Pages

Sunday, January 25, 2015

Timothy Tow

Only a handful of Bible-Presbyterian old pastors dare to call him as "an old fox," these old pastors were very close to Timothy Tow from the beginning of Far Eastern Bible College, they were all at inner circle of Tow's life, they knew him very well, they were in the beginning good friend.....but Tow betrayed them and hurt their feeling...that is why they called him, "an old fox

Tuesday, January 20, 2015

My letter to the students in Far Eastern Bible College, Singapore.

To the students in Far Eastern Bible College in Singapore,


For I say to you, that unless your righteousness exceeds the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will by no means enter the kingdom of heaven.[1] Then Jesus said to them, “Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and the Sadducees.”[2] …..Then they understood that He did not tell them to beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees.[3]

Therefore whatever they tell you to observe,  that observe and do, but do not do according to their works; for they say, and do not do. [4]


The Lecturers in Far Eastern Bible College…..many of them were bad examples. They were like a well-known Bible professor of a generation or two ago. In the classroom, he was a brilliant interpreter of the Bible. His influence over his students was almost hypnotic. Few could sit at his feet for long without being inspired by his insights into God’s Word and being persuaded to his point of view. But off campus, he often destroyed what he accomplished in class sessions. His rudeness, especially to persons he perceived to be his social inferiors, embarrassed everyone with him. After a few hours in his company on such occasions, many former disciples could not listen to his Biblical expositions again. He was a good teacher, but such a bad example that he canceled his words by his actions.
This is Jesus’ opinion of the Pharisees and teachers of the law, who “sit in Moses’ seat” (as professors authorized to explain the correct meaning and application of Moses’ laws). Jesus’ disciples do well to obey their teaching, but would be ill advised to follow their example. Jesus knows them well. They have already made themselves His enemies. They have sought every opening to criticize and heckle Him. In the end, they look for a way to kill Him.
Yet they seem so respectable. Of course they do, because that is one of their chief goals. Jesus castigates them on at least these counts:
(1) You don’t practice what you preach (3).
(2) Your rules are a burden to sincere people (4).
(3) You put on a good show to win men’s applause (5–7).
(4) You glory in titles and honors (8–12). Jesus’ disciples, on the other hand, are not to seek to be honored with titles like “rabbi” or “father” or even “teacher.” They are to take nothing away from the Father or the Son. They are to remember they are servants, not masters. If there is to be any exalting, God is to do it!
(5) You are keeping people out of the kingdom of God (13). You are hypocrites, pretending to be serving God but really just using your religious role to puff yourselves up. You won’t heed My teaching about the kingdom of God, and you do everything you can to keep others from hearing and obeying. You won’t repent and you won’t let anyone else repent, if you can help it. (Verse 14 is reduced to a footnote in recent versions of the Bible, since it is not found in the most reliable early manuscripts. It is quite in keeping with the rest of Jesus’ denunciations, however. His heart always goes out to widows, who are often helpless to prevent themselves from being taken by unscrupulous profiteers.)
(6) Your converts are worse, not better, than before their conversion (15). As students often surpass the fanaticism of their teachers, so yours invite an even more disastrous judgment than you do.
(7) You complicate even such matters as oath-taking (16–21). We already know Jesus’ opinion concerning oaths: Matthew 5:33–37. The prevailing principle seems to have been to swear by the greater, so the Pharisees thought an oath “by the gold in the temple” would be more binding than swearing by the temple (made of stone) itself. All this does not matter to Jesus, who would do away with the whole system of swearing oaths.
(8) You commendably practice some doctrines—like tithing—while completely ignoring weightier matters like justice, mercy, and faithfulness (22–24). Mint and anise and cummin were garden herbs used in cooking and for certain medicinal purposes. The tithing of herbs was considered the ultimate in religious piety.
(9) You scrupulously observe the external niceties of religion while leaving the inner person unreformed (25–28).
(10) You honor dead prophets but, like true descendants of their murderers, you do as your forefathers did (29–32).
(11) When I send “prophets and wise men and teachers” to you, you will prove yourselves to be as quick to kill as your forefathers killed the prophets who came to them (33–36). The first reference is to Zechariah the son of Jehoiada the priest, who was slain in the court of the temple—2 Chronicles 24:20f. The second is to Abel, son of Adam, who was slain by his brother Cain, the first of a long and inglorious line of murderers—Genesis 4:10.[5]

Beloved students in Far Eastern Bible College,

Remember this, you may have learned a lot from those lecturers, but do not follow their bad example…..!!!

