Independent Fundamental Baptist (IFB) Deception

Exposing the Dangerous Teachings of the Independent Fundamental Baptist (IFB) Denomination

Romans 8:1-2 KJV Deception


Despite the KJV onlyist’s claims to the contrary, there have been many examples of the errors found in the KJV. Some errors are rather small and insignificant while others are so drastic that they change the very fabric of how we perceive Christianity. Now I’m being a bit dramatic, but there is some truth to that and I’d like a chance to explain why. There is a HUGE error in the KJV, in particular Romans 8:1-2 that I have come to recognize as a belief altering error.

Coincidence or not, we often hear of a strong correlation between KJV only types and some kind of works based righteousness. If you’ve ever attended an Independent Fundamental Baptist church for more then a second you’ve no doubt heard a sermon about how we are to live our lives measured against a certain set of “standards” or rules. Don’t wear this, don’t go here, don’t listen to that, don’t associate with that crowd, don’t drink that, don’t touch those, don’t think about that, etc. and the list goes on.

One of the passages of scripture that drive the KJV only types to these beliefs is Romans 8:1-2. In the KJV this passage reads: 1: There is therefore now no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit. 2: For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death. When read on it’s own we can see clearly that there is something extra we need to do to not have “condemnation” “…walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit.”. Clearly we are being taught that we need to manage our behaviors so that we are not catering to the flesh… or are we???

Let me quote that same passage in the NLT 1: So now there is no condemnation for those who belong to Christ Jesus. 2: For the power of the life-giving Spirit has freed you through Christ Jesus from the power of sin that leads to death.” Notice anything different? There’s something missing isn’t there? Well no, in actuality there’s something ADDED to the KJV. It’s the phrase “…who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.”

So let’s spell this out in a little different way that may make things a little more clear. According the the KJV (and the NKJV) Romans 8:1-2 lists the requirements for having “no condemnation” as “being in Christ” AND “walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit”. According to the NLT (and every other translation except the KJV and NKJV – Hmmmmmm) Roman’s 8:1-2 lists the requirements for having “no condemnation” as “belonging to Christ Jesus.” (Notice the little period at the end? That means there’s nothing else.)

As (I hope) you can clearly see, according to the KJV, we need to do some extra work in order to be found righteous. This is a pretty important concept to get wrong don’t you think? You can’t have it both ways. Either you are found righteous by the atoning work of Christ on the cross, or you are found righteous by the atoning work of Christ AND our behaviors.

I think IFBers recognize this discrepancy and have chosen to try and reason it away by implying that there are a set of standards we need to follow as believers so we don’t “walk according to the flesh”. We obviously can’t have it both ways. It’s either by the work of the Cross or by our works that we are found righteous, but it can’t be both. So to reconcile the difference the IFB has come up with this idea of “standards” for us to follow making “walk not after the flesh” more of a daily check list of do’s and don’ts to help us in our walk with Christ. The problem is that it’s completely unnecessary. It may be something that’s appropriate and even helpful, but because of this it’s completely unnecessary.

To stick with the KJV and ignore other translations can lead to very different set of beliefs about who we are in Christ and what we are to do. The KJV onlyist will argue that this phrase “who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.” is left out of the newer translations, but I beg to differ. I believe that it was added to the KJV. Why? I can only speculate. All I know is that the phrase that’s in the KJV and NKJV but no other translations doesn’t really fit in the context and hopefully with this article you can see the danger of ignoring other translations and relying on the KJV only.

33 Comments

Add a Comment
  1. Wow! This is an excellent article!!! Very thought-provoking.

    Something I thought about while I was reading this is, often times it’s the pastor who sets the standard for what “walking in the Spirit is.” It’s the pastor who tells a person what “walking in the flesh is.” If someone doesn’t follow the rules that are set down, then they can’t possibly be walking in the Spirit. They must either be walking in the flesh or back sliding.

