Category Archives: Editorial

The death of Presbyterianism, etc.

At this time, the main Presbyterian Church in Geelong has shut down. Divine Providence is not favouring that cause, it seems. At one time, the King James Bible was being used there, even (no doubt) Pure Cambridge Editions published by William Collins!

In all honesty, the charismatic and Pentecostal churches are merely in maintenance mode (despite any of their bluster, swings and roundabouts — though, not all). All the entertainment, carnal Christianity, social programs, slick advertising and worldliness is no aid to those who compromise therewith (there is genuine Word of Faith and Traditional Pentecostalism).

The only solution is a Biblically-based Spirit moving: the Word and Spirit movement.

Isa 42:21 The LORD is well pleased for his righteousness’ sake; he will magnify the law, and make it honourable.
Isa 42:22 But this is a people robbed and spoiled; they are all of them snared in holes, and they are hid in prison houses: they are for a prey, and none delivereth; for a spoil, and none saith, Restore.
Isa 42:23 Who among you will give ear to this? who will hearken and hear for the time to come?

Modernism is anti-Protestant tradition

Some modern version supporters claim that they need to know the Middle Eastern culture in order to understand the Bible, and in such a way which differs to traditional Protestant interpretations.

Instead of believing the Bible “as is”, the dangerous trend of trying to “contextualise” it to ancient near eastern culture is a tool of modernists to explain away and keep the Bible from being able to communicate to today properly by the providence of God.

God is actually smart. He can have something written by the hand of Moses which speaks to every generation without these convoluted (claimed “hundreds”) examples of this kind of scripture twisting and wresting.

Continue reading

Who killed Goliath?

Everyone knows David killed Goliath, right? Well, apparently, not everyone. Some modern versions claim that another man, Elhanan, killed Goliath. They say at 2 Samuel 21:19:

“And there was again war with the Philistines at Gob, and Elhanan the son of Jaare-oregim, the Bethlehemite, struck down Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam.” (ESV).

“There was war with the Philistines again at Gob, and Elhanan the son of Jaare-oregim the Bethlehemite killed Goliath the Gittite, the shaft of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam.” (NASB).

“And there was again war with the Philistines at Gob; and Elhanan the son of Jaareoregim the Beth-lehemite slew Goliath the Gittite, the staff of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam.” (ASV).

“And there was again war with the Philistines at Gob; and Elhanan the son of Jaare-oregim the Beth-lehemite slew Goliath the Gittite, the staff of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam.” (RV).

At this verse, the King James Bible rightly says, “And there was again a battle in Gob with the Philistines, where Elhanan the son of Jaareoregim, a Bethlehemite, slew the brother of Goliath the Gittite, the staff of whose spear was like a weaver’s beam.” (KJB).

David killed Goliath. Elhanan killed Goliath’s brother.

Modernists are not the same as Reformers

Those against the perfection of the KJB claim that modernists are using the same Reformation principles today. But are they?

THEN: Erasmus and the Reformers went to the Greek at hand.
NOW: Modernists dredge up manuscripts by concerted effort and focus onto the Middle and Near East areas.

THEN: The Protestants actually believed that God’s word was fully available.
NOW: Modernists are perpetually altering their work because they do not believe that the word of God is able to be fully, certainly known at every last point today.

THEN: They translated into English, which then culminated in “one more exact translation”.
NOW: They keep on translating, year by year, into English.

THEN: They said that an English translation was fully the word of God, able to comfort and resolve doctrinal issues.
NOW: They say that the real word of God was there only when first inspired, and today all things must be judged ultimately based upon the original languages.

And on and on, so don’t be fooled with the idea that the modernists are just the same as the Reformers. The modernists have foundationally departed wildly from the Protestant tradition.

Pr 22:28 Remove not the ancient landmark, which thy fathers have set.

Modern versions: spawn of infidel ideology

Some folks who attack the King James Bible claim to do so on historical grounds. For example, they might say that various translations were made in the Reformation, that the Westminster Confession of Faith spoke about the importance of Hebrew and Greek, or that the KJB translators were not infallible.

But this is a deception if the person arguing against the KJB is taking a modernistic position, in favour of modern versions like the ESV, etc. This is for two reasons:

1. The historical position would at least be friendly toward the KJB, and at least connect to the Textus Receptus or Traditional Text positions, or, at worst, the Majority Text position.

2. The historical position could not embrace the thoughts and processes from the Higher Critics or men like Westcott and Hort.

The most consistent and best historical position, as is highlighted by both internal and external (providential) factors, is to be King James Bible only.

However, a genuine believer should not be a modern versionist, supporting or using the likes of the NASV, the ESV, NIV or anything else like them, let alone the NLT, the Message and so on.

Continue reading

Modern versionism: the slippery slope

Modern versionists are struggling to defend and maintain the doctrine of the inerrancy and infallibility of the Scripture.

By the 1970s, they were making all kinds of compromises, in three areas:
1. In claiming only the original autographs were perfect, implying that it was impossible to have God’s words exactly today in one form.
2. Modernist hermeneutics (Bible interpretation methods) which explained away relevance of the Bible to today.
3. Upholding the Infidel-based idea of human rights.

All three of these above listed ideas are found in the three “Chicago Statements”, while the first two are found in teachings of men such as John MacArthur.

Continue reading

Should churches listen to Bill Combs?

Bill Combs blogged that churches should abandon the KJB ( and that churches should use modern versions (

His reason for abandoning the KJB is simple: the KJB was made a long time ago, and more information has been discovered since that time.

This is potentially a fallacy because more information does not necessarily mean that what was done must now be abandoned.

But looking from a Biblical and a divine aspect, when it can be shown that the sufficient amount of data was available for the KJB men, then all newer discoveries are not in any way counteracting what was done, because to do so would be to say that:

1. Christians did not have the Word of God while all the discoveries of new manuscripts had not occurred, and
2. Christians do not have the Word of God because all discoveries have not taken place, or that human knowledge is yet limited.
Continue reading