Harsh-sounding language was not unusual in religious debates in first-century Judaism. Words and phrases like blind guides, twice the sons of hell, hypocrites, and brood of vipers were typical expressions in such debates between Jewish religious groups at Jesus’ time. This kind of language was the way a person or a group staked out territory. Ancient listeners would not have heard these words and thought how much the speaker hated the other people. Rather, ancient listeners would have concluded that the speaker firmly believed the other party was wrong, and his or her party was right.[6]


Yours sincerely,

.......................................







[1] The New King James Version (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1982), Mt 5:20.
[2] The New King James Version (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1982), Mt 16:6.
[3] The New King James Version (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1982), Mt 16:12.
[4] The New King James Version (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1982), Mt 23:3.
[5] LeRoy Lawson, Matthew: Unlocking the Scriptures for You, Standard Bible Studies (Cincinnati, OH: Standard, 1986), 278–279.
[6] Roger L. Hahn, Matthew: a Commentary for Bible Students (Indianapolis, IN: Wesleyan Publishing House, 2007), 270.

Fox

And He said to them, “Go, tell that fox, ‘Behold, I cast out demons and perform cures today and tomorrow, and the third day I shall be perfected.’ 

The New King James Version (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1982), Lk 13:32.

O Israel, your prophets are like foxes in the deserts. 

The New King James Version (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1982), Eze 13:4.

   Catch us the foxes,
   The little foxes that spoil the vines,
   For our vines have tender grapes.
   
The New King James Version (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1982), So 2:15–16.

Then Samson went and caught three hundred foxes; and he took torches, turned the foxes tail to tail, and put a torch between each pair of tails.

The New King James Version (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1982), Jdg 15:4.

   Because of Mount Zion which is desolate,
   With foxes walking about on it.

The New King James Version (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1982), La 5:18.

Commentary:

Tell that fox (32). The fox was considered a crafty animal, but without the power of the lion. Jesus chose a fitting figure to describe Herod—sly, but secondary in a Roman world.[1]

Go, tell that fox. It is certain, that the person here spoken of is Herod Antipas. Though he had throughout the character of a fox, and was as remarkable for servility as for cunning, I do not think that the term, fox, is intended to refer generally to the cunning of his whole life, but rather to the insidious methods by which he laboured to undermine the doctrine of the Gospel, when he did not venture to attack it openly. Christ tells him that, with all his craftiness, he will gain nothing by his schemes. “Whatever artifices he may devise,” says Christ, “to-day and to-morrow I will discharge the office which God has enjoined upon me; and when I shall have reached the end of my course, I shall then be offered in sacrifice.”[2]



[1] Lewis Foster, Luke: Unlocking the Scriptures for You, Standard Bible Studies (Cincinnati, OH: Standard, 1986), 201.
[2] John Calvin and William Pringle, Commentary on a Harmony of the Evangelists Matthew, Mark, and Luke, vol. 2 (Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software, 2010), 158.

Monday, January 19, 2015

Fox hunting season begins




We are not to hunt these spiritual foxes with real bullets, but with the spiritual bullets, pursuing them to repent and return to the right path,  and by pointing them to their false, and leading them to the right way...The Living Word, Our Lord and God Jesus Christ.

Timothy Tow was an old fox...............

Here is a story from Far Eastern Bible College, when Timothy Tow became old, he became cruel, that is why we called him, "An old fox!

And he had so many small little foxes, like his son in law Jeffrey Khoo, and his students like Quek Suan Yew, Prabhudas Koshy...

Are you one of his small little foxes, repent!

Question: "Does the inerrancy of the Bible only apply to the original manuscripts?"

Answer: This is truly a difficult issue to grasp. Only the original autographs (original manuscripts written by the apostles, prophets, etc.) are under the divine promise of inspiration and inerrancy. The books of the Bible, as they were originally written under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit (2 Timothy 3:16-172 Peter 1:20-21), were 100% inerrant, accurate, authoritative, and true. There is no Biblical promise that copies of the original manuscripts would equally be inerrant or free from copyist errors. As the Bible has been copied thousands of times over thousands of years, some copyist errors have likely occurred.

How do we deal with this? First, it is important to remember that the biblical manuscripts we have today are in 99% agreement with one another. Yes, there are some minor differences, but the vast majority of the biblical text is identical from one manuscript to another. Most of the differences are in punctuation, word endings, minor grammatical issues, word order, etc. – issues easily explainable as scribal mistakes. No important theological or biblical issue is thrown into doubt by any supposed error or contradiction. Biblical manuscripts from the 15th century agree completely with manuscripts from the 3rd century. We can have absolute confidence that the Bible we have today is almost exactly identical to what the apostles and prophets wrote 2000+ years ago.

