A message by Rev James Chan at Calvary B-P Church (Jurong) on 2nd May 1999
It has become necessary for me to preach on the distinctives of our Bible-Presbyterian faith and practice, although I must admit that I do not relish the circumstances under which I address this issue. But I must because, of late, some young people in our church have questioned our practice at Calvary B-P Church (Jurong). And they have charged that our teaching is not in accordance to the Bible, and our practice is an abomination to God.
One of them quoted from the B-P Constitution Article 4.1, The doctrine of the church shall be in accordance with that system commonly called 'The Reformed Faith' as expressed in the Confession of Faith as set forth by the historic Westminster Assembly together with the Larger and shorter Catechisms.
He has accused the B-P Church of taking "a stand that is far from the Reformed Faith." And he charged the church leaders with misinforming others and demanded that this particular clause be removed from the B-P Church Constitution.
Dearly beloved, we do not misinform others about our B-P faith and practice. We know that the Westminster Confession of Faith does not cover biblical separation (Article 4.2, 4.12). We also know that not all Bible scholars have the same interpretation of it. For this reason, we state clearly the chief tenets of the doctrine of the Church in the constitution (Article 4.2, pp 2-3).
The Board of Elders takes a serious view of these allegations, and the matter had to be settled immediately. As such we have to screen all our leaders and Bible teachers from both the English and Mandarin Congregations.
If there are people who disagree and are unhappy with our B-P faith and practice, we lovingly encourage them to go to a church that shares their convictions. And we wish them well. They should not stay in the church and try to influence others with their views. This is in agreement with the vow they have made when they became our members.
We are Bible-Presbyterians
Beloved, we are Bible-Presbyterians. We are not Orthodox Presbyterians or Reformed Presbyterians or Free Presbyterians. They may differ in their practice from us, but we do not have the right nor do we want to charge that just because they are different, therefore what they do is unbiblical.
As Bible-Presbyterians, our emphasis is on the Bible, the Word of God. The Word of God is our only rule of Faith and Practice. Our adoption of the Westminster Confession of Faith is to show that we hold to the Calvinistic doctrine. We made clear that our view on the doctrine of eschatology is premillennial (Article 4.2-7). We sincerely believe that our teaching and practice are closest to the Bible. We believe that our faith and practice is in accordance to the Word of God. Therefore, we do not intend to change our Church Constitution; neither do we need to reform our faith and practice.
Two of the young people who have resigned their membership gave twelve reasons for their leaving. We are not sad over their departure because throughout history, good men have chosen to differ. But we are concerned over their persistent charges that we have erred in the faith and that our practice is unbiblical. As the church pastor, I have to show members and friends of Calvary B-P (Jurong) the reasons of our faith and practice.
1. Are Musicals Wrong?
They believe that "Whatever is not commanded in the Holy Scriptures, is forbidden ... such as presentation, drama, sketches, musical, etc., which Christ and the Apostles neither did practise themselves nor give approval of such activities, as being part of the worship of God or the declaration of His glory.'"
We believe that whatever is not mentioned in the Scripture is not necessarily forbidden. There are many things that we do which are not mentioned in the Bible, such as Youth Fellowship, Adult Fellowship, Sunday School, Awana Club, etc. Are these forbidden? No! We worship in the church building while some worship in hotels. Are they forbidden because Christ and the Apostles did not do that? No!
Presentations, dramas, sketches and musicals can be effective means of communicating the Gospel if they are done in a proper manner and at the right occasion. In Ezekiel 4,5, God used "drama" as one of His teaching methods to convey his message to His people through Ezekiel.
In our church, the main instruction in the Worship Service always comes from preaching of the Word of God. On certain occasions, such as Bible camp testimony time, Christmas Praise Service, we have musical or sketches, but the main instruction is still preaching from the Word of God. Is it wrong? No!
2. Is It Wrong to Sing Hymns?
They also believe "that it is not acceptable unto God, in the singing of uninspired hymns and songs as being part of the worship of Him. This applies to the public and private worship of God, and in any Christian gathering ... The singing of uninspired hymns and songs is a violation of the Second Commandment ... The only acceptable means of worshipping and glorifying Him in singing according to the Holy Scripture, is only to be taken from the inspired book of Psalm found in the written Word of God."
