在面臨不確定情況下,神奇妙的建立了真耶穌教會
耶穌說:信而受洗的必然得救(可十六16)。洗禮之重要性對得救而言是無庸置疑,在整個救恩章程裡洗禮是不可刪除的。使徒們完全遵行不具有任何一絲妥協,彼得年老時也不斷的提醒信徒:一個人要得救,洗禮這環是絕對不能被取代(彼前三21)。這是神在處理人的罪,所設立的方法(徒二38; 二二16),當人受洗罪得赦後就被牽引進入基督的身體裡。
既然信而受洗必然得救,那麼何謂「使人得救的洗禮」呢?毫無疑問的,信心是最關鍵,然而這裡所指的信心不僅限於相信耶穌是唯一的救主,更在於信奉經上所記的「ㄧ洗」,特別是保羅在他的書信裡對以弗所教會所強調的(弗四5)。既然只有「ㄧ洗」,就意味著只有一種洗禮方式,這方式是神的吩咐,并要教會完全遵照去行。
ㄧ個有功效的洗禮其獨特性與洗禮的方式有關。這方式是表明在基督死的形狀上(低下頭)與祂聯合,是由ㄧ位接受赦罪洗禮的人面向下表現出來。低頭面向下是進入耶穌的死(埋葬)之切入點,這是藉由聖靈的工作,最終使受洗的人在耶穌的復活上有分(約十九30; 羅六3-5 )。我們若忽視這種洗禮方式,原因是──我們自認得救是因為我們的信而不是因實行教義──這不外乎是公然反對神所設立的方式,為得救的方法。
有人聲稱:真耶穌教會早期三位工人中有兩位並沒有經過面向下洗禮。這件事若不加以澄清提出反證,對整體教會的生存而言將是致命ㄧ擊;這種說法ㄧ旦不從信仰團體中過濾掉,所帶來的影響非我們所能想像。
這兩位工人是否接受面向下洗禮?
事實上從許多內外部資料看來,證實這兩位早期的工人是已接受面向下洗禮。外在資料,基本上都在描繪真耶穌教會施洗者一直是為受洗者執行面向下洗禮,每當提到歷來早期的工人一定同時論及他們面向下的洗禮。在某種程度上,「受洗面向下」已成為真耶穌教會獨特的地方。
內部資料,有無數口傳和出版品都證實這三位早期工人已確實接受面向下洗禮。口傳方面乃是從許許多多傳道者進修會中聽到這樣的史實,文字記載方面,包括由美國總會所撰寫的真耶穌教會簡介(member.tic.org),台灣教會更有許多文獻出版品,其中一例就是「真耶穌教會三十年專刊」。當然,所有的見證都ㄧ再證明這兩位早期工人所受的洗是面向下洗禮。
從神的話和神的靈而來的明證
「面向下」是有功效的洗禮中不可缺少的部分,這在聖經中有充分的根據。神是一位講秩序的神,絕不會容忍早期三位工人中的兩位不遵守面向下洗禮的教義,這麼作等於神與自己的教訓相違背。這樣的事在新約聖經中也從來沒有出現過。神的工作,特別是有關救贖的工作一定是清楚不含糊的,一個明顯的例子「奉耶穌的名受洗」,這早在使徒那一代已首次執行(他們都是見過耶穌面的),並且在使徒行傳裡歷代都是這麼傳。
最重要的是,聖靈與這末世真教會同在、同作工,這證實了真耶穌教會所傳的真理。真理有一部分是關於神對教會所啟示之得救要道,這些教義都源於聖經。聖靈與教會同在成為不可搖撼的明證:「洗禮面向下是從神來的啟示」;聖靈與教會同工也很明確的見證了這樣一個事實:教會自始至終無不奉行「洗禮面向下」之信仰。既然神的靈一直與教會同在,像這樣的事──三位早期工人中的兩位不依照聖經方式洗禮-----竟不被早期階段在任之工人們提出質疑,這實在是不可能的事。
到底事實真像是甚麼?這又有何意涵?
魏保羅、張靈生、張巴拿巴,這三位是真耶穌教會早期的工人,他們並不是教會的創辦人。真耶穌教會在1917 年是由聖靈親自建立,這三位工人在真教會建立以前已個別領受了聖靈,魏保羅在1916年、張靈生在1910年、張巴拿巴在1911年,這裡很清楚的看到聖靈在建立真耶穌教會上親自引導他們。
根據歷史,魏保羅受聖靈啟示要在活水裡面向下洗禮,在1917年聖靈親自為他施洗,他並受聖靈啟示教會基本教義,張巴拿巴和張靈生從魏保羅那裡接受到真理,也彼此在1919年行了浸禮。關鍵是有人認為這兩位並不是由魏保羅(這首位受聖靈親自施洗的人)來為他們施洗,這引發出一個看法:這三位早期工人似乎是兩組不同的工人,他們領受不同的洗禮,來形成教會。
這看似差異,如何使之一致?
