Correct Doctrinal Position

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.
In abbreviated form the chief tenets of the doctrine of the Church, apart from the Apostles’ Creed, shall be as follows:

1. We believe in the divine, verbal and plenary inspiration of the Scriptures in the original languages, their consequent inerrancy and infallibility, and, as the Word of God, the Supreme and final authority in faith and life;

2. We believe in one God existing in three co-equal and co-eternal Persons, Father, Son and Holy Spirit;

3. We believe that Jesus Christ, the eternal Son of God, was conceived by the Holy Spirit, born of the virgin Mary, and is true God and true man;

4. We believe that man was created in the image of God, but sinned through the fall of Adam, thereby incurring not only physical death but also spiritual death, which is separation from God and that all human beings are born with a sinful nature and become sinners in thought, word and deed;

5. We believe that the Lord Jesus Christ died a propitiatory and expiatory death as a representative and substitutionary sacrifice, and that all who repent of their sins and believe in Him are justified before God on the grounds of His shed blood;

6. We believe in the bodily resurrection of our Lord Jesus Christ, in His ascension into Heaven, and in His exaltation at the right hand of God, where He intercedes for us as our High Priest and Advocate;

7. We believe in the personal, visible and premillennial return of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to judge this world and bring peace to the nations;

8. We believe that salvation is by grace through faith, not by works, and that all who repent and receive the Lord Jesus Christ as their personal Saviour are born again by the Holy Spirit and thereby become the children of God;

9. We believe that the ministry of the Holy Spirit is to glorify the Lord Jesus Christ and to convict and regenerate the sinner, indwell, guide, instruct and empower the believer for godly living and service;

10. We believe that Christ instituted the Sacrament of Baptism for believers and their children and the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, which sacraments shall be observed by His Church till He comes;

11. We believe in the eternal security, bodily resurrection, and eternal blessedness of the saved and in the bodily resurrection and eternal conscious punishment of the lost;

12. We believe in the real, spiritual unity in Christ of all redeemed by His precious blood and the necessity of faithfully maintaining the purity of the Church in doctrine and life according to the Word of God and the principle and practice of biblical separation from the apostasy of the day being spearheaded by the Ecumenical Movement (2 Cor 6:14-18; Rev 18:4).

Schism

copied from http://www.keyway.ca/htm2009/20090808.htm

by Wayne Blank

See also 1 Year Holy Bible Reading Plan

The English word "schism," which has come to mean a separation, is derived from a Greek word, pronounced sk-his-mah, which means division, although not necessarily a physical separation. It actually means dissension within a group, which may or may not cause physical parting. The King James Version uses "schism" only once:

"12:25 That there should be no schism [i.e. sk-his-mah] in the body; but that the members should have the same care one for another. 12:26 And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it; or one member be honoured, all the members rejoice with it. 12:27 Now ye are the body of Christ, and members in particular." (1 Corinthians 12:25-27 KJV)

"They which are approved may be made manifest among you"

The original Greek word was written in the Scriptures more than just the one time that the King James translates it as "schism." It is also variously translated as "division" and "rent" (i.e. to divide, or make apart), including by the King James itself which uses the two words in 1 Corinthians i.e. the KJV translates the single Greek word in three ways; "schism," "rent" and "division" or "divisions."

Notice in this example that the "division" was among those living together in the same house (see also Houses Of The Holy).

"1:10 Now I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions [i.e. sk-his-mah] among you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. 1:11 For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among you. 1:12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul [i.e. Paul's Ministry]; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas [i.e. Peter's Ministry]; and I of Christ. 1:13 Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?" (1 Corinthians)

The "divisions" described here also involved those of the same house - the House of God.

"11:18 For first of all, when ye come together in the church, I hear that there be divisions [i.e. sk-his-mah] among you; and I partly believe it. 11:19 For there must be also heresies [see Heretics] among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you." (1 Corinthians 11:18-19 KJV)

In this verse, the King James translates the same Greek word as "rent." Christ's lesson here was that division must be healed, not merely covered up.

