The Ancient Landmark

In an age of shifting cultural sand and watered-down theology, the faithful church must stand on the unmoving rock of the preserved Word of God.

Good morning, church. It is good to be in the house of the Lord.

We find ourselves today standing on the precipice of a New Year. 2026 is knocking on the door. And traditionally, in churches all across America, this is the season for "New Year, New You" sermons. Pastors will stand in pulpits just like this one and talk about setting goals, casting vision, and looking forward with optimism. They will talk about the next big thing God is going to do.

But today, I feel a heavy burden to do something different. Before we look forward, I want us to look backward. Before we talk about where we are going, I want us to look at the ground beneath our feet and ask a terrifying question: Is the ground moving?

I have been having some conversations this week that have deeply burdened my heart. When you look at the landscape of what is called "Christianity" in America today compared to just fifty years ago—comparing 1975 to 2025—it is almost unrecognizable. We are seeing things today that would have been unthinkable to our grandparents. We see churches flying flags that celebrate sin. We see major denominations debating whether Jesus is actually the only way to heaven or just "a" way among many. We see "pastors" who sound more like life coaches, political activists, or motivational speakers than heralds of the King. We see worship services that look more like rock concerts or TED talks, designed to entertain rather than to convict.

And we have to stop and ask: How did we get here? How did the church, which the Bible calls the "pillar and ground of the truth," become a mirror reflection of the lost world? How did the salt lose its savor?

I want to submit to you today that this did not happen overnight. It wasn't a sudden explosion. It happened by inches. It happened by moving the ancient landmarks. It happened by a slow, steady erosion of two fundamental things: The Authority of God and The Integrity of His Word.

Today, we are going to do a deep dive. We are going to become students of history and theology. We are going to look at the "Great Drift." We are going to talk about Liberal Theology—where it came from and what it does to a church. And we are going to talk about the Bible itself—why we hold to the King James Version, and why the modern translations aren't just "easier to read," but are fundamentally changing the message of the Gospel.

Turn with me in your Bibles to the book of Jeremiah, chapter 6, verse 16.

Jeremiah 6:16 KJV 1900

Thus saith the Lord, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein.

And hold your finger in Proverbs 22:28

Proverbs 22:28 KJV 1900

Remove not the ancient landmark, Which thy fathers have set.

The Great Drift: A Church in the Image of the World

Let's start with the observation. If you were to take a Bible-believing Christian from 1975—maybe your grandfather or grandmother—and drop them into the average evangelical church service in 2025, they would be in shock. They would look around at the smoke machines, the darkness, the message, and they would ask, "What religion is this? Because this does not look like the church I laid down my life for."

The Shift in Morality Fifty years ago, the Bible was the standard for morality in the West. Even the lost world knew what the Bible said, even if they chose not to follow it. There was a cultural consensus rooted in Judeo-Christian values. But look at where we are now.

Take the Sanctity of Life. In 1975, abortion was understood by the church universally as a tragedy and a sin. It was the taking of an innocent life. Today, we have entire "Christian" denominations that not only tolerate abortion but celebrate it. They call it a matter of "healthcare" and "reproductive justice." They have adopted the language of the world to justify the slaughter of the innocent. They have moved the landmark of "Thou shalt not kill."

Look at Marriage. For thousands of years, marriage was defined by Genesis 2—one man, one woman, for life. It was the bedrock of civilization. Today, the culture has not only redefined marriage; it has redefined gender itself. We are told that biology is a social construct, that feelings trump facts. And instead of the church standing firm and saying, "God created them male and female," the modern church is scrambling to "affirm" what God calls confusion. They are terrified of being called "bigots," so they have decided to become heretics. They have moved the landmark of creation itself.

The Shift in Strategy: The "Seeker Sensitive" Movement But how did this happen? How did the church get so weak? It wasn't an accident. It was a strategy. Starting in the late 70s and 80s, a movement swept through the American church called the "Seeker Sensitive" movement. The logic seemed good on the surface. Leaders said, "We want to reach the lost. But the lost don't like organ music. They don't like suits. And they certainly don't like sermons about hell or sin. So, if we want to reach them, we have to change the packaging."

And so the renovation began. They removed the crosses from the sanctuary because they were "offensive symbols of execution." They removed the pulpits—the symbol of authority—and put in stools and coffee tables to look "conversational." They stopped calling it a "sanctuary," a holy place, and started calling it an "auditorium" or a "campus." But most tragically, they changed the message. They stopped preaching about Sin, Wrath, Judgment, and Hell. Those topics were too heavy. Instead, they started preaching about "Brokenness," "Mistakes," "Living Your Best Life," and "Finding Your Purpose."