Second, we should not be quick to say “Oh, that is just a scribal error.” The vast majority, if not all, of Bible “errors” can be explained in a logical and believable manner. Those that cannot by explained, or are very difficult to explain – could very well have an answer that we simply do not know at this point. Just because we cannot find a solution does not mean that a solution doesn’t exist. Believing there to be a scribal error must be the absolute last resort in any supposed Bible “error.”

Ultimately, though, it is possible that errors have crept into our modern manuscripts and translations of the Bible. Copyists and translators are human beings and they make mistakes. The fact that the Bible is incredibly accurate is a testimony to its inspiration and preservation by God.

Can we still trust the Bible? Absolutely! The Bible translations we have today are God’s Word. The Bible today is just as authoritative as it was in the 1st century A.D. We can completely trust the Bible as being God’s message to us today. Yes, the biblical promises of inspiration and inerrancy only apply directly to the original manuscripts. That does not impact, though, whether our modern Bibles are accurate and authoritative. God’s Word endures forever, despite the occasional failings and mistakes of copyists and translators.
Recommended Resources: The Big Book of Bible Difficulties by Geisler & Howe andLogos Bible Software.

Question: "What is the KJV Only movement? Is the King James Version the only Bible we should use?"

Answer: Many people have strong and serious objections to the translation methods and textual basis for the new translations and therefore take a strong stance in favor of the King James Version. Others are equally convinced that the newer translations are an improvement over the KJV in their textual basis and translation methodology. GotQuestions.org does not want to limit its ministry to those of the "KJV Only" persuasion. Nor do we want to limit ourselves to those who prefer the NIV, NAS, NKJV, etc. Note - the purpose of this article is not to argue against the use of the King James Version. Rather, the focus of this article is to contend with the idea that the King James Version is the only Bible English speakers should use.

The KJV Only movement claims its loyalty to be to the Textus Receptus, a Greek New Testament manuscript compilation completed in the 1500s. To varying degrees, KJV Only advocates argue that God guided Erasmus (the compiler of the Textus Receptus) to come up with a Greek text that is perfectly identical to what was originally written by the biblical authors. However, upon further examination, it can be seen that KJV Only advocates are not loyal to the Textus Receptus, but rather only to the KJV itself. The New Testament of the New King James Version is based on the Textus Receptus, just as the KJV is. Yet, KJV Only advocates label the NKJV just as heretical as they do the NIV, NAS, etc.

Beyond the NKJV, other attempts (such as the KJ21 and MEV) have been made to make minimal updates to the KJV, only "modernizing" the archaic language, while using the exact same Greek and Hebrew manuscripts. These attempts are rejected nearly as strongly as the NKJV and the other newer Bible translations. This proves that KJV Only advocates are loyal to the King James Version itself, not to the Textus Receptus. KJV Only advocates have no desire or plan to update the KJV in any way. The KJV certainly contains English that is outdated, archaic, and sometimes confusing to modern English speakers and readers. It would be fairly simple to publish an updated KJV with the archaic words and phrases updated into modern 21st century English. However, any attempt to edit the KJV in any way results in accusations from KJV Only advocates of heresy and perversion of the Word of God.

When the Bible is translated for the first time into a new language today, it is translated into the language that culture speaks and writes today, not the way they spoke and wrote 400 years ago. The same should be true in English. The Bible was written in the common, ordinary language of the people at that time. Bible translations today should be the same. That is why Bible translations must be updated and revised as languages develop and change. The KJV Only movement is very English-focused in its thinking. Why should people who read English be forced to read the Bible in outdated/archaic English, while people of all other languages can read the Bible in modern/current forms of their languages?

Our loyalties are to the original manuscripts of the Old and New Testaments, written in Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Only the original languages are the Word of God as He inspired it. A translation is only an attempt to take what is said in one language and communicate it in another. The modern translations are superb in taking the meaning of the original languages and communicating it in a way that we can understand in English. However, none of the modern translations are perfect. Every one contains verses that are at least somewhat mistranslated. By comparing and contrasting several different translations, it is often easier to get a good grasp on what the verse is saying than by only using one translation. Our loyalty should not be to any one English translation, but to the inspired, inerrant Word of God that is communicated by the Holy Spirit through the translations (2 Timothy 3:16-17).
Recommended Resources: The King James Only Controversy by James White and Logos Bible Software.