We believe that singing in the Worship Service or at any Christian gathering is not limited to the book of Psalms. Paul, in Ephesians 5:19 says, "Speaking to yourselves in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs."
Psalms refer primarily to the Old Testament psalms put to music. It is "a song designed to be sung with the accompaniment of instrumental music ..... one of the sacred poems contained in the book of Psalms (Acts 13:33 quoted Ps 2:7) ... any sacred poem formed on the model of the OT Psalms, as in 1 Cor 14:26." (Charles Hodge, The Epistle to the Ephesians, The Banner of Truth Trust, p 304).
Hymns refer primarily to songs of praise to God. They probably distinguish from the psalms that praise God, in that they specifically praise the Lord Jesus Christ (eg Col 1:12-16; 1 Tim 2:5; Rev 5:9-10).
Spiritual songs were songs of testimony, which "signify spontaneous outpourings of praise under the leading of the Holy Spirit" (Leon Morris, Expository Reflections on the Letter to the Ephesians, Baker, p 177).
In our hymnal, Revival Hymns and Choruses, we may classify "The Lord is our Shepherd (Hymn 344) as a psalm; "The Old Rugged Cross" (Hymn 199) as a hymn; and "Jesus is the Joy of Living" (Hymn 125) as a spiritual song.
Paul's intention is to encourage Christians to use a great variety of sacred songs to exalt the Lord and not to limit to the OT Psalms only. There are Christians who only want to sing the psalms; there are also others who chose not to sing; we have no quarrel with them. But as Bible-Presbyterians, we choose to sing "psalms and hymns and spiritual songs."
3. Are Musical Instruments Wrong?
They believe that "the existence of a choir or the use of musical instruments, as part of worship to God in the New Testament Church, is not according to Holy Scripture." Their reason is that such practices are not recorded as being part of the worship in the New Testament church.
As Bible-Presbyterians, we believe that there is nothing wrong to use musical instruments or to have the choir sing in the worship service for two reasons. It was done in the Old Testament time. And we are encouraged by the Apostle Paul to use music in our worship (Eph 5:19).
Some of the Psalms were instructed by the authors to sing with stringed instruments (Neginoth) as in Psalms 4, 6, 67. Others were instructed by the authors to be sung with wind instruments (Nehiloth; flute accompaniment) as in Psalm 5. Still others were to be sung with the choir as in Psalms 42, 44, 45 (sons of Korah who were singers in the Temple Choir).
They charge that the choir and musical instruments in the church are pure entertainment that draws the worshippers' attention from God. I can only say that there are many things that draw men's attention from worshipping God, and these mainly have to do with the problems of the heart. If the heart is not right, even the songs of angels would not draw man to worship God. Therefore, we do not see any thing wrong to have the piano and organ and choir in the worship service if it is done in a proper manner.
4. How do we keep the Sabbath?
They believe that "the teaching and practice of the church (with reference to Calvary Jurong) on the Christian Sabbath is not according to the teaching of the Holy Scripture. The Holy Scripture required the keeping of the whole of the Lord's Day for public and private worship of God (Exod 20:8-11). Except for works of mercy and necessity (Matt 12:1-13)."
They charge that some leaders "failed to teach the proper way of keeping the Lord's Day. They further charge that some church leaders violated the Fourth Commandment when they request prayers for themselves and others making business trips on the Lord's Day."
We agree that the Holy Scripture requires the keeping of the whole Lord's Day for the Lord and His service. However, we disagree with their application of keeping the Lord's Day. For example, a man is flying back from the United States; he leaves on Saturday. Halfway across the Pacific Ocean, it is the Lord's Day. Should he, then, get off? Or take this situation, a person is required to meet his business client on Monday morning. He is unable to travel on Saturday because of work commitment. The only day to travel is on Sunday in order to meet his client on Monday. Can he travel? Our friends say "No!" We beg to differ because it is a work of necessity.
5. Must the bread of the Lord's Supper be physically broken?
They "are of the view that the proper manner of observing the Lord's Supper, includes the physical and actual breaking of the bread before the congregation, before giving it to the communicants, which at times, our minister failed to do so."
