Fundamentalism and the King James Bible

I Am a Fundamentalist!

I believe in the fundamental doctrines of the Bible, as the Bible teaches them. This makes me, by definition, a fundamentalist. I believe that all scripture is given by inspiration of God. I believe that Christ, before He was born in the flesh, was God. I believe that, at His birth and during His earthly ministry, His name was “Emmanuel,” meaning “God with us.” I believe that Jesus Christ presently is God, and that His throne of deity is forever and ever. I believe that salvation is by grace, through faith, and without the works of the law. I believe that it is the blood, not the water, that cleanses from all sin. I believe in the literal and premillennial second coming of Christ. I believe that heaven is real, hell is hot, and both are eternal.

Fundamentalism, however, is not only defined by what it believes, but also by what it opposes. A fundamentalism that opposes nothing is not fundamentalism at all. I oppose the ecumenical push for ecclesiastical unity. I oppose the fellowship of fundamental, Bible believing Christians with religious crowds who have forsaken Biblical truth. I oppose the “name it and claim it” doctrine of the charismatic movement. I oppose any gospel that preaches that financial gain is equivalent to godliness. I oppose the junk that many churches call “worship” today. I do not know how I can make it any plainer – I believe strongly in the fundamental doctrines of the Bible.

I want to discuss fundamentalism and the King James Bible. What I have to say in this post will be informational rather than confrontational. I am not afraid of controversy, as any reader of my blog can affirm. However, in this particular post, I will mostly be relating information to the reader. I do believe that most of my readers will find this post somewhat interesting.

Among English-speaking fundamentalists historically there have been two basic positions regarding the King James Bible. First, some fundamentalists, in the past as well as in the present, use the King James Bible exclusively. They see it as God’s Word to the English-speaking people. Second, some fundamentalists prefer the King James Bible over other versions, but they use other versions either in their preaching or in their personal study. These two positions are by and large the positions of fundamentalists past and present. It has been my observation that those who absolutely despise the King James Version are almost always not fundamental in doctrine.

Please note a couple of points here. First, it must be admitted that not all fundamentalists are “KJV only,” but nearly everyone who is “KJV only” is a fundamentalist. Second, it has been my observation that those who cling to the King James Version seem to be conservative in doctrine, dress, and practice, while those who favor other versions tend to migrate toward liberalism. A little research will prove this. Ask your nearest United Methodist Church which Bible version they use. I can almost assure you that almost no church in this gay-promoting organization uses the King James Version. Ask your nearest Unitarian church which version they use. I can assure you that they did not get the notion that “everybody will eventually be saved” out of the King James Bible. It has simply been my observation that, as a rule, the English-speaking Christians who favor the King James Bible tend to be straight on the fundamentals of the faith. Those who migrate toward other versions tend to equally migrate toward theological, political, and practical liberalism.

Some Fundamentalists Favor the King James Version Exclusively

If you believe that the King James Bible is the Word of God in the English language and that no other version should be consulted, then you are in good company. Let us examine a few men who held this position.

First, Dr. Harold Sightler, a fundamentalist, was a staunch advocate of the King James Bible. In his sermon “The Zeal of the Lord,” Dr. Sightler said the following:

When I was a young preacher, I was given the impression that the King James Bible had a lot of mistakes in it; a lot of contradictions. But you know, after nearly forty years of preaching, I haven’t found one. It looks like I should have stumbled on one by now. But I haven’t found anything wrong with the King James Bible. I use it. I’m honest in that observation… I’m not a Greek scholar, but I am a Greek major, one of the few Greek majors to ever graduate from a university… Even with that, I have yet to find anything wrong with the King James Bible. You can quote me on that.

Another well-known fundamentalist who held exclusively to the King James Bible was Lester Roloff of Corpus Christi, Texas. In his famous sermon “The Mule Walked On,” Bro. Roloff said the following:

The snow will be falling in August in Dallas before I’d ever permit one of my boys to get up on Sunday morning and throw anything like the newspaper… I wouldn’t mind if he was throwing Bibles! Oh, my, I’d help him… I’d say, “We’re going to put the Bible in every home,” and it won’t be Good News for Modern Man either! It’ll be the King James Version for sinful man!