"9:16 No man putteth a piece of new cloth unto an old garment, for that which is put in to fill it up taketh from the garment, and the rent [i.e. sk-his-mah] is made worse." (Matthew 9:16 KJV)

The coming of The Son Of God was not a "new" religion. It was simply a matter of some of the people recognizing the long-awaited Messiah (see Israelite Monarchy - The Messiah), while others did not - often to a blasphemous extreme (see the verses quoted below). The same Greek word is here translated as "division."

"7:43 So there was a division [i.e. sk-his-mah] among the people because of him." (John 7:43 KJV)

"9:13 They brought to the Pharisees [see also Was Paul Among Them?] him that aforetime was blind. 9:14 And it was the sabbath day when Jesus made the clay, and opened his eyes. 9:15 Then again the Pharisees also asked him how he had received his sight. He said unto them, He put clay upon mine eyes, and I washed, and do see. 9:16 Therefore said some of the Pharisees, This man is not of God, because he keepeth not the sabbath day [see Did Jesus Break The Law?]. Others said, How can a man that is a sinner do such miracles? And there was a division [i.e. sk-his-mah] among them." (John 9:13-16 KJV)

"10:17 Therefore doth my Father love me, because I lay down my life, that I might take it again. 10:18 No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This commandment have I received of my Father. 10:19 There was a division [i.e. sk-his-mah] therefore again among the Jews for these sayings. 10:20 And many of them said, He hath a devil, and is mad; why hear ye him? 10:21 Others said, These are not the words of him that hath a devil. Can a devil open the eyes of the blind?" (John 10:17-21 KJV)

Fact Finder: Many Christian-professing people, and people in the true Church of God, have foolishly claimed to be the "leader" or the "head" of Christ's Church. Who are such people attempting to dethrone with their pompous and arrogant claims?

tongue speaking

Psalm 34:13 


Keep your tongue from evil

and your lips from speaking deceit.



1 Peter 3:10 

For


“Whoever desires to love life

and see good days,

let him keep his tongue from evil

and his lips from speaking deceit;




STOP TEACHING VERBAL PLENARY PRESERVATION, BECAUSE IT IS A DECEITFUL THING.

Statistics

The Far Eastern Bible College (FEBC) is one of the oldest Bible colleges in Singapore, founded in 1962 by the late Rev Dr Timothy Tow, who also founded the Bible-Presbyterian Church movement in Southeast Asia.

Out of 500-600 of those who had graduated from Far Eastern Bible College, only 10%-20% of these graduates became pastors in Bible Presbyterian pastors or church workers, 80%-90% of these graduates went out to serve in other denominations, para churches or continue their study oversea. They did not stay in Bible Presbyterian Churches nor continue their study in Far Eastern Bible College.

This means about 80%-90% of all those who had graduated did not agreed with what they had learned in Far Eastern Bible College, nor they become pastor in Bible Presbyterian Churches! 80%-90% of the graduates did not accept the stand of Far Eastern Bible College nor the Bible Presbyterian Church movement!

You know what these Bible Presbyterian Churches like to say to these fresh graduates, if you do not like Bible Presbyterian movement, just leave us alone! No wonder! The Bible Presbyterian Church movement did not prosper like the Charismatic movement!

Right?

Dissolution of the B-P Synod

This post is edited and copied from: http://www.tabernaclebpc.com/?p=541

The Lord has blessed the B-P Churches and by the late ‘80s, there were already 25 B-P Churches formed. With growth, internal differences also arose over the practice of biblical separation. In fact as early as 1968, the Author has already witnessed a dissentious spirit creeping into Life B-P Church. There were some in the Church session who supported Dr. Billy Graham in which the Author pointed out his compromises in his “cooperative evangelism” method. The B-P Synod was dissolved on 30 October 1988. In the statement made about the dissolution of the Synod, the issues were centred on “strong differences in interpreting the Doctrine of Biblical Separation, Fundamentalism, and Neo-Evangelicalism. Concerted attempts were made during the past two years at reconciliation through personal discussions and formal meetings. Even a moratorium failed to resolve these differences and break the impase. Dissolution is accepted as the last resort.

