The King James Version Debate: A Plea for Realism

“The King James Version is superior to all modern English translations of the Bible”—so say many popular books and pamphlets. The King James Version Debate is the first book-length refutation of this point of view written for both pastors and laymen. The author concisely explains the science of textual criticism, since the main premise advanced by KJV proponents is the superiority of the Greek text on which it is based.

After showing the problems with this premise, the author refutes the common propositions that:

• The KJV is the most accurate translation
• It’s the most durable
• Its use of the Old English forms (e.g., “thou”) makes it the most reverent
• It honors Christ more than other versions
• It’s the most easily memorized
• It’s the most suitable for public reading

Concluding the book is an appendix in which, on a more technical level, the author answers W. N. Pickering’s The Identity of the New Testament Text, the most formidable defense of the priority of the Byzantine text yet published in our day.

D.A.Carson wrote in this book:

Thesis 3: The Byzantine text-type is demonstrably a secondary text. I am not here arguing for or against a theory that sees the genesis of the Byzantine text as a systematic conflation of other texts, even though some conflation certainly occurred. Rather, I am saying that textual critics who pore over manuscripts (or photographs and transcriptions of them) begin to detect clear signs of secondary influence. For example, harmonization is, indisputably, a secondary process. In general, scribes do not purposely introduce difficulties into the text; they try to resolve them. One might argue that particularly heterodox scribes might well make a text more complicated. However, a heterodox scribe is likely to change the theological content rather than relatively minor historical and geographical details; and in any case the Byzantine tradition does not reflect merely an odd manuscript given to harmonization, but rather the whole tradition. This is especially so in the Synoptic Gospels. In the article to which I have just referred, Fee points out a particular section in which the Byzantine text contains some thirty-eight major harmonizations, as compared with one harmonization in the Alexandrian text.¹¹ Thus prompted, I made some checks myself in other passages and found similar proportions. The only way to circumvent the evidence is to deny that they are harmonizations, or to argue that harmonizations are not secondary; and I find it very difficult to conceive how either of these alternatives can be defended by the person who has spent much time poring over the primary data.

Thesis 4: The Alexandrian text-type has better credentials than any other text-type now available. Some of the literature put out by defenders of the TR gives the impression that the great fourth-century uncials, Vaticanus (B) and Sinaiticus (א), are the only exemplars of the Alexandrian text; and therefore, it is argued, the Alexandrian text is itself a product of the fourth century.¹²

This is manifestly untrue, as the more able defenders of the TR have been forced to admit. Not only is the Alexandrian text-type found in some biblical quotations by ante-Nicene fathers, but the text-type is also attested by some of the early version witnesses. More convincing yet, Greek papyri from the second and third centuries have shown up, none of which reflects a Byzantine text and most of which have a mixed Alexandrian/Western text. The famous papyrus p⁷⁵, which dates from about A.D. 200 and is perhaps earlier, is astonishingly close to Vaticanus.¹³ This find definitely proves the early date of the Vaticanus text-type.¹⁴

In addition it has been shown that the Alexandrian text has another point in its favor. Any text-type is either recensional or not recensional. By “recensional” I mean that a text has come into being by conscious revision, editing, or conflation, or by change over a period of time as part of a directed developing process. If this does not explain the genesis of a particular text, ...

Far Eastern Bible College is raising more and more Pharisees

Carey Hardy offers some practical advice for Christians seeking to be biblical parents. Brief excerpts of his 12 steps for raising a Pharisee are provided here, but you can read the full length article by following the link at the end of this summary.

Here are 12 easy steps for raising your children to become Pharisees:

1. Major on external instead of internal issues.

See the Sermon on the Mount (Matt. 5–6).  This is majoring on controlling the child’s behavior without using Scripture and prayer to deal with his heart.

2. Exercise excessive control.

This is not balancing discipline with instruction.  This is manifested by the creation of TOO MANY rules and restrictions, rules that are POINTLESS, or rules that are HARSH AND TOO STRICT.

3. Overreact to failure.

This includes not allowing the freedom to fail. It’s treating failure as the end of the world. You must see failure as an opportunity for instruction. But many parents live in FEAR of failure—and thus they become excessive controllers. This may be manifested in calling attention to every mistake. It’s a performance-based love…expecting perfection.

