor University

Geroge W. Truett Theological Seminary

Baptist Identity THEO 3796
Eli Gutierrez

Analysis and Comparison of the

Baptist Faith and Message Confessions
(1925, 1963, and 2000)

Introduction

The history of Christian theology is condensed in the confessions that Christians have

written throughout the centuries. Although the basic beliefs of Christian theology have been

always the same, the confessions interpret those core principles according to their own

context. They do so in different ways and with distinct emphases in response to the

particular circumstances in which they were created. That is the importance of the study of

Christian confessions. Through them, we can see how Christians have responded to the

challenges of their own time. From the church fathers to contemporary theologians,

Christians have always struggled on how to embrace the eternal truth of God’s Word in a

changing world. They have faced social problems, political issues, historical events, and even

scientific claims. Each context threatened the Christian beliefs in a certain way and demands

a response. In this sense, Christian confessions are the witnesses of how Christians have tried

to remain faithful to the Biblical message in a hostile world. And it is the task of theologians

and historians to find out to what extent they have achieved such goal.

In this essay, I will study three Baptist confessions of the past century. These are the

Baptist Faith and Message of the Southern Baptist Convention in three different versions. I

will provide a historical background of each confession to understand in what circumstances

they were written. Then, I will compare them to see how they have changed over the years.

1
I will answer whether or not these confessions have remained true to the Christian faith in

the general and to the Baptist faith in the particular. And finally, I will present my own

personal confession. I will show that the driving force of the creation and adaptation of these

confessions is the belief about the nature and authority of the Scripture threatened by the

claims of modern science. The analysis of these three confessions will reveal that the SBC has

responded to this threat by adopting and reinforcing a conservative interpretation of the

Scriptures.

Historical Background

Until 1925 the Southern Baptist Convention had never adopted an official confession of faith.

In the 18th century, Baptists usually gave adherence to the Philadelphia Confession of 1742.

This confession was based on the Second London Confession written by Particular Baptists

in England after the Act of Toleration in 1689. It is known as the Philadelphia Confession

because it was adapted by the Philadelphia Association of Baptist Churches. As that

confession receded American Baptists churches often adhered to the New Hampshire

Confession of 1833.1 This confession was widely accepted in the 19th century. However, the

Southern Baptist Convention did not formally adopt a confession of faith until 1925. Perhaps,

this reticence was due to a strong emphasis on the sole authority of Scripture as the rule of

faith.

According to Leon McBeth the roots of the Baptist confession of 1925 may be traced

to a resolution of the SBC in 1919. 2 In that year, it was created a committee, chaired by E. Y.

1 Leon McBeth. The Baptist Heritage. Nashville, Tennessee: Broadman Press, 1987. p. 677
2 Ibidem.

2
Mullins, to reestablish communications with Baptists in Europe after World War I. 3 The

report of this committee took the form of a doctrinal summary to those with a similar mind

and faith. It was widely accepted and it helped to create a climate more favorable to

confessions. However, it was not intended to be a complete system of doctrine nor an official

declaration. Indeed, Jesse C. Fletcher argues that this document was closer to the ecumenical

movement than to fundamentalism.4 Nevertheless, it opened the door of the SBC to

confessionalism.

Roger Richards points out that this was a time of renewing interest on confessions of

faith among Baptists. 5 In 1920, the Foreign Mission Board presented a statement of beliefs

to be affirmed by foreign missionaries. In 1922, a joint meeting was held between

representatives of the Northern and Southern Conventions to explore the possibility of

issuing a joint confession of faith.6 Such confession never saw the light, but the intention was

present among American Baptists. McBeth, for his part, indicates that the Baptist World

Alliance issued a doctrinal statement in 1923.7 In sum, the 20’s was a decade in which

Baptists were opening the door to confessions.