The "Seeker Sensitive" model turned the sanctuary into an auditorium.

They traded Truth for Relevance. They traded Holiness for Acceptance. They forgot that the purpose of the church service is not to entertain the goats; it is to feed the sheep. The church is supposed to be an equipping station for the saints, not a theater for the lost. When you tailor your church to make lost people comfortable in their sin, you end up with a church full of lost people who think they are saved. You create a "Christianity" that requires no repentance and produces no transformation.

The church traded Truth for Relevance and Holiness for Acceptance.

The Overton Window Sociologists have a term for this. They call it the "Overton Window." This describes the range of ideas that are considered "acceptable" in public discourse at any given time. An idea starts as Unthinkable. Then it becomes Radical. Then Acceptable. Then Sensible. Then Popular. And finally, it becomes Policy.

The "Overton Window" has moved ideas from "Unthinkable" to "Policy".

The world has moved the window. Things that were "Unthinkable" in 1975—like men participating in women's sports or the chemical castration of children—are now "Policy." And the tragedy is that the modern church has been chasing the window. We didn't stand our ground. We moved the landmark to accommodate the neighbor, and now the neighbor has no idea where the property line is. We have lost our distinctiveness, and in doing so, we have lost our power.

The Root Cause: The Poison of Liberal Theology

But this drift isn't just about music styles or carpet color. Those are just the symptoms. The disease is deep in the theology. It is the result of a specific way of thinking called Liberal Theology.

Now, when I say "Liberal," please understand me. I am not talking about Democrats vs. Republicans. I am not talking about tax rates or foreign policy. I am talking about a view of the Bible. Liberal Theology began in the 1800s in Europe, specifically in the seminaries of Germany. It is often called "Higher Criticism." And at its core, it asked one question—the exact same question the Serpent asked Eve in the Garden of Eden: "Yea, hath God said?"

The Core Question: "Yea, hath God said?"

The Core Tenet of Liberalism

The central dogma of Liberal Theology is this: The Bible is not the authoritative, inerrant, breathed-out Word of God. Instead, they say the Bible is a human book about God. It is a record of how ancient people experienced the divine.

Do you see the subtle shift? If the Bible is God's Word, then it judges me. I must submit to it. But if the Bible is a human book about God, then I judge it. I can stand over the text and decide which parts are true and which parts are just ancient myths or cultural biases.

Therefore, Liberalism teaches that the Bible contains errors. It contains the prejudices of its time.

They say Paul was a misogynist when he wrote about women in the church, so we can ignore those verses.

They say Moses was a myth, and the Exodus never happened, so we don't need to take the Law literally.

They say the miracles—the splitting of the Red Sea, the Virgin Birth, the Resurrection—were just metaphors. They were spiritual stories, not historical events.

The Jesus Seminar

Let me give you a concrete example of this. In the 1980s and 90s, a group of "scholars" formed something called the Jesus Seminar. These were the leading liberal minds of the day. They got together to vote on the sayings of Jesus in the Gospels. They literally used colored beads to vote.

A Red bead meant: Jesus definitely said this.

A Pink bead meant: He probably said something like this.

A Gray bead meant: He didn't say it, but it sounds like something he might have said.

A Black bead meant: He definitely didn't say it; the church made it up later.

Guess which verses got the black beads? Anything about judgment. Anything about Hell. Anything about Jesus claiming to be the only way to God. Anything about His divinity. They stripped Jesus of His crown and left Him as nothing more than a gentle, hippie moral teacher who just wanted everyone to be nice. They created a Jesus in their own image.

The Jesus Seminar used colored beads to vote on whether Jesus actually said what the Bible says.

The Danger

This is the poison in the groundwater. It destroys the immune system of the church. Once you accept the premise that the Bible is a human book, you have no defense against the culture.

If the Bible says homosexuality is a sin, but your culture says it's love, Liberalism says: "The Bible is wrong on that point. Paul didn't know about modern psychology. We know better now."

If the Bible says Jesus is the only way, but your culture says that's intolerant, Liberalism says: "That was just Peter's opinion. God is bigger than that."

When the authority of Scripture falls, everything else falls with it.

Liberalism places human experience over Biblical authority.

The Battle for the Book: Why the Translation Matters

This brings us to the most critical point of our study today. If theology changes because the culture changes, does the Bible itself change? The modern answer, tragically, is Yes.

We need to talk about Bible translations. I know this can be a technical subject, but it is vital for the health of this church. We are an independent, Bible-believing church, and we use the King James Version. This is not because we are "KJV Only" in a cultic sense. It is not because we worship the year 1611. It is not because we think King James was a saint. It is because we care about the Text.