4. Be unforgiving and impatient.

A grouchy/irritable parent, frustrated over everything that goes wrong.  Instead of a home that is filled with joy, there is an oppressive, negative atmosphere. Sinful choices by your children definitely need to be dealt with. But make sure there is a visible end to the consequences, with the home thus returning to a pleasant atmosphere of peace and tranquility.

5. Elevate preference over biblical principle.

Some parents are prone to emphasize rules that really don’t reflect the Bible at all. Instead, the rules reflect personal preferences.

6. Exercise unnecessary separatism.

This has become a huge problem with many home-schooling families. I believe it’s danger they must watch out for.  Frankly, this approach doesn’t work as the parents think it will. Frequent phone calls from parents of older children who are rebelling. And frequent discussions with pastors who are having this problem in their church.  As your children grow, they must be involved with other children; this is a testing ground and provides opportunities for training. And your teens must be allowed to be with other teens.

7. Judge others…other families.

This is being judgmental about other families, about things going on in the church; being critical of everything, constantly fault-finding, producing a constant rain of criticism.  When you do this in front of children, you’re developing that judgmental spirit in them.

8. Be “belligerent”—a fighter.

Pharisees fight. So, to this parent, every issue is a fighting issue.  As the child watches you take on every wrong thing in the church, every example of wrong thinking in others, they learn the lifestyle of a fighter.  Thus, they end up learning what to fight against and not necessarily what to fight for.

9. Show favoritism.

By this, I mean showing favoritism toward one child over another child.  This teaches a child to want to be only with people who are like you and who meet your standards. Then this can lead to the separatism we discussed earlier.

10. Exercise no humor.

No fun.  You need to know how to not take yourself so seriously and how to not take things in this world so seriously at times.

11. Build up their self-esteem.

A “high self-esteem” is not a biblical concept. Nor is the need to learn to love yourself.  Emphasis on self-esteem encourages individuals to become like Pharisees; they are encouraged to delve into self, to be focused on self, to build up self.

12. Lack genuine spirituality.

Living hypocritically teaches hypocrisy.  You won’t be perfect as a parent, but there must be a level of integrity visible to your children.

 http://sbcvoices.com/how-to-raise-a-pharisee-in-12-easy-steps/

The demonic theologians

Whereas the Gospels provide numerous examples of demon possession, the Bible is also clear that a Christian cannot be possessed by an evil spirit. Upon conversion, the Spirit of Christ takes up permanent residence within that individual. 1 John 4:4 assures all the saved that “the One who is in you is greater than the one who is in the world.” Likewise, the presence of the divine nature in any individual is a certain guarantee that no demon can enter.^2[1]

I grew up with regular reminders of the King James verse “avoid the very appearance of evil” (1 Thess. 5:22, KJV). While a better translation would be to avoid every form of evil, the sentiment that a Christian should not dabble with evil is clearly true. The appropriate attitude is not to try to get as close to evil as we are allowed to. The heart of a Christian should not desire evil in the first place.^[2] It was Satan, not demons, who filled Ananias’s heart (Acts 5:3). Nevertheless, he is probably the strongest proof that a believer may be controlled by demons from within, for the same expression is used of the filling of the Spirit (Eph. 5:18).^[3] Neither Satan nor demons can ultimately have victory over a believer, though apparently they may dominate or control a believer’s life for a time. A believer may be delivered to Satan “for the destruction of the flesh,” but the spirit will “be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus” (1 Cor. 5:5). Whatever relationship Satan or demons may have to a believer during this life, it cannot be permanent or eternal.^[4] But Paul says we wrestle, or struggle, against the powers of darkness, and that it is a lifelong conflict (Eph. 6:12). Therefore, the believer must be alert (1 Pet. 5:8), be clothed in the armor of God (Eph. 6:13–18), and maintain vigorous physical, mental, and spiritual health (Rom. 12:2; 2 Cor. 10:5; Phil. 4:8).^[5]