無論如何,答案在聖經,特別是在使徒教會建立期,彼得是第一位從基督領受完整有關建立教會的信息(太十六17-18),然而,他並不是教會建立初期唯一受基督託付的人選。這傳福音的使命也同時吩咐給所有的使徒(太二八19;可十六15)不單是對彼得ㄧ人而已。關於受洗,彼得和其他使徒同受主的吩咐要為那相信的人施洗。聖靈降臨後,教會首次執行洗禮,這不可能是由一人來完成。
顯然,神早在使徒時代ㄧ開始就有意設立一群人來作建立教會的工作。同樣的,在真耶穌教會建立初期,這三位早期工人也被選作建立教會的工作。這證實了一點,他們的洗禮都是藉由聖靈完成,因此不能以他們洗禮狀況特殊來作為質疑的根據,懷疑全球真耶穌教會的一致性。經過多年聖靈一直與教會同在,保守她在神的真理裡面,既然這是一個奇妙的見證,那就不應該質疑早期工人的洗禮使之成為爭論的爆發點;相反的,我們應當對神在建立教會上之奇妙作為感到歡喜快樂。
在聖靈初降後,任何人相信所傳給他們的福音,願意成為使徒教會的一份子,就必須接受使徒或與使徒站同一陣線的工人代為執行浸禮。例如保羅(徒九18; 二二16)並哥尼流和他全家的信仰轉變(徒十一45以下),雖然在這兩則記載中,神個別向他們啟示得救的方法,但他們的洗禮ㄧ概藉由使徒工人們來完成,這就是神所定作為擴張教會的方法。
同樣的,真耶穌教會也採取使徒時代相同模式,在這一群被神揀選、並以神獨特方式給他們施洗的早期工人之後,教會開始迅速擴展,接著,人們藉由真耶穌教會工人執行洗禮加入教會。真耶穌教會(我們指的是那些持守神真道的各地真耶穌教會)從沒有一刻是隸屬於任何一個基督教宗派。
回應一些沒有歷史根據、目的在分裂教會的說法
我們用上述有害的說法為例,假設沒有足夠的歷史證據證明這種說法的錯誤。
結論-撒但細膩的詭計和工作
這樣一個沒有根據的說法,是嚴重危害真耶穌教會的立足角色,也就是主對真教會所託付的重大使命-更正所有錯誤的教義。這種說法在影射教會固有內在早期工人受洗的問題,以此來搞砸教會對外的使命,更嚴重的是混亂內部更正的工作。這很明顯是惡者的工作,牠巧計打算在世界各地的真耶穌教會製造分裂,助長倡導者個人野心,這種行為正是把人帶來歸向人而不而歸向神,為的是建立自己的權勢。
從以上所述各點,我們得到結論:這種說法「真耶穌教會早期三位工人中有兩位並沒有經過面向下洗禮」不是事實。本質上單看這倡導者的動機就知道對教會不利,這樣做是有意曲解教會的教義,因為倡導者已聲稱教會堅守教義是沒有希望的。這絕不是神的工作,簡而言之,這工作根本不符合聖靈的果子(弗五9)-良善、公義、誠實(真理),而是暗中企圖破壞真教會從神領受之使徒的真理模式。因此,我們必須格外謹守這道理的規模,靠著住在我們裡面的聖靈奉行這「一洗」的模式(參:提後一14)。
既然信而受洗必然得救,那麼何謂「使人得救的洗禮」呢?毫無疑問的,信心是最關鍵,然而這裡所指的信心不僅限於相信耶穌是唯一的救主,更在於信奉經上所記的「ㄧ洗」,特別是保羅在他的書信裡對以弗所教會所強調的(弗四5)。既然只有「ㄧ洗」,就意味著只有一種洗禮方式,這方式是神的吩咐,并要教會完全遵照去行。
ㄧ個有功效的洗禮其獨特性與洗禮的方式有關。這方式是表明在基督死的形狀上(低下頭)與祂聯合,是由ㄧ位接受赦罪洗禮的人面向下表現出來。低頭面向下是進入耶穌的死(埋葬)之切入點,這是藉由聖靈的工作,最終使受洗的人在耶穌的復活上有分(約十九30; 羅六3-5 )。我們若忽視這種洗禮方式,原因是──我們自認得救是因為我們的信而不是因實行教義──這不外乎是公然反對神所設立的方式,為得救的方法。
有人聲稱:真耶穌教會早期三位工人中有兩位並沒有經過面向下洗禮。這件事若不加以澄清提出反證,對整體教會的生存而言將是致命ㄧ擊;這種說法ㄧ旦不從信仰團體中過濾掉,所帶來的影響非我們所能想像。
- 若真有這回事,這意味著洗禮面向下不是由聖靈啟示教會的。教會一直對信徒傳授「虛謊的道裡」。這樣的「謊言」從以前一直到現在,仍舊是一代又一代相傳下去。這麼說來,早期工人所傳的就不能相信,他們為主所作的工實在是徒勞。
- 如果這說法是真的,這表示真耶穌教會所執行的洗禮方式並非由聖靈啟示,換句話說,教會現有的教義也不是聖靈啟示建立的,這導致一項必然的結果:教會所持有的洗禮方式並沒有任何根據。洗禮面向下只不過是ㄧ些熱心人士把聖經章節拼湊起來支持他們自己的理念。
- 既然有人說早期工人三個裡有兩個不執行現在教會所認可之得救要道,這意指真耶穌教會早期並沒有嚴格遵照主所給予的指示去行。在某種程度上,這種說法給人一個印象:教會的教義對於救恩而言並非是絕對的,甚至認為這些教義都是人為的。以委婉的態度來衡量,這說法暗指教義是可以加以更改的;以嚴肅的態度來衡量,更嚴重的,全數廢除的也有之。如此膽大開闢了這樣一個視野觀點:教會只有在脫離教義的束縛才可能恢復她本來的面貌。
- 這種說法意指著真耶穌教會的洗禮不再是唯ㄧ叫人得救的洗禮,其他教派的洗禮也具有同等功效。實際上這樣的看法,已排除為那些來自其他教會的基督徒執行洗禮的必要性,特別是那些相信浸禮並已經在其他教會受過洗的人。最终真耶穌教會被認為只是基督教界中許多教會的ㄧ個,如此一個神所建立的教會被視作一般般的平常,這實在是忽略了真教會在救贖上的工作。
- 更嚴重的是,這意指著這兩位工人所建立的各地教會,本質上並不是屬於基督的身體。既然施洗者沒有接受面向下的洗禮,他們本身的罪仍未被赦。嚴格上說來,他們都還未先得救,當然他們所建立的教會仍舊在罪中、與基督的恩典隔絕。依照此情況,無須論證,所有自由世界的真耶穌教會就不是耶穌寶血所買來的教會,因為我們都源於這兩位工人所建立的教會。
這兩位工人是否接受面向下洗禮?