There is a war going on for the very words of God. There are two major philosophies when it comes to translating the Bible, and they lead to two very different Bibles.

Translation Philosophy: Formal vs. Dynamic

The first battleground is philosophy. How do you move Hebrew and Greek into English?

Formal Equivalence (Word-for-Word or literal translation): This approach believes in Verbal Plenary Inspiration. That means we believe God inspired the words, not just the thoughts. Therefore, the translator's job is to bring those exact words into English with as much precision as possible. The goal is to translate exactly what the Greek or Hebrew says, even if it sounds a little stiff, even if it forces the reader to study to understand it. We want to know what God said, not what the translator thinks He meant. The King James Version (KJV) is the masterpiece of this philosophy. It preserves the precision. It keeps the ambiguity where God left it ambiguous.

Dynamic Equivalence (Thought-for-Thought or parenthetical translation): This is the modern approach. It says, "Don't bother translating the words; translate the idea." The goal is to make it easy to read. Make it flow. Make it sound like the morning newspaper. This is the philosophy behind the NIV (New International Version), the NLT (New Living Translation), and The Message.

illustration of our translator when we were in court in Ukraine adopting the kids

The Danger: The danger here is massive. When you translate a "thought," you are interpreting. You are telling the reader what you think God meant, not just what He said. It gives the translator massive power to change the theology of the text to fit their own bias. It acts as a filter between you and God's Word.

Formal Equivalence: Word-for-Word (KJV).

Dynamic Equivalence: Thought-for-Thought (NIV, NLT).

The Manuscript Issue: Two Streams

But the problem goes deeper than just translation style. It goes to the source. It goes to the Greek manuscripts themselves. There are two "rivers" of manuscripts, and they flow in very different directions.

The Antiochian Stream (The Majority Text / Textus Receptus): These manuscripts came from Antioch, Syria. Remember Acts 11:26?

Acts 11:26 KJV 1900

And when he had found him, he brought him unto Antioch. And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church, and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.

This was the hub of missionary activity. It was the headquarters of the Apostle Paul. These manuscripts make up 95% to 99% of all the ancient manuscripts we have discovered—over 5,000 of them. And the amazing thing is that they agree with each other. They testify with one voice. This is the text that the Church used for 1,800 years. It is the basis for the Luther Bible, the Geneva Bible, and the King James Version.

The Alexandrian Stream (The Critical Text): These manuscripts came from Alexandria, Egypt. Now, in the Bible, Egypt is always a type of the world. Alexandria was a hub of philosophy, gnosticism, and intellectual pride. They didn't just copy the Scriptures there; they "corrected" them. There are very few of these manuscripts—less than 50. The two most famous are Codex Vaticanus (which was found in the Vatican library) and Codex Sinaiticus (which was found in a trash can at a monastery). These texts are older, but they are corrupt. They disagree with each other in over 3,000 places in the Gospels alone! They are full of scratches, edits, and omissions. But in the late 1800s, scholars fell in love with the idea that "Older is Better," even if the older text is bad.

Antiochian Stream: Majority Text (95%) -> Textus Receptus (KJV).

Alexandrian Stream: Critical Text (Vaticanus/Sinaiticus) -> Westcott & Hort -> (Modern Versions).

Westcott and Hort: The Men Behind the Change

Who made the switch? How did we move from the Majority Text to this corrupt Egyptian text? It happened in 1881, led by two Anglican scholars named B.F. Westcott and F.J.A. Hort. These men produced a new Greek text based on these Egyptian manuscripts. And we need to know who these men were. They were not fundamentalists. They were not Bible-believers in the sense that we are.

Hort called the Textus Receptus "vile." He hated the text the church had used for centuries.

In their private letters, they revealed that they questioned the reality of a literal Hell.

They questioned the reality of angels and demons.

They were fascinated by Darwin's theory of evolution, which was new at the time.

They leaned heavily toward Roman Catholicism and even the worship of Mary.

Yet, these two men convinced the academic world to abandon the Majority Text and adopt their new "Critical Text." And almost every modern Bible on the shelf today—the NIV, the ESV, the NASB—is based on the Westcott and Hort text, not the Textus Receptus.

The Evidence: The Missing Verses

You might say, "Pastor, does it really matter? Isn't it just 'thee' and 'thou'? Does it really change anything?" The answer is Yes. It changes doctrine. The modern translations, based on the Egyptian text, literally remove portions of the Word of God.