Unger (1971, p. 114) summarizes the biblical data regarding manifestations of demonic oppression as blindness and hardness of heart toward the gospel (2 Cor. 4:4), apostasy and doctrinal corruption (1 Tim. 4:1), and indulging in sinful, defiling behavior (2 Peter 2:1–12). Scripture also mentions that demonic oppression can result in physical illness (e.g., Luke 13:10–16).^[6]

Christians debate whether believers can be possessed. A growing number of conservative writers believe that the biblical data do not clearly answer this issue and that therefore we should look to human experience to help us decide it. Many accounts from experienced missionaries around the world and from ministers in the United States who specialize in spiritual warfare ministries assert that possession can occur in believers. In 1952 Unger wrote in Biblical Demonology that he believes Christians cannot be demon possessed. However, he later reported that he received so many letters from missionaries all over the world documenting this kind of occurrence that he came to believe that it does happen (1971, p. 117). Other writers who agree with this conclusion include C. Fred Dickason (chair of the theology department at Moody Bible Institute and author of Demon Possession and the Christian [1987]), Neil T. Anderson (former chair of the practical theology department at Talbot School of Theology and author of The Bondage Breaker[1993]), Mark Bubeck (author of The Adversary [1975] and Overcoming the Adversary[1984]), and Thomas White (director of Frontline Ministries and author of The Believer’s Guide to Spiritual Warfare [1990]). The common means by which this seems to happen is through believers arrogantly attacking demons (cf. Jude 9) or through habitual sin.^[7]

Demons work by lying, deceit, and oppression, and when the opportunity arises they enter the body of a person (Lk 8:30; 22:3), in order to control the individual’s thoughts and actions. Sometimes a distinction is made between demonic oppression and demonic possession; this supposedly differentiates an attack from without and control from within. Although a non-Christian may be said to be “possessed” by a demon, the Christian cannot be so possessed, for he belongs to Christ and his human spirit has been sealed by the Holy Spirit (Eph 1:13). Demonic spirits somehow know and acknowledge this seal.^[8]

Satan is the author of the world’s system of thinking and encourages people to develop mistaken beliefs about what goals they need to reach to achieve happiness (e.g., possessions, fame, power, or pleasure). Satan also encourages people to develop mistaken beliefs about how best to reach those goals (e.g., through lying, deception, stealing, or infidelity).We as individuals can incorporate those mistaken beliefs either because we see them modeled in the world system or through mistaken interpretations we make as we grow up in our families. Satan and Satan’s demons work in two ways to accomplish this: indirectly by influencing the world system and directly by suggesting thoughts to us (e.g., 1 Chron. 21:1; Acts 5:3). Satan may also in some way blind us to the error of the mistaken beliefs he has persuaded us to accept (2 Cor. 4:4; James 3:15). These would be the categories labeled as examples of demonic temptation and oppression.^[9]

A theologian may have a demon following him, this is called “demonic,” it is to say the demon whispers into the theologian’s ear with false teachings, and then the theologian believed in its lies, and so the theologian start to teach the lies he heard from the demon, and so he became a false teacher, teaching false doctrine and false teaching. At last he may become a heretic.

---

² Lewis Sperry Chafer, “Eternal Security: Part 2.” Bibliotheca Sacra. Vol. 106 (Dallas: Dallas Theological Seminary, 1949; 2002), 398–399.

^[1] David G. Shackelford, “Demons in the Gospels,” in Holman Christian Standard Bible: Harmony of the Gospels (Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers, 2007), 316.

^[2] Kenneth Schenck, 1 & 2 Corinthians: a Commentary for Bible Students (Indianapolis, IN: Wesleyan Publishing House, 2006), 147–148.

^[3] Charles C. Ryrie, Biblical Answers to Tough Questions (Chicago, IL: Moody Press, 1991), 94–95.

^[4] Charles C. Ryrie, Biblical Answers to Tough Questions , 95.

^[5] Charles C. Ryrie, 96.

^[6] David G. Benner and Peter C. Hill, eds., Baker Encyclopedia of Psychology & Counseling, Baker Reference Library (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 1999), 327.

^[7] David G. Benner and Peter C. Hill, eds., Baker Encyclopedia of Psychology & Counseling, Baker Reference Library , 327–328.