Worth reading

The Second Characteristic of a Healthy Church: A Call to Strive for Unity

The Second Characteristic of a Healthy Church - A Call to Strive for UnityThe first community of saints reflected the power and design of God in their lives as a family of believers. The early history of the Church simply reflected the Biblical record from the Book of Acts describing the nature and essence of the first community of saints. The observations of those who witnessed the early Church should inspire and guide us. If we were to emulate the earliest energized believers, our churches would transform the culture and inspire a new generation. How can we, as Christians today, become more like the Church that changed the world and transformed the Roman Empire? We must learn the truthstrive for unitylive in aweserve in loveshare with courage and overflow with joy. These six important characteristics were held by the earliest congregations:
Acts 2:42-47
And they were continually devoting themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer. And everyone kept feeling a sense of awe; and many wonders and signs were taking place through the apostles. And all those who had believed were together, and had all things in common; and they began selling their property and possessions, and were sharing them with all, as anyone might have need. And day by day continuing with one mind in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they were taking their meals together with gladness and sincerity of heart, praising God, and having favor with all the people. And the Lord was adding to their number day by day those who were being saved.
Six simple attributes were observed in the earliest believers. These principles serve as a template and guide for those of us who want to restore the passion and impact of the early Church. If we employ them today, we’ll create healthy, vibrant, transformative churches. The family of God must be united:
Principle #2: Strive for UnityThe Church must be connected by a common Father, a common truth, and a common cause:
“…and they were continually devoting themselves to the apostles’ teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer…”
Christians are a diverse people. We have different histories and different stories to tell. But we are connected powerfully by a common truth calling us to action. The Greek word used for ‘fellowship’ (koinoonia) describes our connection to a common set of actions and activities. We have a common spiritual father, and we believe the Scriptures describing him so clearly. We believe this truth about the nature of God calls us to His cause and plan for our lives. As a result, we are united around the cause of Christ to love and reach the lost with lifesaving good news.
Ephesians 5:1-2Therefore be imitators of God, as beloved children; and walk in love, just as Christ also loved you, and gave Himself up for us, an offering and a sacrifice to God as a fragrant aroma.
We have become a new creation. Not just as new individuals, but as a new family of God; a new movement; an unstoppable rising tide. As a family of God we are called to love and live as a family. We meet regularly to share meals, to remember Jesus through the Lord’s Supper and to pray. But while this is often an expression of our love for one another, we know this is not the only cause to which we are called. We know we are connected by God’s desire to care for the needy and reach those who are still outside the walls of our homes.
The earliest believers understood fellowship as an act of sharing. We too understand that true fellowship occurs when we are transparent and sincere about who we are. Movements form around people who are committed to a cause and committed to each other. We are united by God’s desire for us to share who we are and what we have with those who are in need and those who are seeking the truth. We are not willing to live dual lives, one inside the walls of a church, and another in our communities. We understand that we are not called to go to church, but to be the Church in a lost and hurting world.
The Church ought to meet regularly to affirm our love for God and for one another. We should understand the power of a meal, so we shouldn’t let a week go by without eating together. We ought to understand the power of group prayer, so we should share in the joy of communicating with God. And we should take time to remember our relationship is more than just a common understanding of God; it is also a love relationship with each other. Loving each other means listening with compassion and asking the difficult questions. We must be accountable to each other by name, just as we are accountable to our Lord.
In this short series, we’ll describe the value of these six important characteristics of the early Church. There’s a reason the word “unity” is part of community. Church groups have taken every shape and form in the two thousand years since the first community of saints. The current form is not nearly as important as the transcendent purpose of God’s people here on earth. As we look deeply at the nature of the first Church as it was described in the Book of Acts, we see God’s design for us as a family. The Church is not a place to meet; it is a people to be. When we, as a Church, are united around a common truth and a common purpose, the resulting change in our character will be noticeable and transformative.
- See more at: http://coldcasechristianity.com/2014/the-second-characteristic-of-a-healthy-church-a-call-to-strive-for-unity/#sthash.FKdfYout.dpuf

read more: http://coldcasechristianity.com/2014/the-second-characteristic-of-a-healthy-church-a-call-to-strive-for-unity/

Sunday, January 18, 2015

Scandals in Singapore churches

Though they are BP .. I think their theology not strong one. From the ST article .. you can see how childish is the pastor's "written defence". Either that or the leadership trying to find excuses to "silence" an intellectual from their church. Maybe they exasperated 'cos the businessman learn theology from bible college .. so in the end they resorted to ad hominem attacks.

Pathetic.

I believe if they try to preach to SIS . .they are in for a rude shock. Laughing

http://sgforums.com/forums/1381/topics/206157?page=3

Woe to the false teachers...........