    I don’t think you were being dramatic at all. I think you were being truthful. The rules they want people to follow are more for the benefit of those around us than they are for us. A person can be following all of the rules and look like they are “walking in the Spirit” when in reality, they are “walking in the flesh.” And, if they are told that that is the way to judge a person’s salvation, that person might think they are saved because they are following all the rules. I’ve been there!

  2. Jamey is so right. The standards are set by the pastor, who insists he is getting them from the Bible. But if you challenge him on it at all, “well, you just need to get your heart right with the Lord”. Something was said in an announcement today that simple infuriated me and he effectively shut down any comments about it by stating that quote above. Apparently, the way to walk in the Spirit is by doing what the man in charge says, not seeking the Spirit of the Lord for yourself.
    My husband and I are prayerfully seeking guidance on leaving. We are only hanging on hoping we can reach a few others before we say good-bye.

    1. Shannon, I’ve been praying for you and will continue to do so. 🙂

  3. I did a short study on this as I don’t recall hearing anything of this at the IFB church I’ve been a member of for approx 5 years. We visited another church this morning BTW. Anyway, here’s what I came up with:
    On Romans 8:1-2

    Besides the KJV & NKJV, it’s also in YLT, LITV, Apostolic Bible Polyglot and 1899 Douay-Rheims Bible and possibly others. But the Jamieson, Fausset and Brown Commentary points out: “who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit” — The evidence of manuscripts seems to show that this clause formed no part of the original text of this verse, but that the first part of it was early introduced, and the second later, from Rom_8:4, probably as an explanatory comment, and to make the transition to Rom_8:2 easier.

  4. Ral,
    I grew up hearing about the “proper” way to not walk after the flesh and walk after the Spirit. Alot of times (at least in my IFB churches), verses were quoted, but Scripture references were not given. So, I knew that phrase was somewhere in the Bible because I had heard it quite a bit, but did not know where it was found. I also grabbed my KJV Bible and my NIV Bible, and looked. I have a few other translations as well, so I looked at those. The KJV and the NKJV were the only versions in which I found this phrase.

    This article makes ya’ do a little digging. That’s why I thought it was very thought-provoking. I was able to dig and think about what Steve wrote. Evidently, you did as well, and found that quote from the Jamieson, Faussett & Brown Commentary.

    Other verses were also used to back up this particular teaching when I was growing up. So, if I didn’t hear those exact words or phrases from Romans 8 every time, I know I at least heard the concept.

    1. Jamey, maybe I can relate to what you said if it is related to the 3 times per week for spiritual nutrition. I forgot the IFB term for this. Perhaps the two are related. I am totally bummed out on the IFB way and not the least bit interested in it.

  5. Ral,
    Yes. Going to church at least three times a week for “spiritual nutrition” is something I was taught as well. That was one of the “standards” that I was expected to adhere to. I even went when I was sick because I was told that I had to honor God by being in my place. The “fleshly” person will stay home and watch television or something instead of being in the “House of God” during normal service times. (I wish I could roll my eyes on this thing, because I’m doing it now. LOL)

  6. Jamie, maybe you aught to prepare an avatar for yourself with the eyes rolling back – ha, ha

    1. You could use this one 🙄 just type a colon : followed by the word roll then another colon :

  7. 🙄 That is cool!!!! Thanks guys!!! LOL

  8. I just read these verses in Galatians and thought I would share them. Galatians 5:16-18 (NIV):

    “So I say, live by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the sinful nature. For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with each other. so that you do not do what you want. But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under law.”

    I like that last sentence. I also like the fact that Paul then describes exactly what it is to live in the flesh and also to live in the Spirit.

  9. “It is for freedom that Christ has set us free. Stand firm, then, and do not let yourselves be burdened again by a yoke of slavery.” Galatians 5:1

  10. I like that verse Greg. I am amazed at how much of the New Testament actually has to do with not living under a bunch of man-made rules and regulations. That was not something that I was ever taught growing up. I’m so glad that Jesus set me free from that type of lifestyle.

  11. Jamey – When I was first coming out from the bondage of legalism, and found this verse (below) it spoke to me so strongly, and just so reminded me of when I was tangled up in the IFB.