Another fundamentalist who studied under the famed J. Frank Norris was Benjamin Dearmore. Dearmore wrote an article entitled “Greek versus English” in a periodical called The Message, dated May 28, 1959. In this article, Dearmore said:

As for me, I will take the King James translation as the very word of God for the English people. I believe it is without error. It is 100 percent correct.

Any list of fundamentalists who used the King James Version exclusively would be incomplete without Dr. Jack Hyles. Hyles, in his book The Blood, the Book and the Body said the following:

I want to go out fighting vehemently for the King James Bible. For years this did not seem necessary, but I feel compelled to do it now. I believe that the King James Bible has been preserved word for word. I believe in original inspiration and divine preservation, and come what may, I plan to make that a major battle in the last years of my ministry. (Jack Hyles. The Blood, the Book and the Body. Hyles-Anderson Publishers. Hammond, IN. ©1992. p. 1)

Fundamentalists Who Prefer the King James Version, but Not Exclusively

To say that every fundamentalist has historically held to the King James Version exclusively would not be accurate by anyone’s standards. As a matter of fact, it may surprise the reader to know which fundamentalists have expressed their belief that there are errors in the King James Bible. It may surprise the reader to know which fundamentalists have quoted from other versions in a positive light. Please note that I am neither commending nor criticizing these individuals or groups. I am in no way calling into question their devotion to the fundamental doctrines of the Bible. I am simply stating matters of documented fact.

Let us look first at the Sword of the Lord, an independent Christian publication that is distributed bi-weekly. Let me say here that I subscribe to the Sword of the Lord and recommend it to anyone who is interested in fine Christian literature with a fundamental emphasis. In my opinion, the Sword of the Lord is a quality publication that will benefit ministers and laity alike. The Sword of the Lord is without a doubt a leading voice of fundamentalism both historically and today. The Sword of the Lord sells Bibles, books, and church materials and supplies. The only Bibles that can be ordered through them are King James Bibles. They sell no other version. The bulletins they offer contain only King James Bible verses.

The Sword of the Lord also publishes books. I have a set of sermon books published by the Sword of the Lord Publishers called Great Preaching. Each book features sermons on a particular subject. One book is entitled Great Preaching on the Second Coming, for example.

In the book Great Preaching on the Second Coming, one sermon is entitled “Answering Those Who Teach Great Tribulation Comes Before Rapture” by John Meredith. The whole chapter is devoted to proving that II Thessalonians 2:3 is mistranslated in the King James Bible. Look at Meredith’s words:

Many devout and capable Bible scholars have come to see that there is a mistranslation of II Thessalonians 2:3, and that Paul was still explaining the rapture as he wrote this second letter to the Thessalonian church. The Greek text shows that the words “a falling away” are translated from hee apostasia, and Liddell and Scotts Greek Lexicon gives “department” or departure as one of the definitions of the word apostasia… The Geneva Bible of 1537 gives this as “a departing.” William Tyndale, in his 1539 Bible, speaks of it as “a departynge.” Cranmer’s Bible of 1537 also gives the same meaning of “departure.” The first Bible to translate this “a falling away” is the King James Version. (p. 205)

In the same book, there is a sermon entitled “Jesus May Come Today” by Dr. John R. Rice. He insists that the King James Bible mistranslates not only verse 3 of II Thessalonians 2, but also verse 2 of the same chapter. Notice Dr. Rice’s words:

In verse 2 the term “day of Christ” should be “the day of the Lord.” (p. 218)

Regarding verse three of the same chapter, Dr. Rice says:

We believe, with Dr. E. Schuyler English and many other scholars that this would be better translated “…except there come a departure first,” or literally, the catching away of Christians at Christ’s coming. (p. 218)

Dr. John R. Rice was the founder of the Sword of the Lord. Personally, I honor him as a soldier who fought for fundamentalism. I honor him as a respected teacher of the Bible, as well as a devout soul winner. I am simply stating the fact here that Dr. Rice corrected the King James Bible, which he considered to be erroneous in at least these two places.