事實上從許多內外部資料看來,證實這兩位早期的工人是已接受面向下洗禮。外在資料,基本上都在描繪真耶穌教會施洗者一直是為受洗者執行面向下洗禮,每當提到歷來早期的工人一定同時論及他們面向下的洗禮。在某種程度上,「受洗面向下」已成為真耶穌教會獨特的地方。
內部資料,有無數口傳和出版品都證實這三位早期工人已確實接受面向下洗禮。口傳方面乃是從許許多多傳道者進修會中聽到這樣的史實,文字記載方面,包括由美國總會所撰寫的真耶穌教會簡介(member.tic.org),台灣教會更有許多文獻出版品,其中一例就是「真耶穌教會三十年專刊」。當然,所有的見證都ㄧ再證明這兩位早期工人所受的洗是面向下洗禮。
從神的話和神的靈而來的明證
「面向下」是有功效的洗禮中不可缺少的部分,這在聖經中有充分的根據。神是一位講秩序的神,絕不會容忍早期三位工人中的兩位不遵守面向下洗禮的教義,這麼作等於神與自己的教訓相違背。這樣的事在新約聖經中也從來沒有出現過。神的工作,特別是有關救贖的工作一定是清楚不含糊的,一個明顯的例子「奉耶穌的名受洗」,這早在使徒那一代已首次執行(他們都是見過耶穌面的),並且在使徒行傳裡歷代都是這麼傳。
最重要的是,聖靈與這末世真教會同在、同作工,這證實了真耶穌教會所傳的真理。真理有一部分是關於神對教會所啟示之得救要道,這些教義都源於聖經。聖靈與教會同在成為不可搖撼的明證:「洗禮面向下是從神來的啟示」;聖靈與教會同工也很明確的見證了這樣一個事實:教會自始至終無不奉行「洗禮面向下」之信仰。既然神的靈一直與教會同在,像這樣的事──三位早期工人中的兩位不依照聖經方式洗禮-----竟不被早期階段在任之工人們提出質疑,這實在是不可能的事。
到底事實真像是甚麼?這又有何意涵?
魏保羅、張靈生、張巴拿巴,這三位是真耶穌教會早期的工人,他們並不是教會的創辦人。真耶穌教會在1917 年是由聖靈親自建立,這三位工人在真教會建立以前已個別領受了聖靈,魏保羅在1916年、張靈生在1910年、張巴拿巴在1911年,這裡很清楚的看到聖靈在建立真耶穌教會上親自引導他們。
根據歷史,魏保羅受聖靈啟示要在活水裡面向下洗禮,在1917年聖靈親自為他施洗,他並受聖靈啟示教會基本教義,張巴拿巴和張靈生從魏保羅那裡接受到真理,也彼此在1919年行了浸禮。關鍵是有人認為這兩位並不是由魏保羅(這首位受聖靈親自施洗的人)來為他們施洗,這引發出一個看法:這三位早期工人似乎是兩組不同的工人,他們領受不同的洗禮,來形成教會。
這看似差異,如何使之一致?
