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.

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.

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?

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.

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!

“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.

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.

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?

“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.

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.

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.

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!