A VERY SAD STATE
OF THE
BIBLE-PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
IN SINGAPORE TODAY



A warning from Pastor

I was raised a B-P Church member since 1960 when I first attended Galilee B-P Church in Pasir Panjang. I got to know Rev Timothy Tow at a very young age. I remembered Rev Tow visiting our family when we were living in No. 5 Pasir Panjang Road.

In 1974 the Lord called me into the full-time Christian ministry and I began my theological education in the Far Eastern Bible College (FEBC). I graduated in 1977 and served in Grace B-P Church. I have been in the B-P Church ever since.

I have seen the many good sides of the B-P Church. I have been blessed by her strong doctrinal teachings. FEBC was once a strong school of theology, producing many Bible believing pastors and full-time workers for the church. I am thankful to the Lord for FEBC and her fundamental teachings in those days.

The changes today in the B-P Church
Something has gone terribly wrong with the B-P denomination today. Just about six years ago, a new teaching was introduced into FEBC by some young lecturers. The Verbal Plenary Preservation (VPP) teaches that God has preserved certain Greek and Hebrew manuscripts which underline the King James Version (KJV). So these people say that God has given the English speaking world only one Bible, the KJV. To them, the KJV is the "inspired" Bible for the English speaking church. All other versions namely NKJV, NASB, NIV, ESV, etc, are corrupt versions. They will condemn anyone or any church that uses a version other than the KJV. They have even gone to the extreme to say that other
Bible versions present a different Jesus from the KJV.

I have never, in all my life, in the B-P Church seen such extreme teaching which had led to church splits, name calling, and the soon to be, public court battle between FEBC and Life B-P Church.
This VPP teaching has been a curse in the B-P Church. Once upon a time, we were all united and growing strong together as a denomination. Today it is a laughing stock to the Christian community in Singapore.

This year especially is bad for the B-P Church as news of both FEBC and Life B-P Church's public court case have been announced in the papers. This is against God's Word. See what the apostle Paul has to say about this matter in 1 Cor. 6: 1- 6

"Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unrighteous, and not before the saints? Do you not know that the saints will judge the world? And if the world will be judged by you, are you unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Do you not know that we shall judge angels? How much more, things that pertain to this life? If then you have judgments concerning things pertaining to this life, do you appoint those who are least esteemed by the church to judge? I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you, not even one, who will be able to judge between his brethren? But brother goes to law against brother, and that before unbelievers!"
(NKJV)


How could believers who know God's Word do such a thing?

The VPP teaching has not been a blessing to the B-P denomination. Instead it has caused trouble and disunity.

For your information, a large majority of B-P Pastors are not supporting this teaching. We strongly oppose it. Very few B-P Pastors and B-P Churches are for this teaching. They should rightly call themselves the VPP B-P Church and not be confused with those of us who are the original B-P Church.
Churches which are for VPP:" Calvary-Pandan BPC, Calvary Tengah BPC, Gethsemane BPC, True Life BPC, Truth BPC, Berean BPC

B-P Churches that are not for VPP:" Life BPC, Olivet BPC, Grace BPC, Shalom BPC, Nazareth BPC, Galilee BPC, Maranatha BPC, Sharon BPC, Gospel Light BPC, Moriah BPC, Emmanuel BPC, Herald BPC, Calvary-Jurong BPC, Eden BPC, Jireh BPC, Macedonia BPC, Sembawang BPC, Zion BPC (Serangoon Gardens and Bishan), Faith BPC, All the Tamil B-P Churches, All the Mountain B-P Churches (i.e., Hebron, Herman, Mt. Carmel BPCs etc).

Be watchful
We live in the last days. The Bible warned of many false teachers coming into the church who will deceive even the elect. And sad to say, many will follow their pernicious way (2 Peter 2: 1-2).


The VPP Traits
We should know that these people are a very combative group.

One of the traits in this group of VPPers is to fight anyone who disagrees with them. The recent and earlier editions of "The Burning Bush", a publication of FEBC, and the writings and the correspondences of some of these advocates of VPPs resonate their argumentative attitude. "The Burning Bush" is targetted to combat non-VPPs. It was once an edifying magazine, but today, it is used to put down B-P pastors and elders who are not supportive of their cause. There is nothing edifying in this magazine which publishes only about VPP.

"The Burning Bush" has also been blasting the newly setup "Asia Seminary for Ministry" (ASM), in which Rev. Goh Seng Fong, Rev. Tan Choon Seng, Rev. Yap Beng Shin, Dn. John Chin and myself are the founding members. "ASM" has been accused of being neo-evangelical and ecumenical.

The aggressive nature of their correspondences in the many emails I have read is unbecoming of a Christian leader.