無論如何,答案在聖經,特別是在使徒教會建立期,彼得是第一位從基督領受完整有關建立教會的信息(太十六17-18),然而,他並不是教會建立初期唯一受基督託付的人選。這傳福音的使命也同時吩咐給所有的使徒(太二八19;可十六15)不單是對彼得ㄧ人而已。關於受洗,彼得和其他使徒同受主的吩咐要為那相信的人施洗。聖靈降臨後,教會首次執行洗禮,這不可能是由一人來完成。
顯然,神早在使徒時代ㄧ開始就有意設立一群人來作建立教會的工作。同樣的,在真耶穌教會建立初期,這三位早期工人也被選作建立教會的工作。這證實了一點,他們的洗禮都是藉由聖靈完成,因此不能以他們洗禮狀況特殊來作為質疑的根據,懷疑全球真耶穌教會的一致性。經過多年聖靈一直與教會同在,保守她在神的真理裡面,既然這是一個奇妙的見證,那就不應該質疑早期工人的洗禮使之成為爭論的爆發點;相反的,我們應當對神在建立教會上之奇妙作為感到歡喜快樂。
在聖靈初降後,任何人相信所傳給他們的福音,願意成為使徒教會的一份子,就必須接受使徒或與使徒站同一陣線的工人代為執行浸禮。例如保羅(徒九18; 二二16)並哥尼流和他全家的信仰轉變(徒十一45以下),雖然在這兩則記載中,神個別向他們啟示得救的方法,但他們的洗禮ㄧ概藉由使徒工人們來完成,這就是神所定作為擴張教會的方法。
同樣的,真耶穌教會也採取使徒時代相同模式,在這一群被神揀選、並以神獨特方式給他們施洗的早期工人之後,教會開始迅速擴展,接著,人們藉由真耶穌教會工人執行洗禮加入教會。真耶穌教會(我們指的是那些持守神真道的各地真耶穌教會)從沒有一刻是隸屬於任何一個基督教宗派。
回應一些沒有歷史根據、目的在分裂教會的說法
我們用上述有害的說法為例,假設沒有足夠的歷史證據證明這種說法的錯誤。
- 我們要問「難道早期在台灣或來自台灣的工人是如此無知,在建立台灣教會甚至世界各地方教會期間,對此生死問題竟不動聲色?」事實上有些工人是來自中國,我們能說他們都沒有聖靈的引導嗎?
- 難道只有那位現今大似攻擊教會的個別人士,有權獲得早期真耶穌教會歷史文獻紀錄?
- 重要的是,我們應該聆聽目前還健在的長者或工人,他們對教會歷史比起後輩工人更加熟悉。這些長者總是認為面向下洗禮是受神的啟示,這是真耶穌教會自有歷史以來一直堅持的。
- 有關教會建立仍有許多方面並沒有在歷史上被記錄下來,大多數情況下,歷史紀錄也無法涵蓋所有,一些細節被忽略是難免的,特別在早期真耶穌教會並沒有系統的記錄教會發展的大事記,不然教會現今就有完整詳細的歷史紀錄了。
- 很明顯的,就算他們的洗禮在歷史資料上是不完整的,也不能就此斷定他們沒有遵照教會基本教義的規定來洗禮。相反的,他們既然被神選作一開始建立教會的工人,他們必定是依照聖經的方式洗禮。
結論-撒但細膩的詭計和工作
這樣一個沒有根據的說法,是嚴重危害真耶穌教會的立足角色,也就是主對真教會所託付的重大使命-更正所有錯誤的教義。這種說法在影射教會固有內在早期工人受洗的問題,以此來搞砸教會對外的使命,更嚴重的是混亂內部更正的工作。這很明顯是惡者的工作,牠巧計打算在世界各地的真耶穌教會製造分裂,助長倡導者個人野心,這種行為正是把人帶來歸向人而不而歸向神,為的是建立自己的權勢。
從以上所述各點,我們得到結論:這種說法「真耶穌教會早期三位工人中有兩位並沒有經過面向下洗禮」不是事實。本質上單看這倡導者的動機就知道對教會不利,這樣做是有意曲解教會的教義,因為倡導者已聲稱教會堅守教義是沒有希望的。這絕不是神的工作,簡而言之,這工作根本不符合聖靈的果子(弗五9)-良善、公義、誠實(真理),而是暗中企圖破壞真教會從神領受之使徒的真理模式。因此,我們必須格外謹守這道理的規模,靠著住在我們裡面的聖靈奉行這「一洗」的模式(參:提後一14)。
The Wonder of God in Establishing the True Jesus Church in the Face of Uncertainty
esus teaches that he who believes and is baptised shall be saved (Mk. 16:16). The essentiality of baptism to salvation is beyond any doubt. It cannot be done away with in the process of salvation. The apostles kept it fully without a slight hinge of compromise – Peter at his advanced age did not forget to remind the believers the irreplaceable role of baptism for one to receive salvation (1 Pet 3:21). It is the prescription given by God to deal with the sins of man (Acts 2:38; 22:16). When sins are forgiven in baptism, one is ushered into the body of Christ.
Since baptism saves, then what constitutes a baptism that saves? It is beyond questioning that faith plays a vital role. However, the faith here is not limited only to believing that Jesus is the Saviour, who alone can save. It must, at the same time, lead one to accept the one baptism that is espoused in the Bible; particularly the Pauline message to the believers in Ephesus (Eph. 4:5). Since there is only one baptism, it means that there is only one correct mode of baptism that God instructs the church to carry out; for God demands exact obedience.