I want you to look at the following verses. We are going to specifically for the sake of time look at the NIV. Now if you have NIV this morning, I’m not trying to bash you about your Bible. I want to present you with facts. I want to give you food for thought. This isn't a conspiracy theory; you can open an NIV right now and check it yourself.

Matthew 17:21

Matthew 17:20–22 KJV 1900

And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you. Howbeit this kind goeth not out but by prayer and fasting. And while they abode in Galilee, Jesus said unto them, The Son of man shall be betrayed into the hands of men:

NIV: OMITTED. It just skips from verse 20 to 22.

Matthew 17:20–22 NIV

He replied, “Because you have so little faith. Truly I tell you, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there,’ and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you.” When they came together in Galilee, he said to them, “The Son of Man is going to be delivered into the hands of men.

The Implication: This is the verse where Jesus explains why the disciples couldn't cast out the demon. By removing "prayer and fasting," the modern text removes the spiritual discipline required for spiritual warfare. It makes the solution to demons seem easier, or perhaps non-existent.

Matthew 18:11

Matthew 18:10–12 KJV 1900

Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven their angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven. For the Son of man is come to save that which was lost. How think ye? if a man have an hundred sheep, and one of them be gone astray, doth he not leave the ninety and nine, and goeth into the mountains, and seeketh that which is gone astray?

NIV: OMITTED.

Matthew 18:10–12 NIV

“See that you do not despise one of these little ones. For I tell you that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven. “What do you think? If a man owns a hundred sheep, and one of them wanders away, will he not leave the ninety-nine on the hills and go to look for the one that wandered off?

The Implication: This is the clear mission statement of Jesus Christ. Why would you cut that out?

Acts 8:37

Acts 8:36–38 KJV 1900

And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.

NIV: OMITTED.

Acts 8:36–38 NIV

As they traveled along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch said, “Look, here is water. What can stand in the way of my being baptized?” And he gave orders to stop the chariot. Then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water and Philip baptized him.

The Implication: This is the story of the Ethiopian Eunuch. He asks to be baptized. In the KJV, Philip says he must believe first. By removing this verse, the modern versions remove the requirement of belief before baptism. This opens the door wide to baptismal regeneration or infant baptism. It attacks the doctrine of salvation by faith.

1 John 5:7

1 John 5:6–8 KJV 1900

This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth. For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one. And there are three that bear witness in earth, the spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one.

NIV: OMITTED.

1 John 5:6–8 NIV

This is the one who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ. He did not come by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are three that testify: the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement.

The Implication: This is the strongest verse on the Trinity in the entire Bible. It is the clearest declaration that the Father, Word, and Holy Ghost are ONE. And it is gone.

Luke 4:4

Luke 4:3–5 KJV 1900

And the devil said unto him, If thou be the Son of God, command this stone that it be made bread. And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, That man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God. And the devil, taking him up into an high mountain, shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment of time.

NIV: Omitted "but by every word of God."

Luke 4:3–5 NIV

The devil said to him, “If you are the Son of God, tell this stone to become bread.” Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone.’” The devil led him up to a high place and showed him in an instant all the kingdoms of the world.

The Implication: Jesus is quoting Deuteronomy in the wilderness temptation. The modern versions actually cut out part of Jesus' quote! And ironically, they cut out the part about living by "every word of God." It diminishes the authority of Scripture itself.

Colossians 1:14

Colossians 1:14 KJV 1900

In whom we have redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins:

NIV: Omitted "through his blood."

Colossians 1:14 NIV

in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins

The Implication: The modern text keeps "redemption," but it removes the cost of redemption. It removes the blood. A bloodless gospel is no gospel at all.

It's not just omissions; it's subtle changes that attack the Deity of Christ.

1 Timothy 3:16

1 Timothy 3:16 KJV 1900

And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.

KJV: "God was manifest in the flesh..." This is a clear, undeniable declaration of the Deity of Christ. God became man.

1 Timothy 3:16 NIV

Beyond all question, the mystery from which true godliness springs is great: He appeared in the flesh, was vindicated by the Spirit, was seen by angels, was preached among the nations, was believed on in the world, was taken up in glory.

NIV/ESV: "He appeared in the flesh..."

The Problem: "He" is vague. I appeared in the flesh this morning. You appeared in the flesh. That doesn't make us God. Only the KJV says GOD was manifest in the flesh.

Daniel 3:25

Daniel 3:25 KJV 1900

He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.

KJV: "...is like the Son of God." This connects the fourth man to Jesus Christ, a pre-incarnate appearance.

Daniel 3:25 NIV

He said, “Look! I see four men walking around in the fire, unbound and unharmed, and the fourth looks like a son of the gods.”