We believe that, in the breaking of the bread, the Bible does not command the pastor to follow every single step that the Lord had done. If it is a command then I have to take a loaf of bread, break each piece for each of the communicants. That is because the word "gave" (Matt 26:26) in Greek is in the imperfect tense; it means that the Lord Jesus went on giving, himself breaking a piece for each of His disciple. More importantly, I think the question that needs to be asked is this : Is our present method of administrating the Lord's Supper in anyway less meaningful or unbiblical? Again, I stress that there are other churches that do things differently from us. If they want to break the bread, let them break the bread. If they want to drink from one chalice, please do so. We have no quarrel with them. But just because we choose to do some things differently it does not make us less biblical. We do not have to apologise for the way we do things in Calvary Jurong.
6. Is using the title of "Reverend" wrong?
They believe that "the use of the title 'Reverend' addressed to any ordained minister is not according to Holy Scripture. The title 'Reverend' in the Holy Scripture, is only attributed to God's name (Ps 111:9) and none else. Thus, it is not to be given to any man, regardless of his office or status, because this honour is only attributed and due to God alone."
The title 'Reverend' is used to refer to the character of the office rather than to the individual. It dignifies the work rather than the worker. Paul, in calling himself an apostle, says, "I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office" (Rom 11:13).
On the title of "Reverend", Dr John R Rice has this to say, "The word simply means in English, that the man is a minister. It means nothing more than that. Not a person who is using the title for a minister, means to worship him as God. In English usage, the title has simply become synonymous with 'minister' or 'preacher' or 'pastor.' So it is perfectly proper to use the term.
It is hurtful to cause division and strife over the meaning of words to which the Bible does not attach special and important meanings. And it is foolish to accuse a preacher of blasphemy because he is addressed as 'Reverend,' as it would be to accuse a physician of sinful pride in allowing himself to be called "Doctor.' Doctor, in common language, means physician. 'Reverend' in common language means 'minister' (John R Rice, Here is my Question, Sword of the Lord Publishers, pp 146-147).
7. Is our method of electing elders wrong?
They are of the view that the "church's method of the election of elders, found in Article 15 of the church constitution, section 1 ... is not accordance to the Holy Scripture." They say it is not a "promotional exercise."
We agree that the election of an elder is not a promotional exercise. We do not see it as such. The calling of the elder is to servanthood and not superiority. Our church motto, Mark 10:45, calls us to minister in the pattern of our Lord Jesus Christ. It is a presumptuous mistake on the part of the dissenters to think that people seek the office of eldership for the sake of a promotion.
We believe that the Bible does not give us a full and definite pattern for church government. As a result, churches today have many different forms of government. Each church tries to form the government of the church according to their understanding of the Bible. Our form of government is based on the "Form of Government" and the Book of Discipline of the Bible Presbyterian Church with some modification to meet our local needs (Article 11).
I belabour the point again; there are churches that do things differently from us. Just because we differ do not make them more right than we.
8. Is it wrong for deacons to preach?
They "are of the view that the office of a deacon belongs to that of serving tables and not to the ministry of the Word ... (Acts 6:1-6). In allowing a deacon to preach the Word, ... is contrary to the teachings and instructions of the Holy Scripture."
But they have forgotten that Stephen was a deacon (Acts 6:5) and he preached the Word of God. His sermon is recorded in Acts 7. Philip was also a deacon (Acts 6:5) and he went to preach in Samaria (Acts 8:4-10). Apollos was not even a deacon, and yet he preached.
9. Is celebrating Christmas wrong?
They believe that the celebration of Christmas, Easter and other religious festivals "have no warrant, authority or approval from the Holy Scripture" and they are "not only displeasing to God but also an abomination unto Him (Deut 12:31)."
We believe that there is nothing wrong to celebrate Christmas and Easter, for it is to remember the great work of salvation done by our Lord Jesus Christ and to preach the Gospel. We also believe that it is God's desire for us to remember His work among His people. This is reflected in both Old and New Testaments.
In the OT, the Israelites were commanded to celebrate certain religious feast, so as to remember His mighty acts. For example, the Passover or the Feast of Unleavened Bread is celebrated on the 14th of Nisan (April) to commemorate the deliverance of the Jews from Egypt and the establishment of Israel as a nation by God's redemptive act. In the NT, the Lord Jesus also wants us to remember Him during the participation of the Lord's Supper. He says, "This do in remembrance of me" (Lk 22:19).