The uniqueness of an efficacious baptism, in relations to its mode, is made manifest by becoming united in the likeness of Christ’s death (bowing head) on the part of the one who receives baptism for the forgiveness of sins. The bowing of the head is the entry point into the death (burial of Jesus), which eventually enables a person to participate in His resurrection (Jn. 19:30; Rm. 6:3-5) by the working of the Spirit. The will to disregard the mode of baptism on account of having faith in God is a blatant denial of God’s way that He has designed and engineered to save.
The claim that two out of the three early workers of the church (True Jesus Church) had not undergone the baptism with head bowed is a fatal hammer blow to the existence of the entire church, if it is not clarified and rebutted. The implications are far greater than we can ever imagine if such a claim is not filtered out in the community of faith:
1. It means that the church has all along been preaching a lie to the believers that head bowed in baptism is a revelation given to the church by the Holy Spirit. This lie has been, and still is being, passed down from one generation to another. If this is true, then the natural consequence is that the words of the early workers cannot be trusted. Their labour for God shall surely be in vain.
2. It means that the doctrine of baptism the True Jesus Church (TJC) practises is not Spirit-inspired. In other words, the pattern of this doctrine is not established by the Holy Spirit. Inevitably, it leads to the conclusion that the mode of baptism she holds onto is without basis. And the concept of bowing head is merely the efforts of some keen individuals piecing verses together in support of the idea.
3. It means that the early phase of the TJC had not strictly followed through what the Lord had given to her, since two of the three early workers did not practise what the church now deems essential for salvation. In a way, such a claim gives the idea that the doctrines of the church are not absolute for salvation; that they are man-made. They are given to change to say it mildly. More seriously, they can be scrapped altogether. This opens up to the view that the church can only be restored to her true self, if she is set free from the restriction of the doctrines that she now holds true.
4. It means that the baptism performs by the TJC is no longer the only baptism that saves. The baptisms performed by other denominational churches can just be equally efficacious. It practically rules out the need to baptise Christians from other denominational churches, especially those who believe in baptism and have been baptised by their churches. The True Jesus Church is only one of the many churches within Christendom. The church that God has established is, therefore, deemed common and marginalised in terms of her work of redemption.
5. It means, most critically, the churches (TJC) that the two workers established are, essentially, not part of the body of Christ, for the baptists themselves have not been saved in the first place. Their sins were not forgiven, since they had not undergone the baptism with their head bowed. The churches they established are, technically, still very much in sin, separated from the grace of God. It goes without argument, in such a situation, all the churches (TJC) of the free world are not purchased by the blood of Jesus. For we all belong to this line of the church’s establishment.
Were the two workers baptised facing downward?
But, in reality, there are numerous records, both external and internal, which have confirmed that the two early workers were baptised facing downward. Most external sources basically have painted the picture that the True Jesus Church always baptises with the recipient’s head facing downward. Whenever the history of the early workers are stated, their baptisms facing downward are almost certainly mentioned. In a way, baptism with head bowed has become, and is, the unique feature of the True Jesus Church, which fully accords with the Bible.
Internally, there are countless accounts of word of mouth and publications, which ascertain that the three early workers were baptised with their head bowed. The former can be heard in many preachers’ seminars. The latter includes the brief introduction to the history of the True Jesus Church written by the USGA (members.tjc.org). There are also many accounts printed by the Taiwan churches. One example is the 30 years’ Commemorative Publication(TJC三十年纪念专刊). Surely, all these are testimony to the baptisms of the two early workers with head bowed.
The confirmation from the word of God and the Spirit
Head bowed in baptism is an integral part of an efficacious baptism, which is fully substantiated with the word of the Bible. God, being a God of order, would not have gone against His own teachings by tolerating the non-compliance of two of the three early workers for not baptising with head bowed. No such parallel can be found in the New Testament in reality. The work of God, with regards to salvation, is always clear and unambiguous. The baptism in the name of Jesus is one such notable example. It was first being preached by the generation of the apostles (those who had seen the face of Jesus), and continued on to all the generations as chronicled in Acts.
Most importantly, the presence of the Spirit in the work of the end-time true church is a concrete proof to the truth that the TJC preaches. One part of the truth is about God’s revelation to the church concerning the doctrines of salvation, which have their roots in the Bible. This effectively is an unshakable back up to the idea that head bowed in baptism is a revelation from God. It is an explicit testimony to the fact that the church has upheld this practice throughout. Since the Spirit of God has been abiding with the church, it cannot be true that two of the three early workers whose baptisms were not biblical, without being called into questioned by the workers who were present in the early phase of the establishment of the church.
What had really happened and its implications?
Paul Wei, Lin-Shen Chang and Barnabas Chang were the three early workers of the True Jesus Church. They were not the founders of the church. The True Jesus Church was established in the year 1917 by the Holy Spirit. The three workers received the Holy Spirit before the establishment of the church. Paul Wei received the Holy Spirit in the year 1916; Lin-Shen Chang received the Spirit in the year 1910; and Barnabas Chang in 1911. Clearly, the Spirit had been guiding them in establishing the True Jesus Church.
According to history, Paul Wei was instructed by the Holy Spirit to baptise in living water with head facing downward. He was baptised by the Holy Spirit in the year 1917. He was given the revelation to the basic beliefs of the church. Having received the truth from Paul Wei, both Barnabas Chang and Lin-Shen Chang baptised one another in the year 1919. The flashing point here is that some have assumed that these two workers were not baptised by Paul Wei, who was the first to be baptised by the Holy Spirit. It gives rise to the idea that the three early workers were of two groups forming the church of God in the light of their baptisms.