Dr. Rice not only corrects the King James Bible, but he furthermore quotes from the American Standard Version in a positive light. Look what Dr. Rice says in a pamphlet where he refers to John 5:24:

The American Standard Version will make it clearer even yet, for as translated there this verse says about the believer that he “hath eternal life, and cometh not into judgment.” (John R. Rice. Can a Saved Person Ever Be Lost? Sword of the Lord Publishers. Murfreesboro, TN. ©1943)

Another pillar of fundamentalism was Dr. R.A. Torrey. His sermons were often published by the Sword of the Lord Publishers. William P. Grady, in his book Final Authority, says concerning R.A. Torrey:

There was, of course, the occasional exception of a dedicated soul winner succumbing to the spirit of his age. Dr. R.A. Torrey is an excellent case in point. Opponents of the King James Bible derive great security from Torrey’s preference of the Revised Version. (William P. Grady. Final Authority: A Christian’s Guide to the King James Bible. Grady Publications. Schererville, IN. ©1993. p. ix)

I know of no one who has at least thumbed through Torrey’s Topical Textbook who would even attempt to assert that Torrey was anything other than a doctrinal fundamentalist. In many of his works, he used the King James Version, but referred to the English Revised Version at times, believing it to be authoritative.

Next, we have Dr. Louis Talbot. His sermons were often published by the Sword of the Lord Publishers. He had a strong preference for the King James Version, but used other versions. His own words will testify to this:

For public reading and worship, so do I prefer the King James Version. And nothing in the English language can compare with it for beauty and majesty and dignity of style. It is still the Bible of the people. It is familiar to most Christians and therefore desirable for public reading, to avoid confusion. These are the reasons why I use it in the church services. Moreover, it is remarkably accurate in its translation. It was the product of forty men’s work; therefore this precluded any one man’s coloring the translation with his own prejudices or inclinations. Truly God guided the translators who, in 1611, under the supervision of King James of England, worked so diligently at their task! Yet since that date, many valuable manuscripts, versions, and archaeological discoveries have become available to scholars; and therefore, by careful scrutiny of these devout, scholarly men have been able to improve on the accuracy of an English translation here and there – so far as rendering the literal meaning of the original Hebrew and Greek is concerned. Accordingly, the American Standard Version and the English Revised Version, which are practically the same in most respects, are the most accurate translations in our English language. (Robert L. Sumner. Bible Translations [n.p.: Biblical Evangelist, 1978]. p. 10)

W.B. Riley, a noted fundamentalist whose sermons were often published by the Sword of the Lord Publishers, certainly did not believe that the King James Version was infallible:

To claim, therefore, inerrancy for the King James Version… is to claim inerrancy for men who never professed it for themselves. (Sumner. Bible Translations. p. 13).

Another well-known fundamentalist was Dr. Monroe Parker. In his sermon “The Depravity of Man and the New Birth,” Dr. Parker, though preaching from the King James Bible, when expounding upon Jeremiah 17:9, refers to a translation by “Dr. Stewart,” who translated it “The heart is deceitful above all things, and incurable.”

Dr. C.I. Scofield was a noted fundamentalist who popularized dispensational fundamentalism. In his reference Bible, Dr. Scofield on more than one occasion corrects the King James text. Ironically, Dr. Harold Sightler, an unyielding adherent to the King James Bible, repeatedly recommended the Scofield Reference Bible. Concerning II Thessalonians 2:2, Dr. Scofield said:

The theme of Second Thessalonians is, unfortunately, obscured by a mistranslation in the A.V. [Authorized Version, or King James Version] of 2:2, where “day of Christ is at hand” (I Cor. 1:8, refs.) should be, “day of the Lord is now present” (Isaiah 2:12, refs.).” (C.I. Scofield. The Holy Bible: Edited by Rev. C.I. Scofield, D.D. World Publishing. Grand Rapids, MI. p. 1271)

In his notes on I John 5:7, Dr. Scofield agrees with the English Revised Version and the American Standard Version, stating that I John 5:7 should not be in the text:

It is generally agreed that v. 7 has no real authority, and has been inserted. (Scofield, p. 1325)

Another well-known fundamentalist and noted Bible teacher is Dr. H.A. Ironside. In his commentary on the eighth chapter of Romans, Ironside prefers the rendering of the Revised Version:

