Far Eastern Bible College 远东神学院 |
|
---|---|
Address | |
9A Gilstead Road Newton, 309063 Singapore |
|
Coordinates | 1°18′56″N 103°50′18″E / 1.3156°N 103.8382°ECoordinates: 1°18′56″N 103°50′18″E / 1.3156°N 103.8382°E |
Information | |
Type | Seminary |
Motto |
"Holding forth the Word of Life" (Phil 2:16) "Holding fast the Faithful Word" (Titus 1:9) |
Religious affiliation(s) | Christianity |
Denomination | Bible-Presbyterian |
Established | 17 September 1962 |
Founder | Timothy Tow |
Principal | Jeffrey Khoo |
Staff | 8 |
Faculty | 14 |
Gender | Mixed |
Enrolment | Approx. 100 |
Colour(s) | Blue, gold |
Graduates | Approx. 700 |
Website | www |
The Far Eastern Bible College (abbreviation: FEBC; Chinese: 远东神学院) is a reformed, fundamentalist, and separatist Bible-Presbyterian theological institution located at Gilstead Road, under the Novena Planning Area, within the Central Region of Singapore. Founded in 1962 by Timothy Tow, FEBC is the fourth oldest Bible college in the country. The current principal is Jeffrey Khoo.
The college motto is "Holding forth the Word of Life" (Phil 2:16) and "Holding fast the Faithful Word" (Titus 1:9).
Far Eastern Bible College was established on 17 September 1962 as an autonomous institution independent of ecclesiastical control. It shares premises with the Life Bible-Presbyterian Church, but the two organisations had a falling out over a doctrinal issue. In 2008, the church sued the college over what it considered to be "deviant Bible teachings", and sought to force FEBC to leave the Gilstead Road premises.
The FEBC faculty had been promoting a doctrine known as "Verbal Plenary Preservation", which states that the text of Scripture has been perfectly preserved. However the church failed as the Court of Appeal, the apex court in the Singapore legal system, held on 26 April 2011 that (i) “the College, in adopting the VPP doctrine, has not deviated from the fundamental principles which guide and inform the work of the College right from its inception, and as expressed in the Westminster Confession”; (ii) “[i]t is not inconsistent for a Christian who believes fully in the principles contained within the Westminster Confession (and the VPI [Verbal Plenary Inspiration] doctrine) to also subscribe to the VPP doctrine”; and (iii) “[i]n the absence of anything in the Westminster Confession that deals with the status of the apographs, we [the Court] hesitate to find that the VPP doctrine is a deviation from the principles contained within the Westminster Confession.