How do we reconcile this seeming discrepancy?
Regardless, the answer can be found in the Bible; in particular during the establishment of the apostolic church. Peter was the first one to receive the full message from Christ concerning the building of the church (Mt. 16:17-18). However, he was not the only person upon whom Christ had entrusted the task of building up the church at the starting phase. The command to preach was given to the apostles (all) at the same time (Mt.28:19; Mk. 16:15), not just to Peter alone. In relation to the work of baptism, Peter, together with the rest of the apostles, was commissioned to baptise those who believed. The first ever baptism performed by the church, after the downpour of the Holy Spirit, could not have been done by one person alone.
Clearly, God had intended to set up a group of people to do the work of building up the church at the very beginning during the time of the apostles. In an identical vein, the three early workers of the True Jesus Church were chosen to set up the church at her initial phase, attesting to the fact that their baptisms were done by the Spirit. Therefore, the uniqueness of their baptisms’ circumstances should not be used as the basis to question, and to doubt, the oneness of the True Jesus Church throughout the world. After so many years of the Spirit’s abidance with the church, this wonderful testimony should never have been a flash point of controversy, insofar as the church holds on to the truth of God. Instead, we all should rejoice and be glad over the miraculous deeds of the Lord in establishing the church.
After the downpour of the Holy Spirit, whoever believed in the gospel preached to them, and would like to have a part in the apostolic church, must be baptised in water by agents from the apostolic line. Examples include the conversions of Paul (Acts 9:18; 22:16) and Cornelius and his family (Acts 11:45ff). Although in both accounts, God had personally revealed the way of salvation to them, their baptisms were done by the apostolic workers. This is what the Lord has prescribed for the expansion of the church.
Likewise, the True Jesus Church has also adopted the same apostolic pattern. After the first group of workers, whom God had chosen, baptising them in unique ways, the church began to spread speedily far and wide. People who later on joined the church were baptised by workers from the True Jesus Church. There has never been one instant, in which the True Jesus Church (by this, we refer to those True Jesus Churches that keep the truth of God) is affiliated to a Christian denominational church.
Reponses to claims designed to divide the church in the absence of historical backup
Let us use the above detrimental claim as an example and assume that there is no sufficient historical evident to prove the claim is wrong.
1. We ask, ‘Were all the early workers in or from Taiwan so ignorant that they did not even address such a life-and-death issue, in the course of building up the church locally and in other parts of the world?’ In fact, some of them actually came from China. Are we all assuming that they did not have the guidance of the Holy Spirit?
2. Can it be true that only an individual, who is feverishly attacking the church now, has access to the historical records of the early phase of the TJC?
3. It is important to listen to some surviving elders or workers who know the history of the church much more and better than any of the workers who come after them. Yet these elders always claim that head bowed in baptism is inspired by God, which the TJC has been adhering to ever since she came into existence.
4. There are many aspects of the establishment of the church that are not recorded down in history. In most cases, the historical records are not all-encompassing. Some details are ignored. This is inevitable. In particular, during the early phase, the True Jesus Church did not have a systematic approach of recording the events that happened in the timeline of her establishment. Otherwise, the church now would have a complete and detailed set of historical chronicles.
5. With this in mind, it is quite clear that even if assumed that historical records about their baptisms are absent, it does not naturally lead to the conclusion that they had not followed through the doctrines of the church. Rather, it should be more of the case that they must have gone through the baptism according to the Bible, since they were chosen to further the work of building up the church of God, at least initially.
Conclusion - The Works and Tricks of Satan At Its Subtlest
Such an unfounded claim jeopardises the favourable position of the TJC to do the work that the Lord has entrusted upon her - to correct all wrong doctrines. To insinuate that there is an inherent problem with the early workers is to mess up the work of the church outwith and, most importantly, the work of internal correction. This is clearly the work of the evil one. It is subtly intended to drive a wedge in the church (TJC) worldwide to further the proponent’s personal ambition. This behaviour is nothing less than bringing people unto man rather than to God, to establish his own empire.
In view of the above mentioned points, we rule out such a claim to be true and authentic, on the ground that the motive of the proponent is not for the good of the church. It is done with the intention to distort her teachings. For the proponent has claimed that the church is hopeless when she adheres to a set of doctrines. This cannot be the work of God. Simply, such a work does not conform to the fruit of the Spirit (Eph. 5:9) – goodness, righteousness and truth. The hidden agenda is to destroy the pattern of the apostles that the church has received. We must, therefore, all the more keep the pattern of the sound word. In this case, the mode of baptism, by counting fully on the Spirit who dwells in us (cf. 2 Tim. 1:14).
Since baptism saves, then what constitutes a baptism that saves? It is beyond questioning that faith plays a vital role. However, the faith here is not limited only to believing that Jesus is the Saviour, who alone can save. It must, at the same time, lead one to accept the one baptism that is espoused in the Bible; particularly the Pauline message to the believers in Ephesus (Eph. 4:5). Since there is only one baptism, it means that there is only one correct mode of baptism that God instructs the church to carry out; for God demands exact obedience.
