# bible presbyterian church



## Notthemama1984 (Jan 6, 2010)

Has anyone ever heard of this denomination? I just saw it and thought it was going to be some new small off shoot, but apparently it has been around for more since the late 30s. They originally broke off from PCUSA and entertained the idea of joining the PCA, but


> This group represented, doubtless in all sincerity, a point of view concerning the return of our Lord and concerning the use of intoxicating liquors which it was felt by many was both contrary to the Word of God and calculated to prevent that Church from ever awaking a wide response in the hearts of American Christians.



The quote was taken from their website Grow with us in the Word of God!

It seems they rewrote the Westminster standards to include/require a premil view.

Any thoughts?


----------



## Wayne (Jan 6, 2010)

Rushing to work just now, so this will be brief.

The BPC was formed as a split technically not from the PCUSA but from what is now the OPC. 

In 1936 the Presbyterian Church *of* America was formed as a split from the PCUSA. This was the denomination led by J. Gresham Machen.
But on 1 January 1937, Machen died. By April of 1937 events were in play leading to a subsequent split of the new denomination over three main issues:
1. Beverage alcohol - the BPC side said we had to abstain to maintain our testimony; the OPC side said we shouldn't get drunk, but have liberty to consume wisely.
2. Premillennial freedom - early on in the OPC, voices began to speak against dispensationalism and push for amillennialism. The BPC guys saw this as a restricting of millennial freedom. There might have been dispensationalists among the BPC numbers, but technically they were historic premills. And yes, they did amend their edition of the Westminster Standards to reflect that view.
3. The use of Boards and Agencies. As soon as the OPC was formed, they began to set up their own missions agency, etc. The BPC guys wanted to "keep every egg in a separate basket" - they thought it best to have independent agencies doing those tasks of missions, publications, etc.

The original name of the OPC, the Presbyterian Church *of* America was forfeited when the PCUSA brought a lawsuit. The PCUSA had been working on a merger with another denomination and that PCofA name was one name that was on the table to use had the merger gone through. By 1938, at their 3d General Assembly, the OPC name was adopted.
It was also in 1938 that the BPC officially began.

The BPC currently numbers a few thousand members. The BPC suffered a division in 1955/56 and the larger side of that split later merged with the Reformed Presbyterian Church, General Synod (New Lights) to form the Reformed Presbyterian Church, Evangelical Synod. The RPCES was then folded into the PCA in 1982.


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Jan 6, 2010)

Thanks for the correction Wayne. So do we know anything about their orthodoxy now? Are they still good or gone left?


----------



## buggy (Jan 6, 2010)

They are without question orthodox in the faith, but are more "fundamentalist" compared to PCA, OPC etc. They are affiliated with the American Council of Christian Churches, the fundamentalist version of the NCC/NAE. 

The B-Ps are much more influential overseas, with a large membership in Singapore and several church plants in Commonwealth countries (e.g. Britain, Australia).


----------



## Wayne (Jan 6, 2010)




----------



## SolaScriptura (Jan 6, 2010)

They are relatively fundamentalist. I believe they hold to dispensational eschatology, and they are decidedly against the use of tobacco and/or alcohol... I don't know if the two BPC members I've met are normative, but they were also against dancing and playing cards and going to movies.


----------



## Galatians220 (Jan 6, 2010)

There was a very friendly BPC congregation here in Trenton, MI that my husband and I enjoyed attending a few years ago. It was called Faith Bible Presbyterian Church and the ambience, preaching and doctrines discussed were more like Reformed Baptist churches we've attended. The pastor had a radio show here for decades and was an extremely affable man. I liked him a lot. The church had a couple of splits and I don't know if they're still around. Pastor's wife was Scottish - a lovely lady - and if it hadn't been for the drive (almost an hour one way for us) we might have attended more. The dispensationalism, though, bothered me, as did the overly casual demeanor during services. The people, however, were that precious, oxymoronic commodity: warm, friendly Presbyterians.


----------



## Notthemama1984 (Jan 6, 2010)

So they sound like MacArthur, but baptize babies.


----------



## MLCOPE2 (Jan 6, 2010)

Chaplainintraining said:


> So they sound like MacArthur, but baptize babies.


