Tag: CHC

Commentary – Why I disagree with Kong Hee’s “theology”

2 comments

First, let me make it clear that the opinion I expressed in the post below does not represent the opinion of any church. I write this knowing that I will earn the enmity of many, but failing to speak out would be the equivalent of a sin of omission – i.e. failing to do what is required to alert someone to the perils before him and allow harm to come to that person. Here goes…

When the matter of financial irregularities in CHC hit the news, I was two minded about what stand to take. After some consideration, I felt that there is no reason for me to be blackmailed by the opinion that good Christians should always stand together with other Christians and pray for them. Faith should not blind us, nor should it negate our ability to reason. What exactly is the point of praying in this case unless the irregularities found are planted evidence? Kong Hee and the other five have hired some of the best lawyers in this country and are fully capable of explaining to the Courts what has been done. Whether their explanation will be to the Courts’ satisfaction that no wrongdoing has been committed is another matter entirely. While CHC’ers may consider this entire matter to be the schemes of the Devil or some form of persecution, it is hard for me to accept that considering my objection and revulsion to Kong Hee’s teachings. It is even more repulsive when some said Kong Hee will have to suffer like Jesus. The image of the anti-Christ comes immediately to mind. Therefore, if I were to pray, it will be for God to open the eyes of CHC’ers to see things objectively, and also for wisdom upon the judge presiding over the case. It wouldn’t do for the innocent to be convicted, nor for the guilty to go scot free.

I admit I know very little about CHC as I have only been there twice. Nevertheless, how well I know CHC is not a prerequisite to what I have to say as I am only speaking out against what I do know. My first impression of CHC after my both of those visits was that it is very much like a pop concert. I decided I preferred the church I was still attending then as it was the place where Christ came looking for me again after seven years or so. I had visited CHC because two fellow believers who went over from their previous church invited me. One of them actually left CHC not long after in 2003 because of the blatant use of the church as a platform to promote Sun Ho’s music albums.

I wouldn’t have given more thought about those two visits or the sermons preached in those services. Suffice to say they were forgettable. Though I often hear about how supposedly anointed a speaker Kong Hee was and how the church numbers have increased, I did not feel edified by his messages and a church’s numbers really meant very little in my personal opinion. After all, people go to church for all sorts of reasons and not necessarily there to seek God. On top of which, how much of that “growth” came from members leaving other churches is another matter entirely. Even so, I thought at that time it was a good thing people are going to church. Since salvation belongs to God, having more people exposed to the Gospel cannot be bad. In any case, I would have completely forgotten about Kong Hee, since he is but one of the many preachers. God could anoint anyone with His Holy Spirit to speak and I have often felt attachment to a pastor (or even to pop stars and soccer players) to be akin to idolatry.

I certainly had my doubts about Sun Ho’s career even though I didn’t really care at that time. When the charges about financial irregularities came about, I was totally puzzled when her secular career is now said to be part of something called a “Crossover Project”. There are two things that I find chronologically mind-bogging. If I remembered correctly, Sun Ho resigned from CHC in 2003 to pursue her secular singing career, due to the criticisms about the church being used to promote her personal career. Yet, CHC’s current propaganda gives me the impression that her departure then was the beginning of the “Crossover Project”, which is said to have began back in 2002 or perhaps even earlier since she spoke about 10 years of Crossover recently. If that is the case, why the necessity to resign at that time? Why even discard the “pastor-singer” moniker at all?

Anyway, I started paying attention to CHC again about 4 years ago because Sun Ho’s “China Wine” MTV was posted on Facebook. That MTV was as uninspiring and completely forgettable as Kong Hee’s sermons. I couldn’t fathom how anyone would think of Jesus in that MTV, not to mention that it might actually stumble a new convert. What came on the heels of that was an article by the titled “The Power of Pop Culture” by Kong Hee published in the CHC’s quarterly newsletter. I felt it was nothing more than self justification for the lifestyle Sun Ho is pursuing in the United States. All my theological disagreement with the teachings of Kong Hee thus began after reading that piece.