^[8] Walter A. Elwell and Barry J. Beitzel, Baker Encyclopedia of the Bible (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1988), 611.

^[9] David G. Benner and Peter C. Hill, eds., 329.

Many others

During the past decade or two there has been a flood of new translations, too numerous to mention here. Some have endeavored to be literal renderings of the originals, while others are definitely paraphrases into what is considered to be more modern English usage. Still others are in the making and will, no doubt, be seen in the near future.

Conclusion: Does this flurry of “experts” to give us the exact language of the original autographs indicate that we cannot depend upon our present English Bible to declare the true message God would proclaim to Mankind? Perhaps the following quotation from Sir Frederic Kenyon, director of the British Museum, will answer the question best: “It is reassuring at the end to find that the general result of all these discoveries and all this study is to strengthen the proof of the authenticity of the Scriptures, and our conviction that we have in our hands, in substantial integrity, the veritable Word of God.”^25[1]

---

²⁵ Sir Frederick Kenyon, source unknown.

^[1] Guy P. Duffield and Nathaniel M. Van Cleave, Foundations of Pentecostal Theology(Los Angeles, CA: L.I.F.E. Bible College, 1983),  44.

Hunting for the text of the New Testament

All right, so how might we explore the cumulative impact of all these differences? Actually, it is quite easy, though sensationalists avoid mentioning this. One reason why textual criticism is so complex is that we have so many manuscripts, in different scribal forms, from such a wide area, over a long period of time. One of the main theories (though this has recently been challenged) is that there are three main ‘families’ of manuscripts:

1. The Western tradition, which consists of early manuscripts from a wide area, and was the basis of translations in the Western church, in particular Jerome’s Latin translation the Vulgate, which was the dominant biblical text in the Roman church.
2. The Eastern tradition, or Byzantine text-type  , which consists of around 80% of all manuscripts, though none of them very early. Known as the Majority Text (MT), this was the dominant text used in the Eastern church, and was the basis of theTextus Receptus   (TR), a collation of manuscripts by Erasmus during the Reformation. When it was decided to make translations from original Greek texts rather then from the Latin Vulgate, this became the basis of early English translations up to and including the AV in 1611.
3. The third player in the drama is what is known as the Alexandrian text type  ; this includes Codex Sinaiticus   and Codex Vaticanus   (used by Westcott and Hort   in 1881) and consists of a smaller number of much earlier manuscripts which take us much closer to the original texts. It is this group of manuscripts which are sensationalised as introducing the differences from earlier manuscripts, and these are the basis of all modern translations.

read more: http://www.psephizo.com/biblical-studies/hunting-for-the-text-of-the-new-testament/

List of major textual variants in the New Testament

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an (incomplete) list of major textual variants in the New Testament, with a focus on differences between categories of New Testament manuscript.

• The Textus Receptus (Latin: "received text") is the name subsequently given to the succession of printed Greek texts of the New Testament which was first collated by Desiderius Erasmus in the 16th century. It constituted the translation base for the translation of the New Testament into English by William Tyndale, the King James Version, and most other Reformation-era New Testament translations throughout Western and Central Europe.
• The Majority Text represents the Byzantine text-type, which was used in Eastern Greek speaking churches and was dominant from the late middle agesonwards. It is similar to the Textus Receptus.
• The modern critical text (e.g. Novum Testamentum Graece) is close to the Alexandrian text-type, which accounts for some of the earliest New Testament manuscripts; it stands behind most modern English translations of the New Testament including the ASV, the NIV, the RSV and the ESV.

For a more comprehensive list which includes many minor variants, see Textual variants in the New Testament.

Variations between Majority Text/Textus Receptus and critical text[edit]

The following list contains texts where the Majority Text is in agreement with the Textus Receptus, against the critical text.

MT = Majority Text. CT = Critical text

Gospels[edit]

Matthew 5:44

MT: But I say to you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who spitefully use you and persecute you.

CT: But I say to you, love your enemies, and pray for those who persecute you.

Matthew 6:13

MT: And do not lead us into temptation, But deliver us from the evil one. For Yours is the kingdom and the power and the glory forever. Amen.

CT: And do not lead us into temptation, But deliver us from the evil one.