Split Churches
The issue of VPP creates a huge problem and results in split of Churches. This is witnessed in the States as well as on our own shores. Since the day VPP came to the B-P Church in Singapore, we had seen with our own eyes the problems encountered by Life B-P Church, Calvary-Jurong B-P Church and Calvary-Pandan B-P Church.

A Lack of Love 
Another of their trait is the lack of love in dealing with fellow B-P pastors and elders over this issue. To them, this matter of VPP is life and death. If the B-P Pastor or Elder is not supporting them, they are swiftly condemned as neo-evangelicals or neo-fundamentalists. Their names are highlighted in their magazines and church weekly, etc. There is no personal and friendly conversation over how to solve this issue in a loving manner.


Name Calling
They are quick to call anyone who are not for their cause, neo-evangelicals, neo-fundamentalists, ecumenical, etc. They have also labelled fellow B-P pastors as liars. They have published openly the names of Bible colleges, seminaries and gave them such names.


Claim to possess the truth

They claim to have the perfect Bible. They have the "inspired" KJV with them. So long as other Christians do not use the KJV, they do not have the truth. To these people, all other Bible versions are corrupt and don't have the the Word of God. They are the only ones who have it because they use the KJV. So they have the truth. Is that so?


Martin Luther, the reformer, did not use the KJV. Did he have the truth of God's Word? What about Christians of other races, like the Indonesians, for example, whose Bibles are in the Indonesian language, do they have the truth of God's Word? What about Christian leaders like John MacArthur who uses ESV or NASB? Is he teaching the truth from God's Word?
Do not fear at all, my brethren! We have the truth of God's Word in other Bible versions and diverse languages. God did not give us one Bible version only, i.e., the KJV, even though we may love this version. 
"In the first place, then, let it be said that we believers in the plenary inspiration of the Bible do not hold that the Authorized Version or any other form of the English Bible is inspired. I beg your pardon for saying anything so obvious as that, but, do you know, my friends, it is necessary to say it. There are scarcely any limits to the ignorance which is attributed to us today by people who have never given themselves the trouble to discover what our view really is. Let it be said then very plainly that we do not hold that the Authorized Version or any other form of the English Bible is inspired. We are really quite well aware of the fact that the Bible was written in Hebrew and in Greek. The Authorized Version is a translation from the Hebrew and the Greek. It is a marvelously good translation, but it is not a perfect translation. There are errors in it. The translators were not supernaturally preserved from making mistakes. It is not inspired."
"Is the Bible the Word of God?"
(A quote by J. Gresham Machen taken "The Christian Faith in the Modern World" 1936)
Claim to defend the truth?VPPers like to see themselves as defenders of the truth. It seems that they see themselves as the only ones who have the perfect and "inspired" Bible (the KJV) and they are defending this Bible version. Anyone who speak against this version is immediately taken to task.

Conclusion
Has not the original B-P Church been defending the truth since the days of Rev. Timothy Tow? We have been taught and we will continue to teach our B-P Church members that God has given to us the inspired, inerrant Word of God in the original autographs. This is VPI (Verbal Plenary Inspiration). We have never heard of VPP which is a new and strange teaching that has infiltrated the B-P Church some years ago. We have defended the truth of God's Word and we will continue to do so. We will defend our flock against this teaching of VPP. That is what the original B-P Church is doing today. So who is the original B-P Church? Are we not the ones?



Rev Tan Eng Boo
Pastor, Grace B-P Church
January 2009

Lawsuit

Life Bible-Presbyterian Church wins suit against FEBC

Does any one of you, when he has a case against his neighbor, dare to go to law before the unrighteous and not before the saints? Or do you not know that the saints will judge the world? If the world is judged by you, are you not competent to constitute the smallest law courts? Do you not know that we will judge angels? How much more matters of this life? So if you have law courts dealing with matters of this life, do you appoint them as judges who are of no account in the church? I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not among you one wise man who will be able to decide between his brethren, but brother goes to law with brother, and that before unbelievers? (1 Corinthians 6:1-6 NASB).

A difference in doctrines over VPP led to a dispute between the Life Bible-Presbyterian Church and the Far Eastern Bible College, which had shared the same premises in Gilstead Road since the 1960s. The dispute led to a court battle when the church filed a suit in 2008 against the directors of the college to evict the school. On 30 June 2010, High Court judge Judith Prakash ruled in favour of Life B-P Church. Justice Prakash ruled that the college was a separate entity from the 1962 one as it had a different constitution which mentions the new VPP doctrine. She noted that the courts have recognised that doctrine is fundamental to the character of a religious charitable body. So the 2004 college cannot benefit from the funds that were raised in the names of the church and the original college. The claims of the FEBC Board of Directors against the Church were dismissed with costs. Adapted from this article from Singapore Law Watch.