The incident that created the urgent necessity of a formal confession within the SBC

was the rupture of the Fort Worth’s First Baptist Church with the convention. J. Frank Norris,

the Pastor at Fort Worth, attacked SBC for allegedly tolerating “modernistic” views of

Scripture. He was one of the leaders of the fundamentalist movement and finally was

excluded from SBC. However, his questions to what Baptist seminaries were teaching

3 William L. Lumpkin. Baptist Confessions of Faith. Valley Forge: Judson Press, 1959. p. 390
4 Jesse C. Fletcher. The Southern Baptist Convention. Nashville, Tennessee: Broadman & Holman Publishers,
1994. p. 140
5 Roger Richards. History of Southern Baptists. Kindle Edition. (Kindle Locations 5219-5220).
6 Idem. (Kindle Locations 5225-5226)
7 McBeth. Op. Cit. p. 678

3
brought the occasion to unify opinions about the necessity of a more complete doctrinal

statement within the denomination. The resolution was voted in 1924 and the committee

that drew up the confession in 1925 was chaired by E. Y. Mullins. They used the New

Hampshire Confession adding several articles.8

The Baptist Faith and Message of 1925 was reviewed in the 1960’s on similar

conditions of confrontation against a “modernistic” interpretation of Scripture. The episode

is the so-called “Elliot controversy”. Ralph Elliot was a Baptist scholar who in 1961 wrote a

book about the message of Genesis that caused a great controversy.9 To examine the first

book of the Bible Elliott used a historical-critical method of interpretation. He argued that

not all of it was literal history. However, he claims that it could be religious truth nonetheless.

Elliott assumed multiple authors for Genesis and concluded it was full of symbolic stories

not to be taken as literally true.10

Some of the most conservative pastors attacked the views of Elliot as ideas that

undermined the reliability of Scripture. To deal with the issue, in 1962 the SBC formed a

committee chaired by the president Herschel Hobbs to study the 1925 confession. In the

report, the committee added statements to some articles and combined some articles with

others. The result was the Baptist Faith and Message of 1963. The new confession was

intended to reflect the beliefs of the churches in the convention and to tighten the

accountability standards regarding the inerrancy of Scripture at the seminaries and SBC

institutions. It is interesting what Bill Leonard stated in 1990, that “the fundamentalist won

8 Fletcher. Op. Cit. p. 142

9 Idem. p. 206
10 Jerry Sutton, The Baptist Reformation, Nashville, Tennessee: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2000, p. 7

4
in the public arena, yet the historical-critical method continued to be utilized in many

Southern Baptist Seminaries”.11

Baptists historians agree that in the last third of the 20th century there was a

resurgence of conservativism within the SBC. In this time aroused a number of theological

controversies, especially about the correct nature and mode of inspiration of the Scripture,

that pushed toward conservativism. In 1999 the SBC formed a committee for the revision of

the 1963 Baptist Faith and Message. The next year the committee presented a report that

added several statements but not new articles. Although there were several amendments

proposed to the report, none passed. As we shall see, this document reflects the resurgence

of conservativism with statements about the nature of the Scripture and the role of women

in ministry. The adoption of the Baptist Faith and Message in its 2000 version remains as a

clear evidence that the conservative values of the local churches were publicly articulated by

the convention.

Before 1925 the general tendency within the SBC had been to reject confessions

because of the fear to creedalism. It took eighty years to the convention before adopting one

formal confession of faith. Both in 1925 and 1963 some Baptists warned about confessions

and asked to be cautious. In the preamble of the 1963 confession it is stated that the

confession is a consensus and does not intend to be complete nor final.12 Roger Richards

states that:

“When the Baptist Faith and Message was adopted in 1925, it was intended as a means
by which Southern Baptists would be able to articulate its beliefs to those outside of
the denomination, while at the same time, stating clearly to all, both within and

11 Bill J. Leonard. God’s Last and Only Hope. Grand Rapids: Eardmans Publishing Co., 1990. p. 72
12 McBeth. Op. Cit. p. 686

5
 without the Convention, while not being a binding creed upon any church or member.
It had been used in that capacity until the time of its revision in 1963.”13

For his part, Leon McBeth indicates that “what they (SBC) adopted in 1963 was a confession;

but the way that document has been used has gone far toward hardening it into a creed.”14

Although both words mean much the same they can have been used to mean different things.