Thereafter, I viewed a few of Kong Hee’s sermons which happened to be shared on Facebook. Sadly, just like his piece on “The Power of Pop Culture”, verses were often quoted out of context as long as they justify whatever message being preached at that time to exhort the congregation to open their wallets and give in return for spectacular amount of returns and blessing from God, who would otherwise hold it back like some kind of mafia Don. Without any doubt, if that is the theological basis of the so-called “Prosperity Gospel”, I found that it is not only questionable – it is outright heresy.

Let me layout my reasons for my objection to whatever that is preached in CHC. For all intentions and purposes, I don’t think any message that preaches personal gain through endless giving is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. The Gospel is often offensive to people who heard it for the first time because it declares all men to be sinful and condemned. It is a message for all mankind to repent and turn from our evil ways, and to accept Jesus Christ as the only means of redemption and salvation (Romans 3:23 ~ 24). It would be irreconcilable for CHC or Kong Hee to preach the Gospel when their very own church leadership pursues a highfalutin lifestyle. As far as I am concerned, the Gospel of Jesus Christ has been dead in CHC for some time.

I have a rather simplistic view of what conversion means. It means one hears the Gospel, believes in it by accepting Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior, repents of his sins and be baptised by water in Jesus’ name. We often say we give our lives to Jesus, but we cannot give back to God what originally belonged to Him. In reality, when we believed, God gives us a new lease of life and then charge us with the task of the Great Commission – i.e. to bring the Gospel on to everyone who have yet believed and make disciples of them (Matthew 28:18~20). There is no fanciful way to bring Jesus to the masses. We seek to obey God by preaching the same message that all are sinful and condemned. In most cases, we earned nothing but the enmity of all whom we shared the message because very often we Christians have our own failings which invite criticisms, and in particular accusations of hypocrisy.

However, becoming a Christian does not and will not make someone the paragon of virtue or the ultimate arbiter in morality. The fact that we failed to live up to the standards set by God simply means we need them all the more to show how far we have fallen. To discard them simply means a further slide away from what God expects of us. It is exactly for this reason why a Savior is needed. God expects perfect righteousness which we cannot attain no matter how much “good” we do. Our good works are counted as filthy rags – or in the original Hebrew, used sanitary cloth – before God (Isaiah 64:6) and only Christ offers that perfect righteousness that He has imputed to us through faith in Him. Simply put, if a church isn’t preaching the Gospel, then its claims to be fulfilling the Great Commission is an utter sham. All the more so when it panders to the world by the means where it’s most acceptable and well received. This basically says a lot about what I think of the “Crossover Project”.

Other than preaching the Gospel, God also expects us to do good works. For faith without works is dead. Good works is not another way to earn us a way into heaven, or to obtain reconciliation with God. They are basically another outward manifestation of our faith in, and our obedience to God. It is part of our transformation into the image of Christ Jesus our Lord and Savior. Charitable deeds are one of the ways we perform good works, and being charitable is not limited to money – for e.g giving up our seat on the MRT to those in need is one of them. Also, being charitable does not mean giving money foolishly away or using money for whatever purposes imagined to be for good. The Bible specifically talks about helping the poor, the widowed, and the fatherless. That brings me to the matter of tithing.

During the Old Testament days in the Theocracy of Israel, the Israelites are commanded to tithe (Leviticus 27:30). The very essence of tithing is for charity, with only the tithe of the third year given to the Levites – the priesthood class (ref. Deuteronomy 12:19; Deuteronomy 14:27 ~ 29; Deuteronomy 26:12 ~ 13). In essence, it is what would pass for a modern day social security and taxation plan in the Theocracy of Israel back then. God has given very specific command on how the tithes should be used as well, making sure no one prospers from it. When Israel failed to do so, God rebuked them, even accusing them of robbing Him (Malachi 3:7 ~ 8).

Now, there is no equivalent of the Levites in the New Testament context, since Jesus has become the High Priest and now intercedes on our behalf. The pastors are different from the Levites and thus we are not tithing “to pay them”. That does not mean we should not tithe, we simply need to understand why; when or if we are feel compelled or led to give. Once we understand the reasons, obeying and giving to church simply becomes a matter of joy. God does love a cheerful giver (2 Corinthians 9:6 ~ 15), but in the context of that passage, the preceding paragraph talks about giving to those who were in need (e.g. the Macedonian Church at that time). It is not some kind of loophole in the Scriptures where we can use to strong-arm the Creator of the Universe into showering the believers with blessings.