If we know how to celebrate the birthday of our loved ones, is it wrong to celebrate the advent of Christ in a meaningful way and also to preach the Gospel? The angels, the shepherds and the wise men had done it. Why can't we? After all, it is the Lord's command for us to remember Him. These imply not only His death but also His birth and resurrection. These events emphasise the complete ministry of Christ for our salvation.
10. It is wrong for a woman to speak publicly or lead in prayer?
They "are of the view that the practice of the church, in allowing women to speak publicly in preaching, teaching and leading in prayer is not according to Holy Scripture (1 Cor 14:34-35; 1 Tim 2:11-14). This also applies to the teaching of children or the younger ones."
We believe that in principle man is to lead in all these areas. However, this is not absolute. There are occasions where men are incapable or are reluctant to fulfil these ministries, and the ladies are needed to fill the gap. In the OT, we have Deborah (Judges 4-5). In NT, we have Priscilla, the wife of Aquila (Acts 18:24-26). For more details see Rev Timothy Tow's book, The Story of My Bible-Presbyterian Faith, pp 106-108.
In the mission field, there are many women missionaries, doing the work which men are reluctant to do. Kelapa Sawit B-P Church was taken care by Miss Ng Siang Chew. Awana Club and Junior Worship - from the nursery to the young teens - are run by many faithful female teachers because few brothers responded to the need. Let me again quote from Rev Tow in his letter to the Calvary Missions Fellowship (dated 22nd April 1994); he wrote, "I take my hat off to women missionaries and preachers. There is no law forbidding them to preach when men are reluctant to venture out. Let the first male to criticise the women speakers be sent to the frontiers to take their place. Amen?"
11. Is our marriage ceremony wrong?
They "are of the view that the 'ceremony' of the solemnisation of marriage as practised by the church is glorifying to men, robbing the glory away from God and injurious to the blessed name of the Blessed Trinity." They are particularly opposed to "the marching in of the bride with musical accompaniment and the invoking of the name of the Blessed Trinity in the process of the solemnisation."
We believe that in weddings the main focus is on the bride and groom because they come before God and man in a solemn vow to stay together. Nevertheless, the glory must go to God who is the Source and Author of all life and the Builder and Maker of homes. The use of the processional and recessional with musical accompaniment does not rob God of His glory. Neither is it wrong to invoke the name of the Holy Trinity to bless the couple. The benediction is given as a sign of God's approval.
Again, this is a matter of liturgical difference. Different churches will do things differently, let none condemn another just because we do things differently.
12. Is our third point of Calvinism wrong?
They "do not agree with the third point of Calvinism as expounded by some of the leaders of the Bible-Presbyterian churches, which was often quoted as follows: Christ's death is sufficient for the world and efficient for the elect."
We believe that Christ's death is sufficient for all, efficient for the elect because it is taught in the Bible.
i. Sufficient for all - Matt 11:28; John 3:16; 1 Tim 2:3-4; 2 Pet 3:9; 1 John 2:2
ii. Efficient for the elect - John 10:12, 26-27 (For details, please read, Rev Tow's, The Story of My Bible-Presbyterian Faith, pp 93-100).
Conclusion
I am sorry to say that the young people who left us have chosen to hold an extreme view of the teaching of the Bible and in the practice of the Christian faith. I believe they reach their positions because they have elevated books written by men to be on par with the divinely inspired Word of God. And in some cases, they have even reached conclusions in areas where the Bible is silent.
The Bible is the final authority of our Bible Presbyterian Faith and Practice. We can see no more than what God has revealed to us in His Holy Scriptures. And we can go only as far as the Word of God takes us. To take one step farther would be pure conjecture based on man's finite intelligence (whoever that man may be - be it John Calvin or Charles Spurgeon, or the Westminster Divines). And we must understand that no human explanation that contradicts the Word of God is valid. We must always to back to the Bible. That is why we are Bible-Presbyterians.
Let me also sound a word of caution to all, especially parents, because of what I would deem as the unethical practices by some of the young people who left the church. Through persistent e-mails, they seem intent in influencing and confusing others who chose not to share their convictions and follow in their way. Therefore, I warn those in our midst who have received such articles to throw them away.
Finally, I want to assure all our members that what we teach and practise in Calvary are in accordance with the Word of God. Let us work together to protect the church and to advance the Gospel till the Lord's return. Amen.