“A confession designates what people do believe; a creed what they must believe.”15 What it

is clear is that the fear of creedalism within southern Baptists one hundred years ago has

become into a robust confessionalism that sometimes indeed functions as creedalism. In an

exposition of the Baptist Faith and Message 2000 Albert Mohler states that “The Southern

Baptist Theological Seminary is unembarrassed in our commitment to require all professors

to teach in accordance with and not contrary to our Abstract of Principles and the Baptist

Faith and Message.”16

Analyzing the context of each of the three version of the Baptist Faith and Message

we can see the increase of the conservative views within the denomination. Conservatism

came to be the dominant position in the SBC at the end of the 20th century and these

confessions are witnesses of such phenomenon. Now, I will compare the three confessions

to see how this process affected the articles and statements of faith and practice.

Comparison

This analysis does not pretend to be an exhaustive examination of the three confessions. It

is a comparison of them, intended to highlight those important changes such as the

13 Richards. Op. Cit. (Kindle Locations 6416-6419).

14 McBeth. Op. Cit. p. 687
15 McBeth. Op. Cit. 687
16 Albert Mohler, Jr., An Exposition from the Faculty of The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary on The Baptist

Faith and Message 2000.

6
hardening and narrowing of some views. The confession of 1963 reproduces sections of the

1925 confession without change. In other instances, as it itself says “it has substituted words

for clarity or added sentences for emphasis.” To some extent, the 2000 confession does the

same.

Before the articles, the three confessions include a preamble in which state what a

confession is and how it should be used. In this preamble, the three confessions stand against

the naturalistic view of the world. However, the 2000 confession added the word “pervasive”

to the anti-supernaturalism of the secular culture. The 2000 confession adds the emphasis

on the Church’s task and responsibility of guarding the doctrine. It says “each generation of

Christians bears the responsibility of guarding the treasury of truth that has been entrusted

to us.”

In the article about “the Scriptures”, the 1963 confession adds “it is the record of God’s

revelation of himself to man”. Also, it states that Jesus Christ is the criterion by which the

Bible is to be interpreted. The 2000 confession takes out the word “record” and modifies the

statement which regards Christ as the criterion of interpretation. In its 2000 version it says:

“All Scripture is a testimony to Christ, who is Himself the focus of divine revelation.” The

2000 confession reflects the debate among Baptists about the nature of Scripture stating: “all

Scripture is totally true and trustworthy.”

In the article about “God”, the 2000 confession adds the complete foreknowledge of

God, including the decision of his “free” creatures: “God is all powerful and all knowing; and

His perfect knowledge extends to all things, past, present, and future, including the future

decisions of His free creatures.” The 1963 confession adds three subsections for the three

persons of the Trinity. And the 2000 confession does the same. For me, it is surprising that

7
the 1925 confession did not include statements about the Son and the Holy Spirit. In the

subsection of “God the Son” the 2000 confession adds the word “substitutionary” to the death

of Christ. Also, it emphasizes that the Holy Spirit baptizes the believer in the very moment of

regeneration.

While the article about the man in the 1925 confession is titled “The Fall of Man” it is

called only “Man” in the 1963 and 2000 confessions. The later confessions add statements of

the human nature whereas the former confession only includes biblical passages. They

maintain the image of God as the reason for man’s dignity and worth. Also, they emphasize

the original state of humans as good and free. Thus, the fall and the consequent inherited

corruption to every human are not from God but from the fall. Moreover, the 2000 confession

adds “male and female” as the crowning of creation. And states that “the gift of gender is thus

part of the goodness of God's creation”, standing against the gender ideology’s agenda.