In the New Testament church, believers are encouraged to give offerings as we are expected to help one another so there will be no lack among believers. All the more so for those who have given up their job to serve full time in church. Clearly, we cannot expect anyone to make sacrifices and eat all the way into their own savings to serve God full-time. But that money is not given for their prosperity. If they are getting so much money that they can afford to fly in private jets and to live in lodgings way above everyone else, while someone within the congregation is in dire need, then something is seriously wrong!

In any case, God has never failed to command us to look after the disadvantaged regardless of the Old Testament Temple period or the New Testament period. If a church has stored up huge amount of money, then my opinion is that should simply expand charitable services within the community where it got the money. If a church will not help the community in which it is founded and decided that it has other non-charitable priorities, then it should really just leave and stop being hypocritical.

It simply defies basic economic principles when one believes that giving beyond his capacity “will earn one many times more in return”. It also belittles the other Christians who gave time, and service to serve God in other capacities – turning them into nothing more but second-class citizens in God’s kingdom. It is simply common sense to ask Kong Hee how does God bless this other group many times in return. God certainly never intended the Holy Scriptures to become an excuse for leaders to make believers pour out their hard earn money into a bottomless pit. The Scriptures have examples on how God works when He truly intends something to be done. For example, when God commanded Moses to build the Tabernacle, Moses was told what to ask from the Israelites. But God’s servants do not take more than what is necessary because Moses immediately told the people to stop giving when he realised that there is more than enough (Exodus 36:6 ~ 7). In short, there wouldn’t be any issue asking the congregation to give as long as there is a target figure in the first place. (If one example is not enough, read up 1st and 2nd Chronicles on the first temple which King Solomon is instructed to built, and be truly amazed! Then read up on the second temple in the Book of Ezra chapters 1 ~ 3 as well. Pay special attention to where the material is coming from and see whether anyone actually gave until they wept.)

Kong Hee’s “theology” has really very little feet to stand on. If anyone justifies taking from the congregation by quoting Scriptures, then it is necessary for the congregation to evaluate whether it follows God’s modus operandi according to the Scriptures too. The Scriptures should be the very fail-safe to prevent anyone from asking fellow believers to sign them a blank cheque, and in specific to prevent someone from using Scriptures to their advantage and abuse certain parts to suit their own personal agenda. Believers are thus equipped to play the role of a watch dog over their own church leaders had they been reading their Bible. They can be sure to a certain extent when their leaders tell them to give, whether the instructions really came from the Almighty Himself or not.

Current Affairs – The City Harvest Church Investigation

7 comments

Early in March, when the news broke that the Commissioner of Charities (COC) has questioned City Harvest Church (CHC) about its $310 million stake in Suntec Singapore, I said that it is high time to do a full audit of their financial accounts. In my opinion, it would be good for a government gahmen agency to perform this audit to assure not just the members of the church, but also the general public that everything is in order in the wake of the NKF and Renci affairs. While I am not expecting any wrongdoing by the church’s leaders lea-duhs, it is necessary to be assured that no one else attempts the sort of ‘accounting wizardry’ experienced by Asia Breweries or SIA. Christians or not, we are all sinners who can fall to temptation.

Thus, it certainly didn’t come as a surprise that the COC called in the Commercial Affairs Department (CAD) to bring in members of the church for questioning. With that much money in the church, there would definitely be some accounting errors or discrepancies in which the authorities may want a detailed and proper explanation from those who are involved in the finances. At this point of time, I am certain very few people can tell exactly what is really happening here and it will definitely take several months before everything will become clear.