    Jesus said “And you experts in the law, woe to you, because you load people down with burdens they can hardly carry, and you yourselves will not lift one finger to help them.” Luke 11:46…..that’ll preach right there!

    I would come out to the pky lot years ago after Sun AM services and just feel like I couldn’t hardly walk, after having been pounded by the MOG for 60+ minutes!! Where was/is the grace?

  12. I love reading about what Jesus said to the Pharisees. Until I started really reading the Bible I had no clue that Jesus was against all the rules and regulations that I was taught the “good” Christian is supposed to live by.

    I can also understand feeling pounded on by the MOG. I felt the same way when I listened to an old IFB sermon from one of my old churches last week.

  13. 1. You said in your article,

    “Let me quote that same passage in the NLT 1: So now there is no condemnation for those who belong to Christ Jesus. 2: For the power of the life-giving Spirit has freed you through Christ Jesus from the power of sin that leads to death.” Notice anything different? There’s something missing isn’t there? Well no, in actuality there’s something ADDED to the KJV. It’s the phrase “…who walk not after the flesh, but after the Spirit.””

    It is actually in the Greek in the Textus Receptus (I just checked to be sure). It may be a difference of the manuscripts it was translated from. No addition to the manuscripts on this verse.

    2. I believe the emphasis that was given to this passage as described in the KJV is a misinterpretation or twisting of the meaning. I believe it is echoing the thoughts from II Corinthians 5:17. If any man be in Christ, he is a new creature/creation. I believe the passage is saying that there is now no condemnation waiting for those who are showing the evidence of true salvation, which is a changed life (walking in the spirit instead of the flesh). Anyone who is saved will truly experience a change of heart. And anyone who exhibits this change (not a self initiated change, but a God initiated one) is truly saved and will never come into condemnation. No change means no salvation, because God said this change would happen.

    Please note that not everyone who exhibits a certain lifestyle will be saved. Many can turn over a new leaf and play the game for a while. It is only those who have exhibited true God given change and a desire to live a life after the Spirit.

    1. @ John,

      You need to refresh your memory of the history of the Textus Receptus. The TR has long been acknowledged by scholars to have passed it’s prime. The Textus Receptus is not considered an original manuscript and over the years additions to the TR as foot notes have become confused as part of the original text. That’s one major reason scholars now forgo the TR and the Byzantine family of manuscripts (on which the TR is based) and look to older more reliable manuscripts to formulate current translations. The phrase in question was probably not in the Byzantine manuscripts, but added to the TR as a footnote and then through the years found it’s way into the actual text and now in the KJV as part of the text rather than a footnote or side note. Either way it’s an addition that doesn’t belong.

      No change means no salvation, because God said this change would happen. Please note that not everyone who exhibits a certain lifestyle will be saved. Many can turn over a new leaf and play the game for a while. It is only those who have exhibited true God given change and a desire to live a life after the Spirit.

      We don’t always see the change that happens. That’s why we shouldn’t judge whether people are saved or not because we can’t always tell. It’s not our place to look at someone’s behaviors and try to determine if they are saved or not. God said change would happen, but he never said when nor did he specify what changes would be made for each individual. Man looks on the outward, but God looks on the heart. Evidence of true salvation is VERY subjective. What I see as “evidence” of salvation you might not. That’s why we shouldn’t be the judge of whether people are saved based on their behaviors. My IFB churches tried to judge our salvation based on what clothes we wore and how we cut our hair and what music we listened to etc. Being a “new creature/creation” doesn’t always mean that the outward things change (or at least not right away – sometime change takes a long time). It’s an inward transformation that may or may not transform the outward. There is no specification in scripture that spells out what the outward change will be. It’s different for everyone and frankly no one’s business, but the individual. Salvation has nothing to do with our behaviors, period!