Whereas the 1925 confession includes six articles (The way of salvation, Justification,

the Freeness of salvation, Regeneration, Repentance and Faith, and Sanctification) the later

confessions only include one article with several statements. In these themes, we can find

more differences between the confessions than in other articles. The subsection of the 1963

confession about regeneration and justification is split into two different subsections in the

2000 confession. The two later confessions take away the statement of the 1925 confession

titled “The Freeness of Salvation”. In its 1925 version states: “Nothing prevents the salvation

of the greatest sinner except his own voluntary refusal to accept Jesus Christ…”. The fact that

the later confessions take away such statement perhaps reflects the increasing influence of

Calvinism among Baptists during the second half of the 20th century. However, the three

confessions maintain that salvation is a free offer to all who accepts Jesus.

8
 Two articles of the 1925 confession are combined in one single article in the two later

confessions. The 1925 confession included the article about “Perseverance”, in which was

contained a statement that was removed by the later confessions. About real Christians it

says that: “Their continuance in well-doing is the mark which distinguishes them from mere

professors.” The latter confessions keep the article of “God’s purpose of Grace” which

includes a less optimistic statement about the perseverance of Christians. It maintains the

perseverance of true Christians to the end by the power of the grace of God. However, it

acknowledges that they may fall into temptation.

The article of “The Gospel Church” in the 1925 confession is named “The Church” in

the two later confessions. However, the later confessions add the phrase “A New Testament

Church” where the 1925 confession only says “A Church”. Unlike the 1925 confession, the

later confessions emphasize that the ordinances of Christ are two. For the 1925 confession

the scriptural ordinances are bishops or elders, and deacons whereas for the later

confessions the ordinances are pastors and deacons. Moreover, while the 1925 article about

the church is short, the later confessions include statements about the democracy under

Christ, the responsibility of members, and the offices of the church. Both later confessions

state that the church is an “autonomous body”. Nevertheless, they include such phrase in

different parts of the article. Perhaps the 2000 confession is more emphatic in the autonomy

of the church including it at the very beginning of the article. Also, the 2000 confession

includes a statement in which limits the office of pastor to men.

The articles about the “Baptism and Lord’s Supper” are very similar in the three

confessions. The later confessions add the word “obedience” for the act of baptism. They also

9
add the meaning of the baptism’s symbol, which is the death and resurrection of the believer.

Furthermore, the later confessions contain a larger statement about the Lord’s Supper.

The article about the “Lord’s Day” is almost identical in the three confessions. The

only difference is that the 2000 confession does not include the statement: “and by refraining

from worldly amusements, and resting from secular employments, work of necessity and

mercy only being excepted.” Perhaps the 2000 confession moderates the statement to give

it the appearance of a principle rather than a rule.

The article titled “The Kingdom” is completely changed in the two later confessions.

Also, the later confessions combine three of the 1925 articles in one single article named

“Last Things”. However, the later confessions eliminate of this section the statements about

“The Resurrection”, “The Return of the Lord”, and “The Righteous and the Wicked”. The

article titled “Evangelism and Missions” is almost identical in the three confessions. The only

important difference is that the 2000 confession adds the statement “the Lord Jesus Christ

has commanded the preaching of the gospel to all nations.”

The article about “Education” is similar in the three confessions. The 1963 confession

does not include the intellectual nature of the Christian faith, which is included in the 1925

and 2000 confessions. Also, the 1963 and 2000 confessions include a statement about the

freedom, responsibility, and limits of Christian education. In the article about “Stewardship”,

the two later confessions add the phrase “according to the Scripture” when stating how

Christians should contribute to the advancement of the Redeemer’s cause on earth.

Furthermore, the article about “Cooperation” is almost identical in the three confessions. It

emphasizes that while Christians should organize associations or conventions for the objects

10
of the Kingdom of God, such organizations have no authority over one another nor over the

churches.