The uniqueness of an efficacious baptism, in relations to its mode, is made manifest by becoming united in the likeness of Christ’s death (bowing head) on the part of the one who receives baptism for the forgiveness of sins. The bowing of the head is the entry point into the death (burial of Jesus), which eventually enables a person to participate in His resurrection (Jn. 19:30; Rm. 6:3-5) by the working of the Spirit. The will to disregard the mode of baptism on account of having faith in God is a blatant denial of God’s way that He has designed and engineered to save.
The claim that two out of the three early workers of the church (True Jesus Church) had not undergone the baptism with head bowed is a fatal hammer blow to the existence of the entire church, if it is not clarified and rebutted. The implications are far greater than we can ever imagine if such a claim is not filtered out in the community of faith:
1. It means that the church has all along been preaching a lie to the believers that head bowed in baptism is a revelation given to the church by the Holy Spirit. This lie has been, and still is being, passed down from one generation to another. If this is true, then the natural consequence is that the words of the early workers cannot be trusted. Their labour for God shall surely be in vain.
2. It means that the doctrine of baptism the True Jesus Church (TJC) practises is not Spirit-inspired. In other words, the pattern of this doctrine is not established by the Holy Spirit. Inevitably, it leads to the conclusion that the mode of baptism she holds onto is without basis. And the concept of bowing head is merely the efforts of some keen individuals piecing verses together in support of the idea.
3. It means that the early phase of the TJC had not strictly followed through what the Lord had given to her, since two of the three early workers did not practise what the church now deems essential for salvation. In a way, such a claim gives the idea that the doctrines of the church are not absolute for salvation; that they are man-made. They are given to change to say it mildly. More seriously, they can be scrapped altogether. This opens up to the view that the church can only be restored to her true self, if she is set free from the restriction of the doctrines that she now holds true.
4. It means that the baptism performs by the TJC is no longer the only baptism that saves. The baptisms performed by other denominational churches can just be equally efficacious. It practically rules out the need to baptise Christians from other denominational churches, especially those who believe in baptism and have been baptised by their churches. The True Jesus Church is only one of the many churches within Christendom. The church that God has established is, therefore, deemed common and marginalised in terms of her work of redemption.
5. It means, most critically, the churches (TJC) that the two workers established are, essentially, not part of the body of Christ, for the baptists themselves have not been saved in the first place. Their sins were not forgiven, since they had not undergone the baptism with their head bowed. The churches they established are, technically, still very much in sin, separated from the grace of God. It goes without argument, in such a situation, all the churches (TJC) of the free world are not purchased by the blood of Jesus. For we all belong to this line of the church’s establishment.
Were the two workers baptised facing downward?
But, in reality, there are numerous records, both external and internal, which have confirmed that the two early workers were baptised facing downward. Most external sources basically have painted the picture that the True Jesus Church always baptises with the recipient’s head facing downward. Whenever the history of the early workers are stated, their baptisms facing downward are almost certainly mentioned. In a way, baptism with head bowed has become, and is, the unique feature of the True Jesus Church, which fully accords with the Bible.
Internally, there are countless accounts of word of mouth and publications, which ascertain that the three early workers were baptised with their head bowed. The former can be heard in many preachers’ seminars. The latter includes the brief introduction to the history of the True Jesus Church written by the USGA (members.tjc.org). There are also many accounts printed by the Taiwan churches. One example is the 30 years’ Commemorative Publication(TJC三十年纪念专刊). Surely, all these are testimony to the baptisms of the two early workers with head bowed.
The confirmation from the word of God and the Spirit
Head bowed in baptism is an integral part of an efficacious baptism, which is fully substantiated with the word of the Bible. God, being a God of order, would not have gone against His own teachings by tolerating the non-compliance of two of the three early workers for not baptising with head bowed. No such parallel can be found in the New Testament in reality. The work of God, with regards to salvation, is always clear and unambiguous. The baptism in the name of Jesus is one such notable example. It was first being preached by the generation of the apostles (those who had seen the face of Jesus), and continued on to all the generations as chronicled in Acts.
Most importantly, the presence of the Spirit in the work of the end-time true church is a concrete proof to the truth that the TJC preaches. One part of the truth is about God’s revelation to the church concerning the doctrines of salvation, which have their roots in the Bible. This effectively is an unshakable back up to the idea that head bowed in baptism is a revelation from God. It is an explicit testimony to the fact that the church has upheld this practice throughout. Since the Spirit of God has been abiding with the church, it cannot be true that two of the three early workers whose baptisms were not biblical, without being called into questioned by the workers who were present in the early phase of the establishment of the church.
What had really happened and its implications?
Paul Wei, Lin-Shen Chang and Barnabas Chang were the three early workers of the True Jesus Church. They were not the founders of the church. The True Jesus Church was established in the year 1917 by the Holy Spirit. The three workers received the Holy Spirit before the establishment of the church. Paul Wei received the Holy Spirit in the year 1916; Lin-Shen Chang received the Spirit in the year 1910; and Barnabas Chang in 1911. Clearly, the Spirit had been guiding them in establishing the True Jesus Church.