Matthew 17:21

MT: However, this kind does not go out except by prayer and fasting.

CT: Verse omitted

Matthew 18:11

MT: For the Son of Man has come to save that which was lost.

CT: Verse omitted

continue reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_major_textual_variants_in_the_New_Testament

Our Top 15 Apologetics Books

Reasonable Faith

Mere Christianity

Pensées

Philosophical Foundations for a Christian Worldview

Tactics: A Game Plan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions

The Case for the Resurrection of Jesus

Can We Trust the Gospels?

The Case for the Real Jesus

The Resurrection of the Son of God

Testing Christianity's Truth Claims

Scaling the Secular City

Christian Apologetics (Geisler)

Francis Schaeffer Trilogy

20 Compelling Evidences that God Exists

Faith Has Its Reasons

Kingdom of God

Kingdom of God has come, but not yet completely established on earth, as Christian we are called to expand the kingdom of God through preaching the Gospel truth to the unsaved. Love one another! Be a good witness for Christ to expand the kingdom of God.

Remember! The kingdom of God does not belongs to Bible Presbyterian Church in Singapore only.

The true and universal church is in the kingdom of God, where Christ is on the throne. Where we worship Him in the church. Christ is the head of the church. Kingdom of God is in our hearts, and He reigns in our life.

But sad to say, these Bible Presbyterian quarrelsome pastors in Singapore, like to quarrel, like to sue each others, like to quarrel who has higher place in their churches, who is more powerful. Do you think they are in the kingdom of God? Maybe yes! Because they believe in the Lord and Savior!

It's kingdom of God in their hearts? Do they like to expand the kingdom of God? The answer is a big no! One day they will receive their rewards in heaven!

One day a "big" pastor visited his parish far far away, you know what this pastor "said" to his parish worker, he said, "Get lost and shut up, I am the boss here, you have to obey me like obey God!" Then the devil goes into the pastor's heart and speak to him, "If you cannot defeat this man, just kill him with poison!!!"

Some of you like to behave like "bosses" in the kingdom of God, shame to you! I am a Bible Presbyterian pastor, but I am really ashamed of you, you should be ashamed as a Bible Presbyterian pastor because of your doings!

Still want to quarrel about Bible versions ???

Saint Athanasius wrote

"But for the searching and right understanding of the Scriptures there is need of a good life and a pure soul, and for Christian virtue to guide the mind to grasp, so far as human nature can, the truth concerning God the Word. One cannot possibly understand the teaching of the saints unless one has a pure mind and is trying to imitate their life. Anyone who wants to look at sunlight naturally wipes his eye clear first, in order to make, at any rate, some approximation to the purity of that on which he looks; and a person wishing to see a city or country goes to the place in order to do so. Similarly, anyone who wishes to understand the mind of the sacred writers must first cleanse his own life, and approach the saints by copying their deeds. Thus united to them in the fellowship of life, he will both understand the things revealed to them by God and, thenceforth escaping the peril that threatens sinners in the judgment, will receive that which is laid up for the saints in the kingdom of heaven." - [Saint Athanasius, in his conclusion to "THE INCARNATION OF THE WORD ", CHAPTER 9, (9:57)]

Psalm 12:6

Ps. 12:6, 
The words of the Lord are pure words,
like silver refined in a furnace on the ground,
purified seven times.

To say that God's words are pure, refined, and purified is to insist that they have no “dross” of lies, flattery, or insincerity: God means what he says; his words are completely pure. This general truth gives bite to his specific promise of v. 7 

Psalm 12:7
You, O Lord, will keep them;
you will guard us from this generation forever.

God Will Guard His Faithful. The psalm closes with assurance: God will protect his faithful followers.

Prov. 30:5
Every word of God proves true;
he is a shield to those who take refuge in him.