One of these issues is that the Zion-Camel BP Churches maintained that tongues had not ceased, and that these were meaningful ecstatic utterances. It was clear that within the B-P Churches, a liberal camp has entrenched within the Synod. The Author even wrote a book about Charismatism to explain that tongues have ceased and that Holy Spirit revival in Church history such as John Sung’s revival has no mention of tongues at all. In addition, a Pastor within the liberal camp even cast doubts on God’s Word in his writings. An example is that he said we cannot determine whether the Flood was over the whole world or only on a part of it.

With the dissolution of the B-P Churches, each B-P Church will continue to exist with its existing name and autonomy. It is clear that after the dissolution, some B-P Churches are sailing with the neo-evangelical current and into the ecumenical mainstream. Hence today, not all B-P Churches are truly “B-P” in its original founding principles of biblical separation.

Schism led to formation of Bible-Presbyterian Church

By Roland Chia 

THE BIBLE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH (BPC) began in the United States in 1937 as the result of a schism caused by the Modernist-Fundamentalist Dispute. 

The origins of this dispute can be traced to the inaugural address delivered in 1891 by Charles Briggs, a minister of the Presbyterian Church of the United States of America (PCUSA) to supporters of Union Theological Seminary of New York City. In that lecture, Briggs shocked his audience by questioning and challenging many tenets of the Church, from its understanding of God’s revelation to the authority of Scriptures. This lecture precipitated what is known as “The Modernist-Fundamentalist controversy” that raged for the next 50 years in PCUSA. 

Those who were unable to accommodate the alleged theological liberalism of PCUSA left the church to form a new church which treats certain tenets of the Christian faith as non-negotiable while embracing the Presbyterian and Reformed heritage. 

Since its inception, the BPC has stood for “ecclesiastical separation”: the view that believers should not join or assist an apostate church. If they are already members of one, ecclesiastical separation teaches that believers should leave that church. Writ large, this principle also maintains that churches should not join denominations or organisations that are not true to Christ or the Bible. It is through “ecclesiastical separation” that Christians, local churches and even denominations strive to remain holy, in obedience to Scripture. 

Put differently, “ecclesiastical separation” enables true believers to individually and collectively strive to “earnestly contend for the faith which was once for all entrusted to the saints”. (Jude 3). Article 6 of the Constitution of True Life Bible-Presbyterian Church in Singapore spells this out in concrete terms: “We are opposed to all efforts to obscure or wipe out the clear line of separation between these absolutes: truth and error, light and darkness … We refer to such efforts by New Evangelicals, Charismatic Christians, promoters of ecumenical cooperative evangelism and of the social gospel, and all churches and other movements and organisations that are aligned with or sympathetic to the Ecumenical Movement.” 

In Singapore, the BPC movement had its official beginning in 1955 when the English congregation of Life Church, under the leadership of the Rev Timothy Tow and Elder Quek Kiok Chiang severed ties with the Presbyterian Synod. The schism came about because the English congregation opposed the perceived liberalism of the Presbyterian Synod, based on the latter’s affiliations with the Ecumenical Movement and the World Council of Churches. 

As Elder Han Soon Juan put it so clearly in the Golden Jubilee Magazine (1950-2000), the leaders in question were “determined that the Life Church English Service be raised as a Polemical Witness for the Faith”. The BPC grew steadily, spawning a number of churches and even establishing a theological institution, the Far Eastern Bible College, in 1962. 

However, in October 1988, the Synod of the BPC was dissolved mainly due to “strong differences in interpreting the Doctrine of Biblical Separation, Fundamentalism, and Neo-Evangelicalism”. 

Although the BPC acknowledges the Westminster Confession as its doctrinal standard, it has adopted the strictures of fundamentalism. The theological conservatism of the BPC is seen, for instance, in its literal interpretation of the Bible, especially the creation narrative found in the early chapters of Genesis. Rejecting theistic evolution, it teaches that God created the world in six days, which are “not distinguished in length from the six-day work week”. 