  14. @Steve

    The history of the TR is not relevant to what I was saying. Regardless of accuracy, the copy of the TR that I happen to have has the phrase in it. So, the translators of the KJV didn’t necessarily add it. Incorrect or not, they were most likely just translating what they had in front of them. The accuracy of the TR is a discussion for another time.

    And, about the change, I agree with you. I never said it was outward or behavioral changes. Nor did I say it was meant for Christians to judge others. Man still has a free will to choose to follow God or not after salvation. There will be, however, a change in the heart; a change of desires. Sometimes that change can result in an outward change, but not always. The Bible tells us that Lot vexed his righteous soul in Sodom. Lot may not have exhibited any outward behavior that would have identified him as a follower of God. Or at least, that is the impression we get from scripture. He was miserable living in or among that wicked lifestyle they had. In his case, the only evidence of salvation was a different attitude inwardly. The evidence of salvation as seen in a changed life is mainly for the benefit of the one who is believing on Christ. I was never trying to judge anyone based on behaviors. And, judging anyone based on superficial behaviors such as music or dress is just stupid and unbiblical. I’m sorry if that is what your former church did. They were wrong to do so. Although, it can be true to a degree that you can have an indication as to whether or not a person is truly in Christ by the way they act, the attitudes they take, etc. But, that isn’t necessarily going to be the case either. But, I would say a good starting place for self examination would be the fruits of the spirit in Galatians 5.

    Anyway, I want to reiterate that the intention of this is not so Christians can judge one another and judge lost people based on their behaviors. The intention of my statements was to say that I believe the passage is saying the evidence of salvation is a changed life in the heart of the believer (however small or great). And, God DID say that a change would take place (again not necessarily evident outwardly).

    Just try to take my statements at face value. I’m not inferring anything deeper. Nor do I have a double meaning to anything I say. I’m just trying to say what I literally mean. If anything needs clarification, I’d be glad to explain.

    1. You lost me regarding the TR/KJV. If it’s not supposed to be there then it was added right? What difference does it make if it was added because it was translated incorrectly or purposefully added with malicious intent? An addition is an addition. People aren’t reading the TR they are reading the KJV so if it’s wrong in the KJV then it’s wrong in the KJV – it doesn’t really matter if it’s in the TR or not. Just because it’s wrong in the TR doesn’t excuse it being wrong in the KJV.

      John, these were your words in your previous comment:

      I believe the passage is saying that there is now no condemnation waiting for those who are showing the evidence of true salvation, which is a changed life (walking in the spirit instead of the flesh). Anyone who is saved will truly experience a change of heart. And anyone who exhibits this change …is truly saved and will never come into condemnation.

      I’m not accusing YOU personally of anything, but the words I put in bold are the words that caused me to think that you are talking about outward change and behaviors. Taken at “face value” those words (the ones in bold) connote an outward type of change. What exactly did you mean by those words that I’ve put in bold then if not an outward change? I’m asking for clarification here because at “face value” it would appear that you’re saying that exhibiting change is a requirement for true salvation (“anyone who exhibits this change…is truly saved…”).

      I believe you when you say you don’t have a double meaning, but I don’t think that you realize that you are using IFB language which by default has an entirely different meaning then what you might intend for it to have. You’re an IFB pastor and you speak IFBese (you use IFBism and IFB language; e.g., “Lot vexed his righteous soul”, “walking in the spirit instead of the flesh”) yet you keep acting like you agree with this site and I just can’t wrap my mind around that. I can’t reconcile the idea that you both agree with the IFB and this site at the same time. Please forgive my skepticism and suspicion, but how is that possible?

  15. Regarding the TR/KJV reasoning, let me try to clarify. In the early 1600’s, the Wescott-Hort Text did not exist yet. Nor did the Nestle-Aland Text. Since the TR was the only reputable version of Greek available (to my knowledge), the translaters probably simply translated what was in the TR pages. In the copy of the TR that I have, the phrase translated “who walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit” is in there. I’m reading it right now, “me kata sarka peripatousin, alla kata pneuma”. The KJV translators “added” nothing to the KJV as you suggested. They simply translated what they had available. Whether the TR is correct or wrong is not the issue I am bringing up. I’m simply stating they most likely didn’t “add” anything themselves, but merely translated. Supposing that the TR is wrong, they had nothing to compare to. Thus, they had no way of knowing they were wrong. Not until the 1800’s.