The article titled “Social Service” in the 1925 confession is titled “The Christian and

the Social Order” in the two later confessions. The 2000 confession includes a number of

statements against racism, adultery, homosexuality, pornography, and abortion. For me, it is

interesting that the confessions include industry as one of the things that Christians should

bring to the world. I wonder what scriptural passage would they use to support such

affirmation.

At the end of the article about “Peace and War”, the 1925 confession says: “We urge

Christian people throughout the world to pray for the reign of the Prince of Peace, and to

oppose everything likely to provoke war.” This statement is eliminated in the 1963

confession and the 2000 confession only includes the first half. I do not know to what extent

this article and its changes were affected by the political circumstances of each moment. The

1925 confession was created after the World War I and it opposes emphatically to war. The

1963 confession was revised in the middle of the Cold War and it eliminates the last

statements which emphasize the Christian opposition to war. Finally, the 2000 confession

was created in a moment of tension regarding relations in the Middle East and it only

incorporates the first half of the statement which opposes to war emphatically. It would be

interesting to examine how has the Baptist’s view of the war developed through the years.

One of the core principles of the Baptist Faith is the religious liberty. Perhaps this is

illustrated by the fact that the article about “Religious Freedom” is identical in the three

confessions. Finally, the last article was not included in the 1925 confession. And the 1963

confession only includes it since the amendment of 1998. This article is about “The Family”

11
and it emphasizes that the marriage is the union of a man and a woman. While it states the

equality of men and women it also affirms the submission of the woman to the man.

Analysis

One of the distinctive of the Baptist faith is the priesthood of every believer. Baptists have

been known since the beginning for their emphasis on Religious freedom which also has to

do with freedom of expression. In that sense, the circumstances in which the Baptist Faith

and Message confessions were created show that the Southern Baptist Convention has subtly

departed from the core Baptist principle in the past one hundred years. The best example is

the “Elliot controversy”. Elliot was attacked for his understanding and interpretation of the

Scripture. Perhaps some Baptists tried to steer for the middle ground, as E. Y. Mullins in the

20’s. However, at the end, the development of the SBC’s thought was oriented toward an

intolerant conservativism.

When the Southern Baptist Convention was founded in 1845 the founding president

used the phrase “no creed but the Bible” to explain why the convention did not adopt a

specific confession. Although this slogan was originated in the group led by Alexander

Campbell,17 Baptists used it for many years. However, there has been a shift in the conceiving

of confessions. The 1925 and 1963 confessions consider that confessions are “guides of

interpretations”, while the 2000 confession states that they are “instruments of doctrinal

accountability”. This means that the SBC has moved from anti-confessionalism to a

confessionalism that in some sense can be seen as creedalism.

17 Steven R. Harmon. Towards Baptist Catholicity. Eugene, Oregon: Wipf and Stock Publishers, 2006. p. 32

12
 Steven R. Harmon points out the importance of the authority of Scripture for the

Baptist thought. He says that “most Baptist confessions adopted in North America have

contained an article specifically addressing the inspiration and authority of the Scripture.”18

Moreover, he argues that the New Hampshire Confession of 1833 contains the most

influential article among Baptist confessions about Scripture.19 This article was adopted by

the SBC in the Baptist Faith and Message in all its versions. However, the 1925 confession

says that the Bible is the standard by which all “religious opinions should be tried” (emphasis

added) whereas the New Hampshire confession only said “opinions”. This modification, says

Harmon, limited the scope of biblical authority to matters of faith and practice. Lumpkin also

notes that in 1925 the convention declined to adopt an anti-evolutionary amendment about

the creation of man.20 Nevertheless, in the decades from 1925 to 2000, there was a heated

debate among Baptist about the Bible. And the tendency of the SBC has been to eliminate the

influence of moderate approaches and embrace a fundamentalist view of Scripture.