Accordingly, the BPC also teaches that the flood recorded in Genesis 7 is global, citing the thickness of rock strata found throughout the world as geological evidence. A third example is its view on the millennium. The BPC prefers premillennialism – that Christ, upon his return will reign on earth for 1,000 years – to other millennial views because it is “based on a plain and literal interpretation of Scripture”. According to Christopher Lensch, the BPC initially adopted some elements of dispensational theology, but has in recent years passed a synodical resolution disapproving dispensationalism. 

ANOTHER FEATURE that once distinguished the BPC from other churches is its preference for the King James Version (KJV) of the English Bible. The privileging of the KJV is based on the supposition that this translation relied on the Hebrew and Greek texts that were closest to the original autographs of the Bible. There was therefore a period in which the BPC in Singapore used only the KJV in public reading, preaching and teaching. Those who privileged the KJV are also of the view that other versions of the English Bible (e.g., the NIV) are unreliable because they do not provide a literal and accurate translation of the original Hebrew and Greek texts. 

Making the sharpest possible distinction between translation and interpretation, BP theologians Timothy Tow and Jeffrey Khoo maintain that because it has adopted the dynamic equivalent approach to Bible translation, the NIV is an inaccurate version that “has attacked the Written Word and the Living Word”. With the dissolution of the Synod of the BPC in Singapore, however, a number of BP churches now use the NIV. 

The dissolution of the Singapore synod has brought about a more nuanced view of orthodoxy among some BP churches in Singapore. Perhaps it has helped in some ways to underscore the fact that the apostolic Church is also at the same time catholic, as the ecumenical creeds – the Apostle Creed and the Nicene Creed – profess. Insofar as the catholicity of the Church must be defined as “universality plus identity” and “universality plus continuity”, catholicity always presupposes apostolicity. And insofar as the idea of apostolicity is not static, but also signifies the Church’s dynamic witness, apostolicity always implies catholicity. 

The continued presence of the BPC, however, will serve as a reminder to the churches in Singapore of our collective responsibility to faithfully hand down the Faith that we have received from the Apostles, and to courageously guard it against dilutions and distortions. 

Dr Roland Chia is Chew Hock Hin Professor of Christian Doctrine and Dean of the School of Postgraduate Studies at Trinity Theological College. He worships at the Fairfield Preaching Point in Woodlands.

I am a fundamentalist, preaching the truth in love!

I preached the five fundamental tenets of the Christian faith:

1.The verbal inerrancy of Scripture, 
2.the divinity of Jesus Christ, 
3.the virgin birth, 
4.the substitutionary atonement, 
5.the physical resurrection and bodily return of Christ.

I was born as a fundamentalist, but a different fundamentalist, preaching Christ, I must preach the truth in love! 

Dr. Martyn Llyod-Jones said, "To me the work of preaching is the highest and the greatest and the most glorious calling to which anyone can ever be called."

Sometimes I pray in an unknown tongue, but don't call me as a cult!

Sometimes I have tea with Anglicans, don't call me as a Neo_Evangelical.

Sometimes I see love and truth must come together, don't call me as a modernist!

Do not call people any how names, because you are becoming a judge!

International Council of Christian Churches wrote

Recently some brethren in Singapore and elsewhere have been promulgating that apart from the verbal plenary inspiration (VPI) and the consequent inerrancy and infallibility of the Holy Scriptures in the original languages of Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek, “the words of the Received Greek and Masoretic Hebrew texts that underlie the King James Bible are the very words which God has preserved down through the centuries being the exact words of the originals themselves”. This theory of claiming Verbal Plenary Preservation (VPP) for the KJV’s underlying texts and their exact identification with the Holy Scriptures in the original languages, is without Biblical foundation. This has not been, and is not the position of the ICCC or SCCC or other ICCC-affiliated organizations. The SCCC therefore calls upon its members and all other Bible-believing brethren not to subscribe to this new, Biblically unfounded and unproven theory.

KJV-Only Doctrine of 'Grave' Concern to B-P Pastors

Once the fastest growing denomination in Singapore, the Bible-Presbyterian Church is now wracked by infighting that threatens to divide and destroy the conservative mainline evangelical group. 