It is, of course, hardly necessary for me to point out and emphasize what is now familiar to every careful student of the original text: that the last part of verse one is an interpolation (which properly belongs to verse 4), obscuring the sense of the great truth enunciated in the opening words: “There is therefore now no condemnation to those who are in Christ Jesus.” This magnificent statement requires no qualifying clause. It does not depend on our walk. It is true of all who are in Christ, and to be in Him means to be of the new creation. A glance at the R.V. or any critical translation will show that what I am pointing out is sustained by all the editors. (H.A. Ironside. Lectures on the Epistle to the Romans. Loizeaux Brothers, Inc. Neptune, NJ. pp. 94-95)

Finally, we have Noel Smith. Some of his sermons are featured by the Sword of the Lord Publishers. I quote from his article in the Baptist Bible Tribune entitled “Translations of our English Bible,” published on December 13, 1968. Noel Smith clearly believed that, though he favored the King James Version, there were three versions that were authoritative:

The King James, the English Revised, and the American Standard versions remain the great and authoritative translations of the Hebrew Old Testament and the Greek New Testament into English.

Smith goes on to cite the New Scofield Reference Bible as an “invaluable resource”:

The New Scofield Reference Bible, printed by Oxford in the King James text, has made these corrections, and it has made some corrections not made by the English Revised and American Standard versions. The latest edition of the Scofield Bible is invaluable.

Noel Smith reserved some criticism for the King James Version:

There are mistranslations in the King James. In any number of cases ‘heathen’ or ‘Gentiles’ should read ‘nations.’ I think nearly all authorities agree that in II Thessalonians 2:2, the reading should be ‘the day of the Lord,’ not ‘the day of Christ,’ as in the King James.

Smith further criticizes the King James Version:

But it is in the 8th chapter of Romans that the King James revisers (and it is a revision) are deserving of the severest criticism. In the first verse they capitalize “Spirit” as they should… But in the 16th verse what do we have? “The Spirit ITSELF beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children of God.”

Although Noel Smith considers the American Standard Version an authoritative translation, the ASV does not escape his criticism:

The American Standard Version is not perfect. It is justly criticized for its reading in II Timothy 3:16: “Every scripture inspired of God is also profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for instruction which is in righteousness.”

Noel Smith admits that the ASV cannot compete with the KJV on several levels:

No matter how accurate it may be, no matter if it is a word-for-word translation of the Hebrew and Greek, the American Standard Version cannot compete with that mountain of history, tradition, and vast dignity and authority [of the King James Version].

After praising and criticizing both the KJV and the ASV, Noel Smith concludes:

But you don’t have to go from one extreme to another. You don’t have to follow the fanatics. You have the King James Version, the American Standard Version, and the New Scofield Reference Bible. You don’t have to discard your King James. You have all three (and of course, again, The New Scofield Reference Bible is printed in the King James text). You can keep on using your King James Version, as I do. But you should have the American Standard Version, if you are a real Bible student and an authentic and accurate expositor of the Word of God. You should use the American Standard Version as a commentary on the King James Version.

Conclusion

I do not believe that any reader who is the least bit familiar with the writings of John R. Rice, R.A. Torrey, H.A. Ironside, or Noel Smith would attempt to argue that any of these men are not fundamentalists. I do not believe that anyone who is familiar at all with the Sword of the Lord would try to argue that it is not a leading voice of fundamentalism because in one of its pamphlets, its founder, Dr. John R. Rice, quoted from the ASV in a positive light. The truth must be told, and the truth is that there have been great fundamentalist men who have stood for the King James Bible exclusively, giving no attention whatsoever to any other Bible version. But it also must be told that there are others who have also won souls and fought for fundamentalism that referred to other Bible versions than the King James Version.

More Thoughts on the King James Version

Is Salvation Difficult?

II Corinthians 11:3 – “But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.”

Introduction

In my previous post, I examined by the word of God the unscriptural teaching of “tarrying” for salvation. It would benefit the reader to read that article (“Tarrying” for Salvation) before reading this one.