However, the hubbub surrounding the Suntec purchase reminds me of why I dislike and disagree with this New Age church. Beginning with the ‘Prosperity Gospel’ which I considered nothing more than false doctrine. The entire premise of this logic trap is simply that contributing to the church’s revenue will have God bless someone many times in return. I am appalled how the entire Gospel of Jesus Christ was centered on the theme in which God now became the wealth multiplying basin (聚宝盆) in Chinese myths. If that is true there will never be any poor Christians. Christians will all be giving while weeping tears of joy, knowing that God will return their money in abundance. In fact, they should just give and give and give until the point where the overflowing returns make one richer than even Warren Buffet. I was initially surprised that people can be taken in by such hogwash until I realise just how cool and appealing the idea of having God as one’s own money printing press. It certainly even beats being the chairman of the U.S. Federal Reserves yourself! Is it even a surprise why my friend’s 15-year old son told her that he considered CHC some kind of MLM (Multi-Level Marketing) when there are people constantly ‘giving testimonies on how they are blessed’ after they have given unreservedly to God? Sounds like one of those MLM prep-talks in which the top earners will speak to spur the newcomers on.

The complete failure in logic aside, I am shocked that no one see that if this is how God operates, then it induces jealousy among the believers. Just why would God bless someone more than another if He went to the Cross unconditionally to offer His life so all maybe spared from His wrath? How does the concept of the ‘Prosperity Gospel’ reinforce the image of God’s unconditional love? It was almost like saying if one keeps giving his money to God, He will love you more. Really, how can one convince a believer who gives money to the Cai Shen (财神) aka Money God temple that Jesus is different from his god? I recalled someone among my friends even went so far in using the Chinese term 神棍 (pronounced ‘shen gun’) which literally translate as ‘religious con-men’, especially when they heard how even students who have no income worry about their contribution.

While I certainly still believe that God loves a joyful giver, I believe this refers to the giver who is giving not for his own gains and benefits, but for the common good so that none of God’s faithful would be in lack. My personal belief is that the money is to be used to lift others from their physical suffering so they can pay more attention to what God has to say to them, or free them from the bondage of their financial needs to be a servant to God. I am in the opinion that God never intend for Tithing to be an instrument for His Church to solicit and then hoard a large amount of money in reserves. Furthermore, I am quite certain God never intended His Church to build earthly monuments that He will sweep away in His new world, or for it to become a pseudo-investment bank where pastors and church workers are paid like bankers. I read that the CHC pays its 150 staff approximately S$9.3 million annually and that would mean an average of almost $60,000 per person every year. I am however skeptical that many among the 150 can report earning that much. Call it ‘using high pay to retain talent’ if you wish, but it is sort of sad when compared to the late Dr Goh Keng Swee who served as an advisor to China, he refused an annual salary of USD 60,000, citing that he was only there to help and not to profit from it. (There is no surprise there why there is an outpour of grief in the passing of this great man, one whose likes we will unlikely see again for a long time to come.)

Next, it reminds me of Ho Yeow Sun, ex-pastor of the church now turned singer. I certainly recalled that a sister-in-Christ from Church of Our Saviour who left CHC and returned to her home church after the first Ho Yeow Sun CD was pushed during cellgroup meetings. While it is arguable that this probably is just the actions of over-zealous members who loved their one time pastor very much, I often find it rather incredulous that the support given to her in the church itself were all simply self driven and spontaneous by members. Though the official statement is that the church did not openly support Ho nor encourage its members to, I have read blog posts to the contrary, and even a case where a member of the church took the matter to the press.[1] [2]

I laughed out loud when the church repeatedly claims that the support is comparable (or perhaps equal) to that given to other members. After all, I don’t recall CHC promoting member Jack Neo’s movies. However, I wouldn’t press that point since there are probably 101 reasons why that didn’t happen. Either way, that reminds me how CHC categorically deny asking teens who have no income to contribute to the church building fund too. Though from what I read on Christian-related forums, it gives me the impression that it was never explicit was done to stop these teens. While CHC may place the responsibilities of their action solely on the members themselves, I would be surprised that the members did not originally ‘felt inspired’ to do so without some urging during church service (where they were explicitly informed that it was meant only for the working adults) and peer pressure from other members in their own cellgroups.

On top than that, I often find it puzzled that members of CHC do not find the church’s close association with Ho’s otherwise secular career a matter of concern. Any criticism or question to her secular career is often answered with the alleged mission work she is doing in Taiwan. It was sort of like a subtle slap across the face, where detractors are asked (what Steve Jobs asked those who disparaged him), “By the way, what have you done that’s so great? Do you create anything, or just criticize others work and belittle their motivations?” Frankly, regardless of her works, any Christian can be rightly concerned that her actions might stumble another Christian, if not setting a bad example. How Ho Yeow Sun carries herself in public would open the rest of the Christian community to questions and scrutiny (if not open attacks), especially when Christians are expected to behave with a higher moral standard due to their hard-line stand on matters of morality.