Prov. 30:5–6 Every word of God proves true (cf. 2 Sam. 22:31; Ps. 18:30). “Proves true” can also mean “refined” (cf. Ps. 12:6) or “well tried” (Ps. 119:140); the implication is that God's words are a proven foundation for one's life. The proverb's emphasis on every “word” (Hb. ’imrah) underscores the truthfulness, trustworthiness, and reliability of the Bible, not just in its overall message but also of every detail. This verse supplies support for the doctrine of the “plenary” (full, complete) inspiration of Scripture, extending even to “every word.” Thus Prov. 30:6 warns against adding to God's words. The whole of vv. 2–6 thus teaches that human wisdom is limited, that the wisest people recognize their ignorance, that truth resides in the word of God, and that no one should think he is able to enhance the wisdom that God has given.

These Bible verses do not say we have a 100% preserved Greek and Hebrew Text.

A WARNING TO bible presebyterian senior pastors!

The Bible Presbyterian denomination is shrinking in size and number of congregation comparing to other denominations.

This is a warning from above?

That you should humble yourself when you are talking to the young people and co-labors. But no, you choose to speak with pride, and you are arrogant, a warning had been sent to you, that you will not prosper any longer like previous time, until you put on humility. 

Who pick you to be proud in the first place?

You are no better than others, you are money minded, proud and self caring, look at what mission field you involved in, look in the mirrors. Shame to you, when you called yourself as the fundamentalist in the last days. You did not care for those who are poor and seeking your help.

Bible Presbyterian is cut into half, but this time, it will be cut into another half! You have spoiled your self with money and pride.

Hear this, a warning has been sent to you, repent!

Did you pray for those people who disagree with you?

I don't care how far you will go along with this Verbal Plenary Preservation. I don't care how much you love his Verbal Plenary Preservation.

What I concerned is this, did you pray for those people who are disagree with your theological stand, did you pray for their best, did you read your Bible every day?

Or you are being led by those false theologians to hate others, to curse other fellow members in Bible Presbyterian Churches?

Do you indulge in pride, self centered old self? Seeing you are better than those who are rejecting Verbal Plenary Preservation!

If this is the case, it is better for you to start praying now for all ministers and fellow members in Bible Presbyterian Churches!

Dirty hands

Once there was a middle age man named Mr. Stephen, he was just graduated from a Bible college, and he was serving some where in a city, a senior pastor whose name was Timthy Tow, wanted to ordain him into the Christian ministry, this Stephen was a strange and angry man, he told the old senior pastor, "Get lost! Don't touch my head with your dirty hands! I do not want to be ordained by your dirty hands." 

Stephen was insulting the old senior pastor TT that he has a pair of dirty hands! He was indeed a dirty fellow!

As someone has said, “Wisdom doesn't necessarily come with age. Sometimes age just shows up all by itself.”

Do you want to be ordained by some dirty hands, no, do not let people "any how any how" put their dirty hands on your head!!!! If they did, they are insulting you!

Downgrade of FEBC after Rev. Timothy Tow

This posting is copied from http://valiantfortruth.tripod.com/id31.html

When ‘Dr.’ Jeffrey Khoo became the Academic Dean of the FEBC and, subsequently its Principal (when Rev. Timothy Tow passed away) the spiritual rot that started a few years earlier began to get worse.

‘Dr.’ Prabhdas Koshy, one of its lecturers, denied, against all historical evidences and facts, that the Apostles used and quoted from the Septuagint (Did Jesus And The Apostles Rely On The Corrupt Septuagint? http://www.febc.edu.sg/VPP5.htm )

Jeffrey Khoo claimed that the KJV translators restored the lost autographs (Originals) through their translation of the Bible into English. The KJV translators never made such a claim. They were, after all, translators and, not prophets restoring the lost autographs. 

‘Dr.’ Quek Suan Yew, one of FEBC’s lecturers, wrote one of the most startling statement, “Without the doctrine of VPP there is no BIBLE...” (NO VPP, NO KJV! NO CUV!,Elder's page of Calvary Pandan Weekly of 2nd Sept 2007).

Now, according to FEBC, VPP is inextricably linked to the KJV bible. Since the KJV came into being in 1611, it follows therefore, that according to ‘Dr.’ Quek, there was no Bible until 1611! However, this contradicts what the Bible says about the Word (John 1:1, Proverbs 8:22). 