The confession of 1963 adds a statement about the Scripture that says that it is “the

record of God’s revelation”. This statement affirms that revelation precedes the Bible and as,

Harmon points out, “subtly allows interpretative approaches”.21 The 1963 confession also

adds that Jesus is the criterion by which the Bible should be interpreted. Which opened the

scope of interpretation to the contribution of contemporary scholarship. That is why the

2000 confession eliminates the word “record”, stating that the Scripture is God’s revelation

and not only its record. And also change the statement about Jesus saying that “all Scripture

18 Harmon. Op. Cit. p. 28

19 Idem. p 29
20 Lumpkin, Op. Cit. p. 391
21 Harmon, Op. Cit. p. 30

13
is a testimony to Christ, who is Himself the focus of divine revelation.” Thus, between 1925

and 2000 we can see an increasing influence of conservativism. The views about the nature

and inspiration of the Scripture have been hardened and narrowed in the Southern Baptist

thought toward a more conservative understanding.

The three confessions were created in similar situations. The threat was a

“modernistic” view of the nature and inspiration of the Scripture. James Garret maintains

that “twentieth-century Baptist confessions framed in the United States reflect controversy

concerning the Bible, especially regarding its mode of inspiration and the nature of its

inerrancy.”22 In the creation of these three confessions, we can see a hardening and

narrowing of the conservative view of Scripture. Gordon H. James notes that the doctrine of

inerrancy has never been an essential belief of the Baptist faith. He argues that none of the

Baptist confessions contains the word “inerrancy”. 23 Grady C. Cothen, for his part, holds that

the takeover of fundamentalism in the last third of the 20th century was also the arouse of

creedalism. For him, creedalism is against the priesthood of all believers and “foreign to

historic Baptist principles.”24 Thus, this process of increasing influence of the conservative

views is also a departure from the essential Baptist principles.

22 James Leo Garret, Jr., “The Authority of the bible for Baptists”, in: Southwestern Journal of Theology 37,
(Summer 1995): p. 42
23 Gordon H. James. Inerrancy and the Southern Baptist Confession. Dallas, Texas: Southern Baptist Heritage

Press, 1986. p. 49
24 Grady C. Cothen. What Happened to the Southern Baptist Convention? Macon, Georgia: Smyth & Helwys

Publishing, 1993. p.159

14
Personal Confession
This confession is intended to express what I do believe and not what anybody else must
believe. And it does not pretend to be complete nor final.

I - God.
I believe in God, creator of all things and the source of everything that exists. Good and great,
transcendent and immanent. Omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent. I believe in the only
one true God who is love, holy, merciful, just, trustful, faithful and sovereign.

II – God’s revelation.
I believe that God has revealed himself in his creation. God has revealed himself in a unique
way in the Scripture. He revealed himself in the person of Jesus Christ in the greatest and
most complete way. God is still revealing himself through reason and experience. However,
there is no greater revelation than Jesus Christ, and any other revelation should be
interpreted in the light of Scripture.

III - Jesus.
I believe in Jesus as the most perfect revelation of God. Yeshua of Nazareth was a historic,
real, and complete human in which God revealed himself in a definitive way. Jesus is the
Messiah, Lord, Savior, Son of God and full revelation of God to the world.

IV - The Holy Spirit.

I believe in the Holy Spirit as the real, present, personal and involved power of God in the
world. The Holy Spirit convicts the world of its sin, moves people to repentance, and comforts
the people of God. The Holy Spirit dwells inside every person who has believed in God and
acts in them to fulfill God’s purposes.

V - The Scripture.
I believe that God inspired a number of documents in a unique and authoritative way. These
texts where gathered by the Christian Church in its early history and came to be what we

15
know as the Bible. I believe that the Bible contains the Word of God, which is infallible in
matters of faith and Christian practice.

VI - The Christian theology.

I believed that God is still revealing himself through the study and reasoning of his people on
the Holy Scriptures. God speaks to every generation in their own language and in our days,
he uses reason and the historical-critical methods of interpretation to reveal himself to his
people.

VII - The Christian history.