Do not say, "I will repay evil"; Wait for the LORD, and He will save you (Proverbs 20:22 NASB).
Wait for the LORD; Be strong and let your heart take courage; Yes, wait for the LORD (Psalm 27 :14 NASB). Wait for the LORD and keep His way, And He will exalt you to inherit the land; When the wicked are cut off, you will see it (Psalm 37:34 NASB).

Now he waited seven days, according to the appointed time set by Samuel, but Samuel did not come to Gilgal; and the people were scattering from him. So Saul said, “Bring to me the burnt offering and the peace offerings.” And he offered the burnt offering. As soon as he finished offering the burnt offering, behold, Samuel came; and Saul went out to meet him and to greet him. But Samuel said, “What have you done?” (1 Samuel 13:8-11 NASB).

Waiting on the Lord can be very trying. But if you do not wait, you could become like king Saul, doing the wrong things for a right cause.

read more: http://pohkok.blogspot.com/2010/01/2010-03-14.html

Shameful heretic


Downgrade of FEBC after Rev. Timothy Tow
Home
Downgrade of FEBC after Rev. Timothy Tow
Is the great Rev. Timothy Tow an advocate of VPP?
Response to East African Christian Alliance on VPP
Old Testament debunks VPP
An elder's warning to members regarding VPP
VPP heresy and the bullying of a Chinese congregation
Quek Suan Yew's VPP found to be false
Whose land? Palestinian-Israeli conflict
Verbal Plenary Preservation: telling lies to glorify God!
KJV 1611- A Witness Against the VPP error
VPP and the 7th Day Adventist Cult connection
Carol Lee's child of god tells lies.
When leaders of churches fail to discipline.
KJV-onlyism(VPP) and KJV-prefered; the facts.
Gambling is always sinful
Providential Preservation of the Received Text.
Spiritual Terrorism
An Evidential Review of Verbal Plenary Preservation:

When ‘Dr.’ Jeffrey Khoo became the Academic Dean of the FEBC and, subsequently its Principal (when Rev. Timothy Tow passed away) the spiritual rot that started a few years earlier began to get worse.



 ‘Dr.’ Prabhdas Koshy, one of its lecturers, denied, against all historical evidences and facts, that the Apostles used and quoted from the Septuagint  (Did Jesus And The Apostles Rely On The Corrupt Septuagint? http://www.febc.edu.sg/VPP5.htm )

Jeffrey Khoo claimed that the KJV translators restored the lost autographs (Originals) through their translation of the Bible into English. The KJV translators never made such a claim. They were, after all, translators and, not prophets restoring the lost autographs. 

‘Dr.’ Quek Suan Yew, one of FEBC’s lecturers, wrote one of the most startling statement, “Without the doctrine of VPP there is no BIBLE...” (NO VPP, NO KJV! NO CUV!,Elder's page of Calvary Pandan Weekly of 2nd Sept 2007).

Now, according to FEBC, VPP is inextricably linked to the KJV bible. Since the KJV came into being in 1611, it follows therefore, that according to ‘Dr.’ Quek,  there was no Bible until 1611! However, this contradicts what the Bible says about the Word (John 1:1, Proverbs 8:22).   

Paul Ferguson, a new addition to the FEBC, found a comrade-in-arms in Islamist apologist Ahmad Deedat. Ferguson, a Christian Taliban, uses Deedat to attack the Christian Bible (The Burning Bush, Jan 2009). This is not surprising as VPP’s understanding of revelation is identical to Islam’s and the Mormons. The Islamists believe that their Original scripture is inscribed in Arabic on a tablet in heaven; they were then revealed to Muhammad by an angel:

“The Qu’ran is a record of the exact words revealed by Allah through the Angel Gabriel to the Prophet Muhammad. It was memorised by Muhammad and then dictated to his Companions, and written down by scribes, who crosschecked it during his lifetime. Not one word of its 114 chapters, suras, has been changed over the centuries, so that the Qu’ran is in every detail the unique and miraculous text which was revealed to Muhammad fourteen centuries ago.”[1]

‘Drs.’ Khoo, Koshy, Quek and Ferguson subscribe to this theory of revelation, the only difference from the Islamist’s being that God revealed to the KJV translators what the autographic texts were.

It logically follows that they categorically reject any form of textual criticism since the Hebrew and Greek underlying the KJV Bible is revealed directly from God to the KJV translators!

They superstitiously claim that unless Christians have the complete autographical texts in their hands, Christians cannot say they have the Word of God.  