----------



## JonathanHunt (Jan 6, 2010)

They also like the KJV a lot - which is not a bad thing, just pointing it out as a feature. For me, they are more characterised by fundamentalism than by reformed tradition - rather like some reformed baptists I know, and Ian Paisley's denomination.


----------



## Montanablue (Jan 6, 2010)

I knew a girl who had grown up Bible Presybterian (There is or at least was a congregation in Montana- Kalispell maybe?). She certainly had no hard feelings towards them and I know she appreciated a good deal of the teaching she received, but did feel that they were very fundamentalist - at least her particular congregation. No drinking, dancing, cards, and quite into the patriarchy movement.


----------



## Kevin (Jan 6, 2010)

The current moderater of the BPC is a member of this board. The members of the BP that I know (and are in my family) are mainstream reformed, but perhaps a bit on the fundy side in a couple of areas. They are not Dispensational, but do have that rep due to their history.


----------



## VictorBravo (Jan 6, 2010)

Calling John Dyck. He's a member here, a dear brother, and an ordained BP pastor.

The BPs have a seminary in Tacoma. I've taken classes there. I can testify first hand that they are orthodox and hold the WCF dear.

They do have a premil bent and history, but I also know personally several ordained BP pastors who are publicly either amil or postmil.

And no, they are not dispensational!

They are a truly godly group of folks with a passion for holding and practicing the Christian faith.


----------



## buggy (Jan 6, 2010)

The BPs back in my country (SG) are fervent in evangelism and love the Lord greatly. Unfortunately the Synod dissolved sometime in the 1980s and now the churches are all independent. While most maintain the beliefs that the American BPs believe (fundy, premil-leaning), a minority have either accepted KJV-Onlyism or have "mainstreamed" and are little different from most broad-evangelicals today. There are about ~35 BP congregations in Singapore - as much as the US probably - that's why I feel it's worth mentioning.


----------



## A.J. (Jan 6, 2010)

In addition, BPs from Singapore are also doing missionary work in Cebu, the Philippines. Cebu is in the southern part of my country. 

http://www.gethsemanebpc.com/cebu/5thAnniversary/5th_Anniversary_4.pdf


----------



## Scott1 (Jan 7, 2010)

Overall, this is a good denomination with a biblical, reformed core and some peculiar distinctives, including a tilt toward "fundamentalism" in some areas.

It's quite possible the denomination will migrate back toward the OPC, a fine biblical reformed denomination or break away into several others.

The history of the denomination is a case study in the not-so-apparent differences between fundamentalism and biblical reformed Presbyterianism.

But basically, this is good communion that needs to find a home.


----------



## Backwoods Presbyterian (Jan 7, 2010)

Any word on what happened concerning their southeastern Presbytery that split?


----------



## Galatians220 (Jan 7, 2010)

JonathanHunt said:


> They also like the KJV a lot - which is not a bad thing



Yes, they do... I wasn't going to bring that up myself, but yes... It's one of the BPC's *charms* . For us, anyway.

Margaret


----------



## DouglasGregory418 (Feb 2, 2010)

How are they different from the American Presbyterian Church (premil, teetotalers, exclusive psalmody, they hold the westminster standards even more strongly than usual- you absolutely cannot disagree)


----------



## VictorBravo (Feb 2, 2010)

DouglasGregory418 said:


> How are they different from the American Presbyterian Church (premil, teetotalers, *exclusive psalmody*, they hold the westminster standards even more strongly than usual- you absolutely cannot disagree)


 
BP is not EP.


----------



## bouletheou (Feb 2, 2010)

I hear rumblings that the bp's are quietly backing off on some of their distinctives. I've got an acquaintance who is a BP minister who is Amil and drinks beer. They ordained him, and he wasn't hiding his views and practices from them at all.

BTW, they are not dispensational. They are historic premil. Though from what I hear of the changes in dispensationalism these days, it's pretty close to historic premil now

TE Brian (Amil) Carpentr


----------



## Wayne (Feb 2, 2010)

DouglasGregory418 said:


> How are they different from the American Presbyterian Church (premil, teetotalers, exclusive psalmody, they hold the westminster standards even more strongly than usual- you absolutely cannot disagree)


 
From their website, "The American Presbyterian Church was formed in 1979 by a group of five ministers, all of whom had formerly ministered in the Bible Presbyterian Church."

This group currently has three congregations. I seem to remember they might have had six at their peak.


----------