Those who believe that a person is saved only after begging, crying, and spending a great deal time praying usually have an overall mindset concerning salvation that salvation is very difficult to obtain. As a matter of fact, they describe salvation in such a way that they seem to imply that, short of a miracle, salvation is impossible to gain. To these people, being saved is no big deal. It doesn’t mean much, probably because those who have been saved probably will not be able to maintain their salvation. If you hear them tell it, those who have salvation at this moment will probably not be saved in the end anyway.

People with this mindset love to emphasize how hard it is to be saved. It is, without a doubt, a source of pride for them. Salvation, in their mind, is so difficult to obtain and nearly impossible to maintain; but they, dear friend, are among the choice few who have held out through the difficulties of salvation, and they are “still saved.” You can hear the bragging in their voices as they remind you that So-and-so could not hold on to this difficult salvation; this preacher and that one lost their salvation in the overwhelming difficulties that accompany salvation; but alas! They have held on! They have, where others have fallen, stood true in spite of the difficulties that have brought down their brethren. “Not just anybody is going to heaven,” they say. But keep listening. Not everyone is going to heaven, BUT THEY ARE! Oh how superior they are to others!

Those who believe that salvation is extremely difficult to attain almost always believe in a salvation that is gained by works. Oh, they say they don’t believe in such; but the reason that salvation is so difficult to either attain or maintain is because the works necessary to maintain it are so exhaustive. “Salvation is not by works,” they assure us, “but if you do not tilt your head at a certain angle and hold your mouth a certain way, you’re going to hell!” Salvation is not by works, they claim, but if your prayer life does not measure up to their standard, you will lose your salvation. Salvation is not by works, they affirm, but if you do not “fast twice in the week,” (Luke 18:12) like they do, then you will forfeit your salvation. So it is plain to see that those who believe that the way of salvation is difficult often believe in a works-based salvation.

But is salvation difficult to obtain? The clear, concise answer is no. Is salvation difficult to find? In our world of many religions, sects, and creeds, yes! But once the Biblical way of salvation is found, it is not difficult to obtain. Is the way of salvation preceded by obstacles that present difficulties to the seeker? Yes! That is precisely why there are lost people who, after hearing the simple gospel, yet remain lost. Every saved individual overcame obstacles to be saved; but salvation itself is not the obstacle! While there are difficulties that hinder people from coming to Christ, Christ is not the difficulty! I believe that an elementary study of scripture will prove these statements to be true.

A Look at Our Text

The text marking the beginning of this post, II Corinthians 11:3, states, first, that being “in Christ” is simple; and second, that the removal from this simplicity is defined as “corruption.” It is not commendable to make the matter of salvation complicated; it is utter corruption to do so.

In the verse following our text, II Corinthians 11:4, Paul refers to those who complicate the gospel as “preaching another Jesus,” “receiving another spirit,” and “receiving another gospel.” The Jesus of a complicated gospel is not the Jesus of the Bible.

Though the Bible is plain that there is simplicity in Christ, those who promote the “complicated gospel” have scriptures that they use. Let us examine a few of them.

Strait is the Gate and Narrow is the Way

The first passage used to promote a complicated gospel is found in the Lord’s Sermon on the Mount:

Matthew 7:13-14 – “Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.”

Notice first, in verse 13, the word “many.” Speaking of the broad way that leads to destruction, “MANY there be which go in thereat.” Notice then in verse 14 the word “few.” Speaking of the narrow way that leads to life, “FEW there be that find it.”

The primary message of Christ’s exposition of the two roads is to show how many are on the broad way in contrast to how few are on the narrow way. Notice again the last words of verse 13, which speak of the broad way – “Many there be which go in thereat.” Here, a question is raised. Why do so many walk the broad way? In the next verse, Jesus answers that question clearly – “Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life.” The way that leads to life is strait and narrow.

Now, please stay with me. The word “strait” in the King James Bible is not synonymous with the modern word “straight.” The modern word “straight” means “not curved” or “level.” The Greek word translated “strait” in the King James Bible means “narrow, from obstacles standing close about.” Noah Webster defines “strait” as “narrow; close.” He further defines “strait” as “difficult; distressful.”

