- The Line is Drawn

The Reformed Baptist Fraternal (RBF) Has Drawn the Line!

Through the effort of Brother JR, a special meeting was convened on November 11, 2004 “to discuss the possibility of mediating the theological differences between Mr. Lau Sing Foo, pastor of Sungai Dua Church, and the fraternal members of 6 reformed Baptist churches” [quote from the minutes of that special meeting]. I was not a party to that meeting. However, when the meeting was over, I was called to appear before the ‘fraternal members.’ At the meeting earlier the leaders had decided upon three proposals for my consideration to resolve the theological differences, i.e. to deal with my ‘fundamental and serious’ theological errors because I differ from the beliefs of these other men and their churches. All along it was boldly assumed that I am the party guilty of fundamental and serious doctrinal errors. I was offered three options: a. We should find a way to work together and put aside the theological differences for the time being [meaning, I must put aside – i.e. abandon - my different understanding, otherwise no more working together is possible]. b. We should find a way to resolve the theological differences [meaning, if I cannot conform, fellowship is no longer possible.] and c. We should part in a friendly manner [meaning, that’s the only alternative].

I was asked to make a choice. I ruled out the third. I chose the first option, hoping that given time these brethren may come to understand the gospel truths being disputed. However on Jan 25th, 2005 after the official business of the GMF AGM I was given a copy of the minutes of that special meeting held on Nov 11. Item 4 of the minutes states, “The meeting recognized that the issue involved was fundamental and serious, and cannot be brushed aside and pretend that it does not exist.” This was what the RBF had concluded at the special meeting held on Nov 11. The RBF had declared that the issues involved are ‘fundamental and serious’ and the issues cannot be brushed aside and pretend that it does not exist. Since that was what the RBF had concluded then the first proposal above is really just a farce. Putting aside the theological differences for the time being is only pretending that those fundamental and serious theological differences do not exist! Why play game? The implication was actually quite simple: I am in fundamental and serious ‘errors’ and unless I repent and embrace their 'standard reformed' view, I would be shown the way out. I do respect people's rights and liberty to extend or withhold fellowship. I would choose a clear conscience captive to God's word than the fellowship of the eminent saints if I have to choose one. I would have both if possible. I don’t demand fellowship from others, though I mightily cherish fellowship voluntarily extended to us.

I don’t believe the RBF is prepared to sincerely put aside the theological differences for the time being. This became obvious at the meeting on Jan 25th. Peter Kek raised the matter again and wanted to know whether I am still in disagreement with those seven ‘standard reformed views’ raised in his Official Letter of Complaint to the SDC. Knowing then that they were intent to pursue the matter, I proposed that it would be best if I could publish my views on those seven points and leave it to them to find a way to resolve the theological differences. They were heartily agreeable to this course of action. If after reading this work they are still of the opinion that I am in ‘fundamental and serious’ errors, then they have only one of the three choices left to work with - get their churches to officially withdraw fellowship from Pastor Lau and/or SDC, i.e. “we should part in a friendly manner.”

In early March 05, the organizing church for the 2005’s combined church camp, upon the advice of the RBF, wrote to inform SDC that as organizer they were not able to extend a formal invitation to SDC to join the church camp for June 05. However, they did very kindly condescended to consider individual believers and friends from SDC who may wish to join. The explanation for their action is that they have taken a view, i.e. made a judgment, concerning the doctrinal position held by SDC.

The issues do involve serious questions like, how and when does a sinner receive eternal life; what is the gospel; what does the preaching of the gospel do; do repentance and faith secure eternal life; how and when does God justify a sinner; does a believer persevere in a life of faith and holiness in order to be eternally saved, or is it God who perseveres to preserve a believer in the state of grace that he is eternally saved; etc. These are not minor or irrelevant questions, but ‘fundamental and serious’ ones, as the other pastors have understood and declared.

The implication of the RBF’s statements is clear: either I am in fundamental and serious errors, or the members of the Reformed Baptist Fraternal and their churches are. Both sides may be wrong, but both sides can’t possibly be correct and be faithful to the Scriptures at the same time, since essentially the two sides hold to opposing views on those seven doctrinal points. I have summarized the two opposing views on the seven theological points in the following table so that the ‘fundamental and serious’ differences between the two views may be seen easily. The lines are finally drawn by the RBF. They have declared that the differences must not be brushed aside or ignored.

In complying with their wish, “we should find a way to resolve the theological differences,” we must make genuine effort to show plainly what are those theological differences. Some protagonists just state their views and consider the matter closed and if not complied with the fellowship is withdrawn. Other protagonists speak their minds with the hope of promoting further understanding on the issues being disputed and leave every person with sound mind (2Tim 1:7) to conclude for themselves the truth and error of those disputed points. We must take our stand and fight the good fight of faith to uphold the truth of the gospel once for all delivered to the saints, In compliance with the desire of the brethren of the Reformed Baptist Fraternal, I have endeavoured to state my views plainly for the scrutiny of all who care for the truth of our salvation as revealed in the Holy Scriptures.