At the heart of this division is what is known as the "textual debate" or "King James Version-only controversy", which has divided B-P churches along two lines. 

One camp says that only the Authorised King James Version one of the earliest English translations of the Bible is acceptable. They say that this is because only the KJV is based on the majority of existing Greek manuscripts; the other, modern English translations are not. This position is known as Verbal Plenary Preservation or VPP. Many scholars however disagree with this doctrine with strong reasoning. 

Rev Tan, who is the pastor of Grace Bible-Presbyterian Church, called the KJV-Only controversy the curse of the B-P movement in Singapore. 

In an emotion-laden letter to his congregation entitled A Very Sad State of the Bible-Presbyterian Church in Singapore Today dated January 2009 which was uploaded on his church website, he described how some young lecturers in Far Eastern Bible College the first B-P seminary began to aggressively propagate the VPP teaching some six years ago. 

Teaching that all other English translations of the Bible, including the NKJV, NASB, NIV, ESV and others, are corrupt versions, the VPP proponents went to the point of condemning anyone or any church that uses a version other than the KJV, even going to the extreme to say that other Bible versions present a different Jesus from the KJV, he said. The militancy of this fundamentalist section of the B-P denomination has led to church splits in three congregations locally and more regionally, name calling, and an ongoing public court battle between FEBC and Life B-P Church. 

This VPP teaching has been a curse in the B-P Church, he wrote. 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. 

Rev Tan went on to clarify that a large majority of B-P Pastors do not uphold the VPP doctrine but in fact strongly oppose it and noted that [v]ery few B-P Pastors and B-P Churches are for this teaching, and listed six congregations that are pro-VPP and at least 23 congregations that are against the teaching. He added that the controversy has led to confusion over what B-P churches believe and expressed his wish that pro-VPP churches would distinguish themselves from the other, more mainstream congregations. 

In response to the doctrinal assault led by VPP proponents, Rev Tan and four other B-P pastors met up with B-P founding pastor Rev Timothy Tow and his wife in October 2002 and shared with him their concern that FEBC was heading toward an extreme view and urged him to stop certain people from advocating the doctrine so as to avert a split, according to a letter dated June 2005 also posted online. Rev Tan noted that Rev Tow appears to have subscribed to the VPP view. The pastor's serious concern for the matter is evident in how he listed false teachings in particular VPP as the first item in his exhortation to church members on the 33rd anniversary of Grace B-P Church. 

Be warned of this teaching and do not let it enter into Grace Church because it will create enormous trouble and disunity, he solemnly charged them. 

Another B-P pastor for whom the textual debate is of grave concern is the Rev Dr Jack Sin of Maranatha B-P Church, who wrote an undated article A Grave Matter: Verity, Sagacity and Charity in the Textual Debate in which he clarified his church's stand on the issue VPI and encouraged all B-P leaders and believers to avoid such divisive matters and focus on evangelism and the mentoring of God's people. 

About the KJV-Only Controversy 

VPP proponents say that the KJV is the only acceptable English translation of the Bible because it is based on the Textus Receptus (TR), a series of Greek translations compiled and edited in 1516 by Dutch Catholic scholar and humanist Desiderius Erasmus, which they believe is a perfect representation of the Majority or Byzantine text-type which comprise the great majority of existing Greek manuscripts and which by applying the majority rule they believe is a perfect duplicate of the original Greek autographs penned by the apostles under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. 

Simply put, the TR on which only the KJV is based best represents the Majority text-type which by virtue of it being the majority is the exact copy, without error, of the original Greek autographs, which means they believe that the TR is equal to the original, infallible and inerrant autographs. 

Opponents however dispute the VPP line of reasoning at both junctures. Firstly, they highlight that the majority rule is not necessarily accurate in judging which text-type Byzantine or Alexandrian (on which all other modern English translations are based) is the original. This is for two reasons: the majority rule fails to take into account the age and geographical location of the existing manuscripts. 