    As far as the change goes, yes, I did use the words “showing the evidence” and “exhibit”. But, never suggested that it means that the “showing” or “exhibiting” was to anyone other than the believer. The believer is the one who will be able to examine themselves and see the evidences in their own life and heart. And that IS biblical. II Corinthians 13:5 tells us to “Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith”. This doesn’t say examine others, but yourselves. And this examination is of the evidences that a truly saved person will “exhibit” in his own heart and life.

    Those phrases you gave aren’t “IFB language”; it’s quotes from the Bible. The statement about Lot is in 2 Peter 2:7-8. The “walking in the spirit” comment is a quote from the verse we are discussing (Romans 8:1). Yes, I do personally use the KJV. No, I’m not adamant that “if you don’t have a KJV, you don’t have a bible”. That notion is ignorant. Other Bible versions do have much reference value to them. I somewhat regularly will cross check translations with the NKJV and ESV. Sometimes, a different word translated can bring a lot of light to a passage that I may not have thought of.

    The thought that I agree with the IFB and with this site can best be explained this way. In this past election, my vote went to the Republican candidate for the presidency. I am not a Republican, but that is the way I voted this time. I am a true independent. I will vote for the candidate that is “most like” my own values and beliefs. I did not agree 100% or even 75% with the candidate, but it was more compatibility than the Democratic candidate in this case. My religious loyalties if you will do not lie with any denomination. Doctrinally, I line up most closely with IFB doctrinal statements. In some cases, a southern baptist or nondenominational church may line up more, and I would have no problem identifying with a group of believers that mostly reflect my own beliefs. I understand what “doctrines” or “practices” within the IFB that you have a problem with. I too have a problem with some of them. But, as a whole, I still agree with many doctrinal points. For example, they believe in the pre-tribulation, pre-millenial rapture. I agree. They believe that God created the universe in 6 literal days. I agree. They believe that the Godhead is comprised of the trinity: Father, Son, & Holy Ghost. I agree. I agree with them about the person and work of each of these personalities. I agree with them about Baptism. I agree with most of them on hyper-calvinism (I don’t believe it’s biblical). I agree with their position on who comprises the church, the bride of Christ (with the exception of the baptist briders). So, when I say I agree that judging someone on external behaviors are stupid and unbiblical, I mean that. I try to derive ALL of my beliefs from the Bible and only the Bible. I don’t care what any denomination or group says. If the Bible doesn’t teach it, I don’t agree with it, even within my own group. Another area I disagree with the IFB (as a whole) along with southern baptists and many other evangelicals is the notion that you can pray a “sinner’s prayer” and you will be pronounced saved. I don’t believe it’s biblical. Salvation is by faith in Christ’s finished work, not in a prayer or the sincerity of that prayer. I guess you could call me a religious independent. Jesus Christ established the church and His Word. He never established a denomination. I hold no such loyalties. So, though my church may hold the title IFB, I am not an IFBer.

    I know it was a lengthy explanation, but I hope it helps clarify. If you have any other questions, I’d be glad to try to clarify.

  16. Regarding the TR/KJV reasoning, let me try to clarify. In the early 1600?s, the Wescott-Hort Text did not exist yet. Nor did the Nestle-Aland Text. Since the TR was the only reputable version of Greek available (to my knowledge), the translaters probably simply translated what was in the TR pages. In the copy of the TR that I have, the phrase translated “who walk not after the flesh, but after the spirit” is in there. I’m reading it right now, “me kata sarka peripatousin, alla kata pneuma”. The KJV translators “added” nothing to the KJV as you suggested. They simply translated what they had available. Whether the TR is correct or wrong is not the issue I am bringing up. I’m simply stating they most likely didn’t “add” anything themselves, but merely translated. Supposing that the TR is wrong, they had nothing to compare to. Thus, they had no way of knowing they were wrong. Not until the 1800?s.