Ferguson’s fluffy articles employ sleight-of-hand reasoning to attack the Christian Bible. For instance, he quotes from anti-Christian Bart Ehrman[2], and concludes:
“such a statement shows the depth of rationalistic and unbiblical thought that is now prevalent inmodern fundamentalism”.  

Dr. Ehrman is not at all a Christian but an atheist, so how can Ferguson use an atheist to represent modern fundamentalism?

Jeffrey Khoo’s Illegal Degree

The BBC published a report about the University of Wales having links to a bible college in the USA giving out illegal degrees.
The University of Wales is a "laughing stock" for having awarded degrees at a controversial bible college in the USA, an American education expert says.
Trinity College of the Bible in Newburgh, Indiana, is not officially accredited, which means many states consider its degrees to be illegal.
 Dr John Bear said the university's links with the college, which offers mainly distance education courses of a religious nature, was damaging.
The university has now cut the ties.http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/7740904.stm 
    
 Khoo, together with Quek, Koshy (who earned their Th.D from FEBC) and Ferguson (who is doing his Th. D in FEBC) have taken FEBC down the road of the KJV Onlyism cult of D.A. Waite.  In their tenet of VPP number 6, Waite has been given miraculous power to know what the autographical texts are. Essentially, they hold similar position as the Ruckmanites, the only difference is that the Ruckmanites are more honest about their position, whereas the VPPists are dodgy, speaking half-truths, misquoting and misrepresenting. 

[1] Understanding Islam and the Muslims; The Islamic Affairs Dept., The Embassy of Saudi Arabia

[2] The Burning Bush, July 2009

John Calvin drinks 7 barrels of wine in a year, marvelous.....

Calvin's annual salary in Geneva included seven barrels of wine.


Guess what?

Did he receive them, all 7 barrels as his salary?
Did he reject those 7 barrels?
Did he drink them all in a year?
Did he keep them in the his store room?
Did he give some of them to his friends and family?

He did not dispose them...he drunk them, while he was writing...

.....Institutes of the Christian Religion


For John Calvin, wine was actually like the engine oil in the engine, keeping the engine running...that is why he managed to write and write....

Friday, January 16, 2015

Institutes of the Christian Religion

John Calvin wrote in his Institutes of the Christian Religion.

“First, then, the signs are bread and wine, which represent the invisible food which we receive from the body and blood of Christ.”[1] He used wine in the Holy Communion.

“Were it not so, the Prophet would not enumerate among the mercies of God “wine that maketh glad the heart of man, and oil to make his face to shine,” (Ps. 104:15.) The Scriptures would not everywhere mention, in commendation of his benignity, that he had given such things to men. The natural qualities of things themselves demonstrate to what end, and how far, they may be lawfully enjoyed.”[2] He said wine can make people happy.

“Melchizedek, as he is said to have “brought forth (obtulisse) bread and wine,” (Gen. 14:18,) they infer that it was a prelude to their mass, as if there was any resemblance between him and Christ in the offering of bread and wine. This is too silly and frivolous to need refutation. Melchizedek gave bread and wine to Abraham and his companions, that he might refresh them when worn out with the march and the battle.”[3] He said even Melchizedek gave wine to Abraham.

“If you vow abstinence from wine, as if there were any holiness in so doing, you are superstitious; but if you have some end in view which is not perverse, no one can disapprove.”[4] Calvin said total abstinence from wine is superstitious.

“For though Christ says, “Unto every one that hath shall be given;” “thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things,” (Matth. 25:29, 21,) he, at the same time, shows that all additional gifts to believers are of his free benignity: “Ho, every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money, come ye, buy, and eat: yea, come, buy wine and milk, without money and without price,” (Isaiah 55:1.) Therefore, every help to salvation bestowed upon believers, and blessedness itself, are entirely the gift of God, and yet in both the Lord testifies that he takes account of works, since to manifest the greatness of his love toward us, he thus highly honours not ourselves only, but the gifts which he has bestowed upon us.”[5] Calvin said wine is a blessing from God.







[1] John Calvin and Henry Beveridge, Institutes of the Christian Religion, vol. 3 (Edinburgh: The Calvin Translation Society, 1845), 389.
[2] John Calvin and Henry Beveridge, Institutes of the Christian Religion, vol. 2, 295.
[3] John Calvin and Henry Beveridge, Institutes of the Christian Religion, vol. 3, 460.
[4] John Calvin and Henry Beveridge, Institutes of the Christian Religion, vol. 3, 278–279.
[5] John Calvin and Henry Beveridge, Institutes of the Christian Religion, vol. 2, 379.