So, there it is. The gate that opens the way of life is said to be “strait,” defined by Webster as “difficult.” Listen to me carefully. Jesus plainly teaches here that there is difficulty associated with the gate that opens the way to eternal life. But where does the difficulty lie? Is the gate said to be “strait,” or difficult, because the way that leads to life is a hard road? That’s not what Christ said. Christ says nothing in these verses about the narrow way being a hard way to walk. Show me where Christ stated that the narrow way is difficult to walk. It is not there. That’s not what Christ said, yet that is what people teach.

Look again at the last words of verse 14 – “Few be there that find it.” Did you get that? Jesus, speaking of the strait gate and narrow way, is not talking about that way being hard to walk, but rather hard to find. There is great difficulty in the “strait” gate and narrow way; but that difficulty lies in finding it, not walking  in it. Once this is understood, there is no contradiction with Paul’s words in II Corinthians 11, when he speaks of the simplicity that is in Christ.

How true I have found Christ’s words! The strait gate is hard to find! Many of you reading this have had no difficulty finding the strait gate, but you were raised around the strait gate. But I have dealt with lost people who expressed a desire to be saved. The Jehovah’s Witnesses told them that the way to the gate was their way. The oneness movement pointed them another direction to the strait gate. The Methodists assured them that the way to eternal life was yet another direction. The Christian Science movement, the Seventh-Day Adventists, the Church of Christ, and a myriad of other movements insist that their creeds point to the strait gate. Yes, there is a great difficulty associated with the gate that the opens the way of life. The difficulty lies in finding the way, not walking  in it.

Strive to Enter In

In Luke’s gospel, Christ spoke similar words to those words written by Matthew.

Luke 13:24 – “Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and shall not be able.

This is a very popular verse used by those who believe in a difficult salvation. In Matthew’s gospel, Jesus spoke of both a strait gate and a narrow way. Here, in Luke’s gospel, Jesus speaks nothing about the narrow way. He speaks only of the strait gate.

Look at the opening words of this verse. Christ says, “Strive to enter in at the strait gate.” Just like Matthew’s gospel, we have the word “strait” describing the gate. We see again that there is difficulty associated with the gate that opens the way of life. In Matthew’s gospel, we saw that the difficulty associated with the gate lies with finding the gate – “Few be there that find it.” Here, in Luke’s gospel, Christ does not emphasize that the gate is hard to find. But there is a difficulty associated with the gate. Christ even enforces the difficulty associated with the gate by commanding his hearers to strive to enter in. Webster defines “strive” as “to make efforts; to use exertions; to endeavor with earnestness; to labor hard.” But please notice that we are not told to strive because the way of salvation is hard; as a matter of fact, the “way” is not even mentioned in Luke’s gospel. So, if you conclude from this verse that the way of salvation is hard, there is something about this passage you are not understanding.

Is there difficulty associated with the gate? Yes. It is called the “strait” gate. If we get to the gate, we will do so by striving. In this verse, Jesus is dealing with one of the greatest difficulties presented to the sinner – the difficulty of procrastination. When a sinner hears the gospel, his greatest temptation is not to resist the gospel; but rather to put it off. “Don’t reject the Lord,” the devil tells him. “Just don’t respond today.” This temptation should be resisted with every fiber of the sinner’s being. The sinner should strive against this great temptation. Hell is full of people who meant to be saved someday, but they did not strive against the temptation and now they are lost eternally. Though they seek to enter in, they shall not be able.

How do I know that this is the difficulty to which Christ is referring? Let’s look at our verse once more. “Strive to enter in at the strait gate,” Christ says. Why strive? “For many shall seek to enter in, and shall not be able.” This arouses a question in the heart of the careful reader. When will people seek to enter in, and find themselves unable to do so? Christ answers that question clearly in the next verse:

Luke 13:25 – “When once the master of the house is risen up, and hath shut to the door, and ye begin to stand without, and to knock at the door, saying, Lord, Lord, open unto us; and he shall answer and say unto you, I know you not whence ye are.”

When will people seek to enter in and not be able? “When the master of the house shuts the door and you stand without and knock.” There is a great difficulty associated with the gate. But the gate itself is not the difficulty. Salvation is not the difficulty. Procrastination is the difficulty. And if it is not striven against at all costs, the sinner will soon find that the gate that he delayed to enter will be shut forever.