    So what? (and I say that in a strictly rhetorical sense not a smart aleck sense). We now know it’s a phrase that’s not supposed to be there so there’s no excuse for the KJVers to defend or even use something that’s obviously not supposed to be there.

    I never said that the KJV translators added that phrase. Perhaps my wording is a bit confusing because I used the word “added”, but nevertheless you’re missing the point. My point is that it’s a phrase that’s an addition that’s not supposed to be there. People are being taught this lie in churches that use the KJV because they refuse to acknowledge that this is a phrase that isn’t supposed to be there. As a result, they continue to perpetuate false information on a very critical issue.

    My question to you is: why, instead of acknowledging that, yes, it’s a phrase that’s not supposed to be there, did you go on rant to defend the KJV (that it wasn’t added by the KJV translators)? It’s such a critical issue and all you can do is defend the KJV by saying that the KJV translators didn’t actually add anything because it was already added in the manuscripts they used during their translation? That’s like a doctor telling a patient’s family that the patient has a fatal gunshot wound from a handgun and all the family can do is argue with the doctor that it wasn’t actually a handgun but a rifle that wounded him. You’ve missed the point entirely.

    As far as the change goes, yes, I did use the words “showing the evidence” and “exhibit”. But, never suggested that it means that the “showing” or “exhibiting” was to anyone other than the believer. The believer is the one who will be able to examine themselves and see the evidences in their own life and heart. And that IS biblical. II Corinthians 13:5 tells us to “Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith”. This doesn’t say examine others, but yourselves. And this examination is of the evidences that a truly saved person will “exhibit” in his own heart and life.

    Those phrases you gave aren’t “IFB language”; it’s quotes from the Bible. The statement about Lot is in 2 Peter 2:7-8. The “walking in the spirit” comment is a quote from the verse we are discussing (Romans 8:1). Yes, I do personally use the KJV. No, I’m not adamant that “if you don’t have a KJV, you don’t have a bible”. That notion is ignorant. Other Bible versions do have much reference value to them. I somewhat regularly will cross check translations with the NKJV and ESV. Sometimes, a different word translated can bring a lot of light to a passage that I may not have thought of.

    Let me again remind you of what you said:

    I believe the passage is saying that there is now no condemnation waiting for those who are showing the evidence of true salvation, which is a changed life (walking in the spirit instead of the flesh). Anyone who is saved will truly experience a change of heart. And anyone who exhibits this change …is truly saved and will never come into condemnation.

    Nothing in that paragraph even remotely suggested that you were talking about an internal, self-reflection type of change. Those words DO suggest a works based evidence whether you meant them to suggest that or not. That’s the danger in using that type of language and the danger of being associated with a denomination that typically promotes the idea of works based righteousness – it causes misunderstandings. IFB language and KJV language are one in the same. The phrases you used aren’t in the “Bible” they are in the KJV.

  17. Wow, things are becoming clearer to me. I recently sent you a question regarding my boyfriends (IFBer) sudden break-up. A few weeks before he broke up he said he had been especially touched by Romans 8:1-2, and quoted it to me. Assuming his IFB friends and pastor led him to cut off all ties with me (non-denominational born again believer) what should I do? This goes beyond a romantic relationship, but he needs to see the truth about this system. He used to be involved with FBC Hammond and attended Hyles-Anderson. He saw the truth about them, but found another IFB west over the state line. His father was an angry drunk who he could never please and I can’t help but see he has replaced that situation with his MOG, who no one can ever live up to the standards preached, we always leave there feeling guilty. What can I do to reach him and rescue one more soul from this system?

    1. Wow! Laura. My heart goes out to you. I have found that reading all the articles on this site and all the comments that people have left has helped me tremendously. Maybe, you will read something that you could share with this man. I will be praying that opportunities will come up where you can share with him what you are learning.