Paul Ferguson, a new addition to the FEBC, found a comrade-in-arms in Islamist apologist Ahmad Deedat. Ferguson, a Christian Taliban, uses Deedat to attack the Christian Bible (The Burning Bush, Jan 2009). This is not surprising as VPP’s understanding of revelation is identical to Islam’s and the Mormons. The Islamists believe that their Original scripture is inscribed in Arabic on a tablet in heaven; they were then revealed to Muhammad by an angel:

“The Qu’ran is a record of the exact words revealed by Allah through the Angel Gabriel to the Prophet Muhammad. It was memorised by Muhammad and then dictated to his Companions, and written down by scribes, who crosschecked it during his lifetime. Not one word of its 114 chapters, suras, has been changed over the centuries, so that the Qu’ran is in every detail the unique and miraculous text which was revealed to Muhammad fourteen centuries ago.”[1]

‘Drs.’ Khoo, Koshy, Quek and Ferguson subscribe to this theory of revelation, the only difference from the Islamist’s being that God revealed to the KJV translators what the autographic texts were.

It logically follows that they categorically reject any form of textual criticism since the Hebrew and Greek underlying the KJV Bible is revealed directly from God to the KJV translators!

They superstitiously claim that unless Christians have the complete autographical texts in their hands, Christians cannot say they have the Word of God. 

Ferguson’s fluffy articles employ sleight-of-hand reasoning to attack the Christian Bible. For instance, he quotes from anti-Christian Bart Ehrman[2], and concludes:

“such a statement shows the depth of rationalistic and unbiblical thought that is now prevalent in modern fundamentalism”. 

Dr. Ehrman is not at all a Christian but an atheist, so how can Ferguson use an atheist to represent modern fundamentalism?

Jeffrey Khoo’s Illegal Degree

The BBC published a report about the University of Wales having links to a bible college in the USA giving out illegal degrees.

The University of Wales is a "laughing stock" for having awarded degrees at a controversial bible college in the USA, an American education expert says.

Trinity College of the Bible in Newburgh, Indiana, is not officially accredited, which means many states consider its degrees to be illegal.

Dr John Bear said the university's links with the college, which offers mainly distance education courses of a religious nature, was damaging.

The university has now cut the ties.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/7740904.stm 

Jeffrey Khoo, current principal of the FEBC, earned a ‘illegal’ degree from the Trinity (College of the Bible) Theological Seminary.
http://www.trinitysem.edu/

The following link shows the cover page of Jeffrey Khoo’s dissertation submitted to the Trinity (College of the Bible) Theological Seminary in Newburgh, Indiana, for the PhD degree.
http://valiantfortruth.tripod.com/JKhoo_Disertatn.pdf

Nature of FEBC’s down-grade

Under Khoo, the FEBC has lost its status as a Reformed bible seminary.

Khoo, together with Quek, Koshy (who earned their Th.D from FEBC) and Ferguson (who is doing his Th. D in FEBC) have taken FEBC down the road of the KJV Onlyism cult of D.A. Waite. In their tenet of VPP number 6, Waite has been given miraculous power to know what the autographical texts are. Essentially, they hold similar position as the Ruckmanites, the only difference is that the Ruckmanites are more honest about their position, whereas the VPPists are dodgy, speaking half-truths, misquoting and misrepresenting. 

[1] Understanding Islam and the Muslims; The Islamic Affairs Dept., The Embassy of Saudi Arabia

[2] The Burning Bush, July 2009

Scripture readings

If you want to experience God working in your life, come to Scripture with a prayerful, expectant, purpose-filled attitude. The mourner will be comforted. The weary will gain strength. Those convicted of their sin will repent and know peace. All will sense joy. Recognize what a gift God’s Word is.

Dogs and cats are fighting

Since the FEBC will stay on the same plot of land co-habbit with Life BP Church, the cats and dogs's fight came into picture, weather you will build a tall wall to separate FEBC from the church or not, it is just a mere consideration, but the fighting continues, it is not the end yet, the fighting just started after the appeal was allowed.

The false teachers will began to teach heresy with higher look, they are proud, even their appeal being granted. 

Both FEBC and Life BP Church will start another round of fightings this time, enemy and neighbor at the same premises, well, interesting, lets see who is going to lose at the end, how to witness for the Lord, time will tell us!

New fights on the block!