According to history, Paul Wei was instructed by the Holy Spirit to baptise in living water with head facing downward. He was baptised by the Holy Spirit in the year 1917. He was given the revelation to the basic beliefs of the church. Having received the truth from Paul Wei, both Barnabas Chang and Lin-Shen Chang baptised one another in the year 1919. The flashing point here is that some have assumed that these two workers were not baptised by Paul Wei, who was the first to be baptised by the Holy Spirit. It gives rise to the idea that the three early workers were of two groups forming the church of God in the light of their baptisms.
How do we reconcile this seeming discrepancy?
Regardless, the answer can be found in the Bible; in particular during the establishment of the apostolic church. Peter was the first one to receive the full message from Christ concerning the building of the church (Mt. 16:17-18). However, he was not the only person upon whom Christ had entrusted the task of building up the church at the starting phase. The command to preach was given to the apostles (all) at the same time (Mt.28:19; Mk. 16:15), not just to Peter alone. In relation to the work of baptism, Peter, together with the rest of the apostles, was commissioned to baptise those who believed. The first ever baptism performed by the church, after the downpour of the Holy Spirit, could not have been done by one person alone.
Clearly, God had intended to set up a group of people to do the work of building up the church at the very beginning during the time of the apostles. In an identical vein, the three early workers of the True Jesus Church were chosen to set up the church at her initial phase, attesting to the fact that their baptisms were done by the Spirit. Therefore, the uniqueness of their baptisms’ circumstances should not be used as the basis to question, and to doubt, the oneness of the True Jesus Church throughout the world. After so many years of the Spirit’s abidance with the church, this wonderful testimony should never have been a flash point of controversy, insofar as the church holds on to the truth of God. Instead, we all should rejoice and be glad over the miraculous deeds of the Lord in establishing the church.
After the downpour of the Holy Spirit, whoever believed in the gospel preached to them, and would like to have a part in the apostolic church, must be baptised in water by agents from the apostolic line. Examples include the conversions of Paul (Acts 9:18; 22:16) and Cornelius and his family (Acts 11:45ff). Although in both accounts, God had personally revealed the way of salvation to them, their baptisms were done by the apostolic workers. This is what the Lord has prescribed for the expansion of the church.
Likewise, the True Jesus Church has also adopted the same apostolic pattern. After the first group of workers, whom God had chosen, baptising them in unique ways, the church began to spread speedily far and wide. People who later on joined the church were baptised by workers from the True Jesus Church. There has never been one instant, in which the True Jesus Church (by this, we refer to those True Jesus Churches that keep the truth of God) is affiliated to a Christian denominational church.
Reponses to claims designed to divide the church in the absence of historical backup
Let us use the above detrimental claim as an example and assume that there is no sufficient historical evident to prove the claim is wrong.
1. We ask, ‘Were all the early workers in or from Taiwan so ignorant that they did not even address such a life-and-death issue, in the course of building up the church locally and in other parts of the world?’ In fact, some of them actually came from China. Are we all assuming that they did not have the guidance of the Holy Spirit?
2. Can it be true that only an individual, who is feverishly attacking the church now, has access to the historical records of the early phase of the TJC?
3. It is important to listen to some surviving elders or workers who know the history of the church much more and better than any of the workers who come after them. Yet these elders always claim that head bowed in baptism is inspired by God, which the TJC has been adhering to ever since she came into existence.
4. There are many aspects of the establishment of the church that are not recorded down in history. In most cases, the historical records are not all-encompassing. Some details are ignored. This is inevitable. In particular, during the early phase, the True Jesus Church did not have a systematic approach of recording the events that happened in the timeline of her establishment. Otherwise, the church now would have a complete and detailed set of historical chronicles.
5. With this in mind, it is quite clear that even if assumed that historical records about their baptisms are absent, it does not naturally lead to the conclusion that they had not followed through the doctrines of the church. Rather, it should be more of the case that they must have gone through the baptism according to the Bible, since they were chosen to further the work of building up the church of God, at least initially.
Conclusion - The Works and Tricks of Satan At Its Subtlest
Such an unfounded claim jeopardises the favourable position of the TJC to do the work that the Lord has entrusted upon her - to correct all wrong doctrines. To insinuate that there is an inherent problem with the early workers is to mess up the work of the church outwith and, most importantly, the work of internal correction. This is clearly the work of the evil one. It is subtly intended to drive a wedge in the church (TJC) worldwide to further the proponent’s personal ambition. This behaviour is nothing less than bringing people unto man rather than to God, to establish his own empire.
In view of the above mentioned points, we rule out such a claim to be true and authentic, on the ground that the motive of the proponent is not for the good of the church. It is done with the intention to distort her teachings. For the proponent has claimed that the church is hopeless when she adheres to a set of doctrines. This cannot be the work of God. Simply, such a work does not conform to the fruit of the Spirit (Eph. 5:9) – goodness, righteousness and truth. The hidden agenda is to destroy the pattern of the apostles that the church has received. We must, therefore, all the more keep the pattern of the sound word. In this case, the mode of baptism, by counting fully on the Spirit who dwells in us (cf. 2 Tim. 1:14).