      1. Thank you so much, Jamey. That really means the world to me. I covet prayers, and I have been given that opportunity. I have written him a letter subtly introducing him to the possibility that his sudden change may be the result of mind control he is not aware of. I will follow that up with more direct “speaking the truth in love”. I am in the process of reading Fundamental Seduction, exposing Hyles. The criminal/sexual activity only scratches the surface. When we distort scripture we are really playing with fire. Thank you to all who contribute to this site.

  18. Laura,
    I’m glad that you have been given opportunities to share with this man, what you are learning. I’m also glad that you are educating yourself about the IFB. One thing you said, really hit home with me. You said, “When we distort scripture we are really playing with fire.” I absolutely love that and will probably use it myself. 🙂 It is so true. That’s one of the reasons why lately, I have been learning exactly how the IFB manipulates the Scripture…and also how on earth I could listen to it for so long. I will continue praying for you.

  19. Hi. I read the article and I was wondering how does a person began to show something is different about them if they continue in the same lifestyle WITHOUT any or much change whatsoever? No, its not at a certain pace to win the race of holiness, but how can one teach the holiness of Christ and their life not show it? No one would care to listen. Our walk must match our talk, and when God is supernaturally changing us, others will see it as something real, not a hoax or manipulation. The following verses are ones I learned over the past almost 13yrs: Ro. 7:18 For I know that in me (that is, in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. James 2:24 Ye see then how that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. James 2:20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? James 2:26 For as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also. 2 Corinthians 5:17 Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new. Having faith that the car can get you to work doesn’t help by just sitting in it, but there needs to be some action on the drivers’ behalf. Point #2: The problem with translations of any kind is that there is room for error. When God inspired the men who wrote the Bible on what to write, there weren’t any errors. As long as the translation doesn’t diminish what the context is meant to originally state, I’m all for it, but most times they seem to suit our ease of reading and removes the impact of what would convict us in its strong sense. Thanks so much for reading!

  20. I believe the phrase leaked in from Romans 8.4 by some sort of copying error (“For what was not possible for the law, in that it was made weak by the flesh, God, sending his son in the likeness of the flesh of sin, and the likeness of sin, condemned sin in the flesh, so that the justification of the law might be fulfilled in us, we who walk according to the flesh, but according to the spirit” Rm 8.3-4).

  21. I started my studies in the KJV and had to gradually understand the wording and meaning of outdated words. After doing various textual criticism, I found the source for it’s translations. I’ve never came to the conclusion that we are saved or condemned by our actions, mainly because we have these things called reflexes and memories (Physical and emotional, all of which are trained in us. I especially never came to the conclusion that our salvation/condemnation came by actions because of this verse. That doctrine has to be taught using the Law of God, which is the Law of Sin and Death, which all of these points are expressedly mentioned throughout the Pauline epistles.
    Now, whether the TR is accurate or not, we will have to account for roughly 200 years before the ERV was published, which still holds to the account of living as such lives where the flesh agrees with the spirit. This is not to say that we are condemned by our actions rather, we are to attempt to abide by the spirit in our flesh the best we can. Paul notes, “a thorn in his side” and the infamous, I say infamous because no one preaches it anymore, Romans 7, so it becomes quite obvious that if we miss the point he conveys in 8, we are in no doubt made aware that he was not sinless from reading the previous.
    The question here is, who’s taking the KJV out of context with the ‘supposed’ errors? I think the author here sincerely believes that those 200 years sent people to eternal damnation because of the text, not the teacher. If such is true, count me as condemned also, for I too am not made righteous by teachers nor texts.

  22. http://av1611.com/kjbp/faq/holland_ro8_1.html this article sets it straight do to don’t have to continue with your heretical talk. KJV and NKJV is solid and the others especially the NLT and the NIV are not

    1. Nope. Sorry. The NLT and the NIV are solid and the KJV and the NKJV are not.

  23. What was Peter walking in when Christ rebuked Him , saying get behind me Satan?o

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

Independent Fundamental Baptist (IFB) Deception © 2009-2016 Frontier Theme