I believed that God has revealed himself since the beginning of humanity. We can learn who
is him by studying what he has revealed to humanity throughout the centuries since the
beginning of history. After Jesus, the revelation of God can be seen clearly in the Christian
history and in the theology of the Christian thinkers.

VIII - The creation.

I believed that God is the source of all that exists. He created the universe good and he is
involved with his creation. The evil is not a thing but it is the absence of good, therefore it
was not created by God. Because of the evil the world is fallen and there are suffering and
injustices.

IX - The providence.
God is powerful, good and involved regarding the world. In his sovereignty, he has given
freedom to humans and that is why there is evil. However, he is in charge and everything
that happens is used by him to fulfill his ultimate purpose.

X - The humanity.
I believe that humanity was created good and in the image of God. Therefore, every single
human being regardless of gender, race, age, or condition is of inestimable value and worth.
God created humans as male and female and no more. He created them free and they are
morally responsible of their acts. Since the beginning of human history, they are born with

16
an inherited spiritual corruption that inevitably leads to personal acts of disobedience of
God. Thus, humans are in need of redemption by God’s grace in Christ through the Holy Spirit.

XI - The salvation.
I believe that Jesus Christ died for the sins of all humankind. He died and rose again
conquering death and defeating the sin. God works on every single person to give them the
opportunity to accept the free gift of salvation.

XII - The Christian life.

I believe that God works in every Christian a process of sanctification through the Holy Spirit
and with Jesus as the model of perfect holiness. Every Christian should seek an intimate and
personal relationship with God which transforms him or her into a better person every day.
Every Christian should imitate the example of Jesus of disinterested love to others,
forgiveness of the enemies, and charity to the needs. Every Christian should seek to be at
peace with everybody else. And every Christian should proclaim the Gospel to the heathen
in every opportunity.

XIII - The Church.

I believed that the Church is the body of Christ on earth. Every Christian should seek a
community with others people who share the same faith. God acts through the churches to
fulfill his purposes on earth and to establish his Kingdom. The church serves to five principal
purposes: worship God in community, integral growth of the Christians, social service to the
community, communion among the people of God, and proclamation of the Gospel of Christ.
In the context of the local church, Jesus commanded to celebrate two ordinances: Baptism
and the Lord’s Supper.

XIV - The final things.

I believe in life after death. God will judge every person and the final destiny of everyone will
be decided by him in all justice, grace, and love. And, I believe that God will intervene in a
definitive way in the human history and fulfill his purposes to the world and humanity. But
nobody knows when and exactly how this is going to happen.

17
Bioblography

Books
Cothen, Grady C. What Happened to the Southern Baptist Convention? Macon, Georgia:
Smyth & Helwys Publishing, 1993.

Dockery, David S. Southern Baptist. Consensus and Renewal. Kindle Edition.

Fletcher, Jesse C. The Southern Baptist Convention. Nashville, Tennessee: Broadman &
Holman Publishers, 1994.

James, Gordon H. Inerrancy and the Southern Baptist Confession. Dallas, Texas: Southern
Baptist Heritage Press, 1986.

Harmon, Steven R. Towards Baptist Catholicity. Eugene, Oregon: Wipf and Stock
Publishers, 2006.

Leonard, Bill J. God’s Last and Only Hope. Grand Rapids: Eardmans Publishing Co., 1990.

Lumpkin, William L. Baptist Confessions of Faith. Valley Forge: Judson Press, 1959.

McBeth, Leon. The Baptist Heritage. Nashville, Tennessee: Broadman Press, 1987.

Richards, Roger. History of Southern Baptists. Kindle Edition.

Sutton, Jerry. The Baptist Reformation. Nashville, Tennessee: Broadman & Holman
Publishers, 2000.

Journal
Herschel H. Hobbs, “The Baptist Faith and Message. Anchored but Free.” Baptist History
and Heritage, 13 no 3 Jul 1978, p. 33-40

18