VPP opponents emphasise that Alexandrian text-type manuscripts dating much earlier than the more proliferate Byzantine text-type have been uncovered in the early 20th Century. The age difference is not small, with Alexandrian text-type manuscripts dating from the second to the fourth centuries while Byzantine text-type manuscripts date only from the twelfth to the fourteenth centuries. 

Moreover, textual scholars need to take into account cultural-geographical differences. More of the existing Greek manuscripts were found in the Byzantine text-type than Alexandrian text-type but this is only because the Eastern Church had Greek as its primary language while the Western Church was Latin-speaking. To be sure, even Greek manuscripts found in the West appear to have originated from the East. Therefore, if the majority method were to be fairly applied, it would have to take into account the number of existing Latin manuscripts, but if this were the case the balance would be tilted in favour of the Alexandrian text-type. 

This is why scholars have suggested another method that considers all factors including majority, age, location, difficulty of the reading, and which variant best explains the origin of the other variants. This method, which draws from all available manuscript sources, is known as the Eclectic Text or Critical Text. All modern English translations are based on the Eclectic Text. 

They argue also that the TR, on which the KJV is based, is not an accurate representation of the Majority text-type, with hundreds of differences between the two due to hastiness in translation work and lack of comprehensive manuscript sources. 

The position taken by most scholars is as follows: while the Majority text method does result in the most likely original reading in most instances, it should not be employed universally or exclusively. There are many other important factors in determining which variant is most likely to be original. 

Even though it is impossible to reconstruct the original autographs to the last detail, scholars emphasise that most of the variations between existing Byzantine and Alexandrian text-type manuscripts involve differences in word order and other variants that do not appear as translatable differences in English versions, according to the Institute for New Testament Textual Research. 

Moreover, the preface to the KJV states that the TR, Alexandrian text-type and Byzantine text-type are 85 percent identical (that is, of the variations that occur in any manuscript, only 15 percent actually differ between these three). 

Edmond Chua 

edmond@christianpost.com 

Turretin

To teach inerrancy of any version is a serious departure from the Reformed creeds. It sounds like some in the Bible Presbyterian Church need to read some Turretin. 

God who is supposedly committed to protecting and preserving His word in the KJV as the only valid translation for English-speaking people! 

The word of God to FEBC and Life BPC

Hosea 10:4-8 
New International Version (NIV) 

4 They make many promises, 
take false oaths 
and make agreements; 
therefore lawsuits spring up 
like poisonous weeds in a plowed field. 

5 The people who live in Samaria fear 
for the calf-idol of Beth Aven. 
Its people will mourn over it, 
and so will its idolatrous priests, 
those who had rejoiced over its splendor, 
because it is taken from them into exile. 

6 It will be carried to Assyria 
as tribute for the great king. 
Ephraim will be disgraced; 
Israel will be ashamed of its foreign alliances. 

7 Samaria’s king will be destroyed, 
swept away like a twig on the surface of the waters. 

8 The high places of wickedness will be destroyed— 
it is the sin of Israel. 
Thorns and thistles will grow up 
and cover their altars. 
Then they will say to the mountains, “Cover us!” 
and to the hills, “Fall on us!” 

Commentary from ESV Study Bible: 

Hos. 10:4 It is difficult to determine whether those who utter mere words are Israelites (v. 3) or their kings. If Israelites, it refers to Israel's misplaced reliance on their leaders and the hypocritical or blind claim that they are nevertheless faithful to the Lord (cf. 1 Sam. 8:7; Hos. 7:14). If it refers to the words of kings, their covenants/promises do not stem from integrity but are untrustworthy, empty oaths. 

Hos. 10:5 The address moves to the future. The inhabitants … tremble. Both their king and calf-idol will be removed from Samaria. What the people and the priests once rejoiced over, they will mourn for. On Beth-aven, see note on 4:15. The term glory describes the special presence of God in his sanctuary (cf. Ex. 40:34). Here it is the presumed presence of God at the illegitimate sanctuary. It will depart (or go into exile, ESV footnote), just as the legitimate glory did (1 Sam. 4:21–22). 

Hos. 10:6 The idol they worshiped becomes tribute for the great king of Assyria (see 5:13).