Salvation, like Paul said in II Corinthians 11, is simple. The act of putting off salvation is a great difficulty and a great temptation that must be resisted. Failure to overcome this difficulty has landed many souls in a burning hell. The gate is open now, but not always. That’s the difficulty. Salvation is not the difficulty; salvation is the solution to the difficulty.

The Righteous Are Scarcely Saved

Perhaps the scripture that is misused the most to prove that salvation is difficult is found in I Peter 4:

I Peter 4:18 – “And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?”

This verse is often misused by, in the first place, changing the word “scarcely” to “barely.” Those who believe that salvation is difficult often quote this verse by saying, “Salvation is so hard to attain that if the righteous are saved, they will barely be saved.” This is a gross mutilation of a blessed verse. James Strong defines the Greek word translated “scarcely” as “with difficulty.” Noah Webster defines the word “scarcely” as “hardly; with difficulty.” Both men define this word to mean “with difficulty.”

This verse does not mean that salvation is so complicated and hard to obtain that those who live perfect in every way will just “barely” obtain it. Then what does this verse mean?

First, we have seen that the word “scarcely” means “with difficulty.” So, look again at the first part of this verse – “If the righteous scarcely be saved,” or we could say, “If the righteous be saved with difficulty.” Those who are righteous are saved with difficulty. Everyone who is saved has been saved with difficulty. Keep this in mind; I will come back to it later.

Now, let us examine the latter part of the verse. We have the question, “Where shall the ungodly appear?” Peter is speaking of the Day of Judgment. How do we know? The verse prior to this one makes it clear. In I Peter 4:17 – “For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God. And if it begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?” Peter is talking about the end of those who do not obey the gospel. Their end is the lake of fire, into which they will be cast at the final judgment.

At the Great White Throne Judgment, the lost will try to negotiate with God, but it will be of no avail (Matthew 7:22). In the midst of the negotiations, the lost will no doubt use their difficulties – whatever obstacles hindered them from being saved – as excuses. We see this in Luke 14, where Jesus tells of a man who made a supper. The man began to invite people to the supper. One by one, those invited began to make excuse. One said that he could not come because he bought a piece of land and had to go see it. Another said that he had just purchased five yoke of oxen, and needed to go prove them. Another said that he had married a wife, and therefore could not come. Notice very carefully – there was no difficulty with the supper itself. There was no difficulty with the invitation to the supper. The difficulties lied in the events in the lives of those men who received the invitation. The men who were invited used their difficulties as excuses. The piece of land became the hindrance. The oxen became the obstacle. The newlywed wife became the difficulty. The supper was not the difficulty! Salvation is not the difficulty! The invitation to salvation is not the difficulty. However, some people use difficulties of life as excuses for not being saved. When lost people stand before God, will these excuses be valid?

Perhaps you can envision the scene of the final judgment. A man stands before God. He is lost, but tries to assure the Lord that, had he been raised in a Christian home, he would have been saved. Will that excuse hold up? Absolutely not! A witness will rise up, and say, “Lord, I wasn’t raised in a Christian home either, but I was saved!” And the excuse will be thrown out.

You see, the righteous are “scarcely saved.” The righteous are saved “with difficulty.” Everyone who is saved had difficulties to overcome. You say that the reason you’re not saved is because you had to bury one of your babies? There are some people who had to bury their children, and yet they are saved. You say that the reason you are not saved is because you’ve had a hard life? A hard life is a difficulty for sure, but there are saved people who were saved in spite of the difficulty of having a hard life. To put it as gently as possible, these difficulties are not valid excuses for rejecting salvation. Everyone who has been saved could have used some difficulty as an excuse to remain lost. But they didn’t. They overcame those difficulties. They strove to enter in at the strait gate. They overcame their difficulties and were saved.

That’s the meaning of the verse – “If the righteous scarcely be saved,” – and the righteous truly are saved with difficulty – “where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?” – where shall the lost, who try to use their difficulties as excuses, appear? Since every saved person overcame difficulties to be saved, every difficulty that the lost man tries to use as an excuse on Judgment Day will be overthrown on that fateful day.