NIV: "...looks like a son of the gods." This changes it to pagan mythology. It sounds like something a Babylonian would say, rather than a revelation of the true Messiah.

Conclusion on the Book: Do you see the pattern? It is undeniable. The modern translations—driven by the "Critical Text" and "Dynamic Equivalence"—consistently attack the Deity of Christ, the Trinity, the Blood, and the requirements for salvation. They water down the text.

We stick with the King James Version not because we are trying to be difficult. We are not trying to be “one of those churches”. We do it because we worship the God who promised to preserve His words. Psalm 12:6-7 says, "The words of the LORD are pure words... Thou shalt keep them, O LORD, thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever." The KJV is the faithful preservation of the majority of Christian history. The modern versions are the result of 19th-century liberalism trying to "fix" the Bible to make it more palatable to the modern mind.

Psalm 12:6–7 KJV 1900

The words of the Lord are pure words: As silver tried in a furnace of earth, purified seven times. Thou shalt keep them, O Lord, Thou shalt preserve them from this generation for ever.

The Cure: Rightly Dividing in a Confused Age

So what is the solution? How do we stand firm when the culture is sliding, the theology is liberal, and the Bibles are changing? We cannot just complain; we must have a strategy.

We go back to 2 Timothy 2:15: "Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth."

2 Timothy 2:15 KJV 1900

Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

We Stand on the Absolute Authority of the Text.

The first step is a return to Sola Scriptura—Scripture Alone. We don't correct the Bible; the Bible corrects us. If the culture hates what the Bible says, that is the culture's problem, not the Bible's problem. We keep the ancient landmark. We don't apologize for it. We don't soften it. We preach it.

We Distinguish the Dispensations (Rightly Dividing).

A huge amount of the confusion in the modern church comes from a failure to "rightly divide." This means understanding that God has different programs for different groups of people at different times. Specifically, we must distinguish between God's program for Israel and God's program for the Church.

When you take Kingdom promises—promises of earthly prosperity, political dominion, and social justice that belong to Israel's future Kingdom—and you try to force them into the Church Age, you get a mess. You get the "Social Gospel." You get "Dominion Theology." You get a church that is trying to "fix the world" through politics or social activism instead of preaching the Gospel to the world.

We understand that we are in the Church Age. Our calling is not to take over the government; our calling is to be ambassadors. We know the end of the story. The Bible does not teach that the world is getting better and better. It teaches that the world is heading toward apostasy and the Tribulation. Our job is not to polish the brass on the Titanic; it is to get people into the Lifeboat. Understanding dispensationalism protects us from the liberal drift of trying to build heaven on earth without the King.

We Preach the Whole Counsel.

Finally, we commit to preaching the whole counsel of God. We preach the parts that make people smile, and we preach the parts that make people squirm. We preach Heaven, and we preach Hell. We preach Grace, and we preach Blood. We preach Love, and we preach Repentance.

We preach the things that make the world uncomfortable, because those are the only things that can save the world. A doctor who doesn't tell you about the cancer because he doesn't want to upset you is not kind; he is a murderer. A pastor who doesn't warn you about the judgment to come because he wants you to like him is not loving; he is unfaithful.

We don't correct the Bible; the Bible corrects us.

We distinguish the Dispensations (Israel vs. Church) to avoid a "Social Gospel."

Will You Move the Stone?

I want to close with this image. In the ancient world, property lines were marked by heavy stones called landmarks. If you wanted to steal your neighbor's land, you couldn't just pick up the stone and run with it in the middle of the day. That would cause a fight.

So, you would go out at night. You would nudge the boundary stone—the landmark—just one inch. No one would notice. Then a month later, you nudge it another inch. Then another. Over the course of 50 years, you could steal an entire acre of land, and the owner wouldn't even realize it until it was too late.

That is what the enemy has done to the church. Inch by inch. Translation by translation. Compromise by compromise. "Just be a little more relevant." "Just soften that stance on marriage." "Just use a bible that's easier to read." "Just drop the Wednesday night service."

And today, we look up and realize we are far from where we started. We are in a different field entirely.

But here is the good news: The Stone is still there. The Old Paths are still there. They haven't moved. We just have to go back to them.

Jeremiah 6:16 KJV 1900

Thus saith the Lord, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein.

Jeremiah says, "Ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls."

Church, we are an independent, Bible-believing church. We are not angry; we are anchored. We are not hateful; we are holy. We are not looking for a fight; we are looking for the Truth. We love the world enough to tell them the truth, and we love God enough to believe what He said—every single word of it.

Let us be the generation that refuses to move the landmark. Let us be the generation that stands firm in a shifting age.

Let's pray.