Hos. 10:7 The imagery like a twig on the face of the waters (i.e., tossed about every which way and then swept away) illustrates the helplessness and weakness of the kings that Israel trusted. 

Hos. 10:8 The thorn and thistle indicate that the land is unproductive; cf. Gen. 3:18; Matt. 7:16; Heb. 6:8. For Aven (another name for Beth-aven), see note on Hos. 4:15. 

My commentary: 

Lawsuit is a curse to FEBC and Life BPC! 

Hosea 10:4 "...lawsuits spring up 
like poisonous weeds in a plowed field." 

Genesis 3:17-18, "...cursed is the ground because of you; 
in pain you shall eat of it all the days of your life; 
thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you; 
and you shall eat the plants of the field. 

To say that the ground is cursed (Hb. ’arar, v. 17) and will bring forth thorns and thistles (v. 18) indicates that the abundant productivity that was seen in Eden will no longer be the case. Underlying this judgment is a disruption of the harmonious relationship that originally existed between humans and nature. 

Wine drinking

The Apostolic Fathers make very little reference to wine, but the earliest references from the Church Fathers make it clear that the early church used wine in their celebration of the Eucharist, often mixing it with water according to the prevailing custom. The Didache, an early Christian treatise which is generally accepted to be from the late 1st century, instructs Christians to give a portion of their wine in support of a true prophet or, if they have no prophet resident with them, to the poor. 

"Didache, chapter 13". Archived from the original on May 28, 2007. 

http://web.archive.org/web/20070528025425/http://www.earlychristianwritings.com/text/didache-hoole.html#13. 

Why?

You guess what is the reason, God allowed FEBC to continue to operate in Life BP Church's compound? 

My guess is, God want these brothers in FEBC and Life BP Church to learn one important lesson, "to love one another!" 

After 50 odd years, these two still do not know how to love their brothers in Christ! These two still do not know how to love their neighbors, they both claimed they have the truth, but they do not have love to love their enemies! They have lost the first love they had in the beginning! FEBC and Life BP Church are fundamentalists without love! These are so called funny_mentalists! 

They must learn this lesson well, if not they will be ashamed one day, when they face the Lord face to face, when He comes! These two, who will be praised, who will be ashamed? 

Surprise, false teachers and false prophets coming out among fundamentalists, even Bible Presbyterian Churches have their own false teachers and false prophets this time, they are teaching in Far Eastern Bible College, teaching false teaching like Verbal Plenary Preservation! 

We are watching, what they are going to do next?

Production

Now even fundamentalists like Bible Presbyterians are producing false teachings, false prophets and false teachers! 

How sad! 

That is why we better buy more and more drums for our churches, drink more wine! Speak more and more tongues! 

At least we can feel a bit good about ourselves!

Bible Presbyterian churches have 7 roots

Still you are proud and dare to say, you have 7 roots! 

Did you defile the land God given to you? 

Bible Presbyterian churches have 7 roots' story see link below: 

http://www.febc.edu.sg/assets/pdfs/febc_press/The%20Singapore%20B-P%20Church%20Story.pdf

First they came

First they came for the communists, 
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist. 

Then they came for the trade unionists, 
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist. 

Then they came for the Jews, 
and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew. 

Then they came for me 
and there was no one left to speak out for me. 

Pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) 


You better speak out before it is too late, Bible Presbyterian!

Pride

Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall. It is better to be lowly in spirit with the afflicted than to share the spoils with the proud. (Proverbs 16:18-19 NET) 

Commenting on verse 18, Dr Bruce Waltke writes: 


...the arrogant raise their eyes above God and humanity and stumble to their perdition (Bruce K. Watke, The Book OF Proverbs Chapters 15 - 31, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2005, 26). 


Indeed, God comes right out and tells us that He hates pride. Commenting on Proverbs 8:13, Watke writes: 


...human pride (is) a self-confident attitude that throws off God's rule to pursue selfish interests. Arrogance destroys a relationship with the Lord, perverts order, and leads to unethical behaviour against one's neighbour. (Bruce K. Watke, The Book OF Proverbs Chapters 1-15, Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 2004, 401)