Thursday, 27 June 2013


What does the Bible say?
Since the day I received the Lord Jesus Christ into my life in a Methodist Church I learnt to ask a simple question; “What does the Bible say?”[i] The intention of asking the question was to set a momentum for an in depth discussion and hoping that people’s attention would be drawn to the Bible, and eventually everybody would be asking the same question. This habit has been reinforced by my days spent in both the Pusat Latihan Kristian Malaysia (i.e. Malaysian Christian Training centre and it was later known as Malaysian Bible Seminary) and Seminary Theology Malaysia. I asked the same question when I prepared my messages, Bible studies, and whenever I was confronted by tough and tricky questions. I did it so often and so much so some church members told me off with the remark, “Don’t you have a mind of your own and why do you have to ask ‘What does the Bible say?’ ”

Unfortunately, wishes and reality do not really match that well, I hardly meet people who would respond according to my wishes. I admit that this question tends to offend people because it challenges their precious conviction. I cannot remember when was the first time I offended people by raising such question, but I remember some occasions when I offended people.
 I was in Parit Buntar and Nibong Tebal, two small towns located at the border of Perak and Penang, for a period of three years. It was the first opportunity for me to try out what I learnt from the seminary and I did it with much enthusiasm. Immediately, I applied all that I know about exegesis, interpretation and preaching, into preparing messages and Bible study. I asked the question “What does the Bible say” frequently to fish discussion. During one of the Bible studies on the book of Revelation, a young lady teacher suddenly burst into tears and accused me of being so “liberal” and not biblical. After some double check, I then discovered that the teacher was from the Gospel Chapel background and believed in the Dispensational view of interpreting the book of Revelation. My approach to the book of Revelation was plain exegetical observation plus lots of questions, and I was busy helping the group to look for facts and evidences from the book. All that I have done had actually put a big question mark on her conviction, without me realizing it.

At another time, I was in the Penang Island preaching on Ephesians 1.19-21, and as usual I made my exegetical observation and remarks, plus some questions addressing the dominant understanding pertaining to the ministry of the Holy Spirit. I was trying to show that the “sign seeking” point of view has got no good support from the Bible. I concluded that the New Testament understanding on the subject was not only accurate but also more superior. Can you guess what happened after the worship? My God, I was surrounded by a small group of young adult worshippers who were so angry and challenged me for a debate.
When I was in Melaka, preaching on 1 Corinthians 13, in the same manner, I raised questions on the common belief on the gifts of Holy Spirit and presented facts and evidences from the Bible, and then I put forward my exegetical observation and concluding remarks. The result was similarly hot.

When I was in Segamat, a small town in the state of Johor, I had the opportunity to cover a series of teaching on the person and the work of the Holy Spirit based on the epistles of 1 Corinthians and Ephesians. I asked the same question “What does the Bible say?” and provided facts and evidences from the Bible. I reminded church members not to entertain “hear say”. The belief and teaching of the Full Gospel Businessmen Fellowship was dominant in the lives of the church members and you can imagine what kind of result I would get before I finished my teaching. I have almost preached myself out of job.
Later I was invited to join the Reformed Baptist group and I went in with the impression that this group of believers would welcome my question. It started well and warm, but as time went by, I realized that after all Reformed Baptist believers do have problem with my question. During one minister conference, the founding elder was teaching on the subject of Christian Worship and insisted that only Hymns should be used in the public worship[ii]. When it was time for discussion, I asked my standard question and pressed for facts and evidences. I did not know I have offended the elder until sometime later. It was during a fraternal meeting the elder who was beside me cautioned me not ask too many questions, and then he told me that he actually wanted to give me a punch on my face[iii] when I raised questions at the Conference to challenge his conviction that only hymns should be sued.

The last straw was when I asked my children what they have learnt from the Sunday school and what must they do to please God. To my Surprise, they told me that we must keep the Law of Moses (The 10 Commandments) to please God. I was shocked because it was not my belief and I have never taught my children such belief. I reacted and I made a big blunder by confronting the issue strongly. At hind sight I should have dealt with the issue in a different manner and the end result might not be so drastic. Basically, I raised many questions and asked for facts and evidences, and instead getting the discussion that I wanted, the local church met and found me guilty of going against the Bible. This time, I have no choice but to leave. I have really preached myself out of job.

Later, I discovered that other elders were facing the same problem, but they prefer not to stir the hornet by asking too many questions. What else can I say? The question I was taught to raise is the culprit and the cause of my entire problem. I have to conclude that Christians, in general, do not like to be challenged by such question. If you do not believe in what I found and you can try by asking the question yourself.







[i] Rom.4.3; Gal.4.30
[ii] See my article on “How to sing?”
[iii] He is a Chinese Kung Fu expert.