What is even more amazing is how her husband, the very founder of the church, try to justify her actions and life style through church publications and his own blog. After justifying how the church should embrace pop culture and post modernism, it was most disturbing when Kong Hee explained the China Wine video as a music video about a girl who has to take up an extra job at a nightclub to make ends meet for her family. Frankly, I must admit that I am a total moron in understanding in so-called fartistic artistic videos which China Wine probably classifies as one! After all, I really can’t see what in that hell-spawned video was portraying just that! It definitely reminds me of a satirical scene in The Onion Movie, in which ‘Melissa Cherry’ , a pop idol in that movie has an explanation for everyone of her suggestive music videos and songs.

Another thing I disagree with is the extravagance. It definitely caused many raised eyebrows when they hear about a S$47-million titanium-clad church ‘monument to capitalism’ in Jurong West Street 91. The front facade of the building is clad with the same titanium that wraps the Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, Spain. Call it a modern Sistine Chapel if you wish, but remember that land sales for religious purposes by the Singapore gahmen are on a 30-year lease. My understanding is that should the gahmen decide not to extend the lease after 30 years, CHC will have restore the land to vacant status – i.e. CHC will need to pay to demolish the building.

CHC’s lea-duhs might want to argue that there is a Biblical basis to all these – from the church building in Jurong West to their purchase into Suntec City. However I consider it to be yet another faulty theology since the very essence of both the Tabernacle and the two Temples of Jerusalem was to emphasise God’s presence in His people. The fact that with the coming of the Holy Spirit and our bodies being the Temple of God, where then is the Biblical basis for such wasteful projects? Even if CHC members want to argue that how they spend their money is an internal matter that is not open to discussion, criticism, comments or ridicule, has it mattered to them how some other churches actually commits to God annually how much they will pledge to support certain community services, charities etc? It warms my heart to see that when there is a shortfall, a church prayed fervently to God together to provide and God answers their prayers. It strengthens my faith when God has blessed beyond what is pledged and the church then expand their scope of support. It assures me that there is almost certainly no avenue for fraud and misuse, when every cent givem without reserve to the church is used to fulfill God’s command for us to be His light and salt to the world.

There is a difference between trusting God and relying on a regimental regime, sales pitch and faulty theology to obtain the money. I have never for once believe that God has provided to us on Earth so we can enjoy our lives when He mentioned that we should store our riches in heaven. For a church to hoard a large amount of money is simply subjecting its members to temptation. Some CHC members will believe that the CAD investigations is nothing more but a trial for the lea-duhs and the church and this may even mobilise them to fast and pray.

I simply hope their faith is not misplaced. After all, should the investigation unravels a scandal, it really does nothing to strengthen the faith of the believers. This summarises much of what I disagree with City Harvest Church.

Addendum 【12-11-2011】:
It has been more than 17 months and there has been no updates on the investigations. It did not take that long to investigate Renci. Just what is going on here? The general public has a right to know the outcome of these investigations even if it did not turn up any wrong doing.

Addendum 2 【27-06-2012】:
My opinion on the latest development here.

Verses to ponder upon:

Luke 12:21 “So is he who lays up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward God.”

Rev 2:15 “Thus you also have those who hold the doctrine of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate.
Rev 2:16 ‘Repent, or else I will come to you quickly and will fight against them with the sword of My mouth.

Rev 3:17 “Because you say, ‘I am rich, have become wealthy, and have need of nothing’; and do not know that you are wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked;
Rev 3:18 “I counsel you to buy from Me gold refined in the fire, that you may be rich; and white garments, that you may be clothed, that the shame of your nakedness may not be revealed; and anoint your eyes with eye salve, that you may see.
Rev 3:19 “As many as I love, I rebuke and chasten. Therefore be zealous and repent.

Recommended Reads:
Cultwatch: How Pastors Get Rich
Vaitor: Red Stories from the Siege
The Sun Shines on Singapore: Kong Hee’s Pastorpreneurship?