Sunday, 9 June 2013


Academic Blind Spots
What is a blind spot in the context of an academic and theological discussion? According to the Webster’s dictionary, it is a prejudice, or an area of ignorance that one has but is often unaware of. What is prejudice? Again, according to Webster’s; prejudice is a judgment or opinion formed before the facts are known, it is a preconceived idea. Or it is a judgment or opinion held in disregard of facts that contradict it, it is an unreasonable bias. Prejudice is therefore nonfactual. Prejudice is powerful and destructive when it is mingled with pride and passion. Our Lord Jesus Christ was, in a way, sent to the cross by the passionate prejudice of the Jews. We could say that much of the doctrinal disputes among Christians in church history were clashes of prejudices. Prejudice is not a thing of the past and it can be found in our thinking today. Indeed, there are plenty of blind spots in our thinking. All of us are guilty of holding on to one form of prejudice or another in our reasoning. The following are two examples of how prejudice operates. Be careful, they are dangerous when they are mixed with emotion!

The 1689 Baptist Confession of faith vs. the Bible
Since the Reformed Baptist church was established in Malaysia, founding members were taught that the Bible is the authority over our belief and practice, and at the same time they were also told to subscribe to the Confession as the authority over their faith and practice. Ever since, this two prong formula has become the trade mark conviction of the Reformed Baptist in Malaysia. This is a bit confusing. Which authority should the believers follow, the Bible or the Confession?
Common sense tells us that it is disastrous for any nation or organization to have two equal powers to be the authority. There will be war when this happen. To avoid this, the authority has to be unified and the role of the other power must be clearly defined and must submit to the unified authority. Take our country for instance, under the constitution, the King is given the constitutional authority and he is the symbol of national unity. The Prime Minister is given the executive power to lead the nation with the help of the Cabinet and the Parliament. The Police are authorized to maintain peace and order and the Defense Units are to protect the nation. The Court is authorized to ensure the constitutional right of every citizen in the nation is protected. In theory and practice, these various powers have to submit to the constitutional authority of the King.
Now, we have unknowingly claimed both the Bible and the Confession as our authorities. Presuming we have done the right thing but in actual fact we made a mistake by making such a claim. On one hand we uphold the Bible and at the same time we spit at the Bible by holding up high the Confession. How are we to persuade others to believe in the Bible when we ourselves do not believe in it? How can we condemn others for not respecting the Bible when we ourselves have no respect for the Bible? It is like the pot calling the kettle black. Or it is, according to a Chinese saying, like the fifty steps ran away soldiers laughing at the hundred steps ran away soldiers. The Bible and the Confession are not the same.  For the Bible is “given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness” (2 Tim.3.16).  The Confession cannot command similar respect simply because it is a piece of human doctrine.  Worse of all, in some areas, its content does not reflect the teaching of the Bible accurately.
What must we do now? We have no other alternative except to recognize and accept the Bible as the only authority over our faith and practice. We must assign the Confession to another place. It will be better if we place it together with all other good Christian doctrines.  We must commit to a careful exegetical study of the Bible and develop a better understanding of the Bible. Then we must reexamine the Confession so to put it right with Bible and to make it relevant for today. The confession was the common consensus of the old and we need to produce a consensus for ourselves today. Only then we can move on, not blindly, but with a clear vision.

The Law vs. the gospel[i]
We often hear statements like “we must preach the Law first to impress upon the hearts of the sinners to fear God and His judgment, then we preach the gospel to bring them to Christ Jesus to seek salvation”, or “we must persuade sinners to believe in Christ Jesus and then teach them to obey the Law”, ringing from the Reformed circle and conservative believers. These statements remind us more of the passionate push for the Law by the Pharisees than the teaching of the gospel. These nonfactual statements puzzle normal thinking mind and raise more questions: What is wrong with the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ? Why are we so hostile towards the gospel? Why do we have to pitch the Law against the gospel?
There are two problems with these hostile statements. Firstly, it gives a wrong impression that the gospel is impotent and by itself it cannot convince the sinners to repent from their sins and believe in the Lord Christ Jesus. Whereas Paul, the apostle, told us that the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ is the power of for salvation for those who believe. He also said that the righteousness of God is revealed by the gospel without the help of the Law (Rom.1.16, 3.21). Secondly, it sends out a wrong message that the gospel is merely about comforting the sinners and therefore it has nothing by itself to demand allegiance from the sinners. The Bible, on the contrarily, tells us that the Lord demands every saved sinner to obey His gospel in his life (Rom.6.17, 10.16, Gal.3.1, 2 The.1.8, 3.14). We must bear in mind that we are called to begin with gospel and end with gospel. There is no need for anybody to change lane in the journey. We must also remember that we are called to propagate the gospel everywhere we go, and not to proclaim a confused message like the message that was proclaimed by the Jewish Christians (Acts 15).

Conclusion
Christian sound thinking is factual, while prejudice, preconceived idea and unreasonable bias are not, and they are bad for sound thinking and we must eliminate them from our study. When we remove prejudice from our thinking we will be able to see clearly and in a better position to return the Bible and the gospel of Lord Jesus Christ to the believers.


[i] See my article “The glorious gospel” for detail exegetical observation on the subject.