This verse is not about salvation being difficult. It is about lost people using their difficulties as excuses. They’ll have no excuse, because righteous people were saved having to overcome the very same difficulties. No wonder John said in I John 5:5, “Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus Christ is the Son of God?” The believer is an overcomer because he overcame difficulties to be saved!

“Tarrying” for Salvation

A Brief Discourse on an Unscriptural Concept

If you believe that within every edifice that has a steeple pointed toward heaven is a minister who knows how to tell a sinner how to be saved, then you are badly mistaken. It is a shameful truth that if a lost sinner were to diligently search for the Biblical plan of salvation, he would stand a better chance of finding it in the janitor’s closet on the second floor of a county courthouse in Montana than in most churches. Dr. Monroe Parker told about a man with whom he dealt. The man told Dr. Parker that he had been going to different churches trying to understand God.

“How’s it coming?” asked Dr. Parker.

“I can’t understand preachers, let alone God,” the man responded.

And that’s the way it is. If you don’t know how to be saved, there is a good chance that going to church will only complicate matters. Let me insert here that there are churches that preach the unadulterated truth regarding salvation. There are preachers who understand clearly from the scriptures how to be saved. These churches and these ministers are becoming scarcer in this age of spiritual apostasy, but thank God they are out there.

Among the many theories concerning salvation is the concept of “tarrying” for salvation. Let us discuss this unscriptural concept.

To understand this concept, let me use an illustration. Suppose a lost individual enters a church, and at the appropriate time goes to the front for salvation. Upon asking what he needs to do to be saved, the pastor instructs him to simply kneel down and pray until he feels that God has answered his prayer, granting him salvation.

Often, lost people who are given this advice spend much time “tarrying,” or “trying” to be saved, often by praying for an extended period of time. I have heard people testify that they spent several hours praying to be saved. Others have testified to “tarrying” for days in their attempt to be saved. Some still yet have testified of “tarrying” for weeks or months trying to be saved. Although this is the experience of some, this is not what the Bible teaches regarding salvation. Now, if we are discussing children of God praying until the answer comes, then please understand that I believe in that kind of “tarrying.” In Luke 11, Jesus instructed His disciples to, like the man who needed bread, ask until the answer comes! If we are discussing Christians “tarrying” for power to win souls, then I believe in that kind of “tarrying.” Jesus instructed His disciples to “tarry” in Jerusalem until they were “endued with power from on high!” But no sinner in the Bible was ever commanded to “tarry” for salvation.

We must always understand that it is the word of God, not the experience of individuals, that determines whether or not a teaching is scripturally correct. Using the word of God alone for our source of authority on this matter, I shall give four points regarding the unscriptural concept of “tarrying” for salvation. First, I will demonstrate that there is no command in the Bible for anyone to “tarry” in order to be saved. Second, I will confirm that there is no example in the Bible of any sinner who “tarried” for salvation. Third, I will explain that proponents of this concept often have a wrong understanding of salvation. Last, I will show that the concept is as illogical as it is unscriptural.

The Bible Does Not Command Anyone to “Tarry” to Be Saved

He who requires the penitent to “tarry” to be saved did not get such a requisite from scripture. Absolutely nowhere in the Bible is anyone told to tarry that they might be saved.

Make no mistake about it – the Bible is clear regarding how to be saved. The Bible gives very specific instructions on this matter. These clear instructions become so muddied because so many religious leaders simply cannot fathom that salvation is as simple as the Bible portrays it. The Bible repeatedly states that salvation is attained by believing on the Lord Jesus Christ. This is the testimony of Jesus Christ (John 1:12; John 3:15; John 3:16; John 3:18; John 5:24; John 6:28-29; John 6:35; John 6:40; John 6:47; John 8:24; John 11:25-26; John 12:44-46); of John the Baptist (John 3:36); of John the apostle (John 20:31; I John 5:1); of Peter (Acts 10:43); of Paul (Acts 13:39; Acts 16:30-31; Romans 1:16; Romans 3:22; Romans 3:26; Romans 10:9-13; I Corinthians 1:21; Galatians 3:22; I Timothy 4:10) and of the Hebrew writer (Hebrews 4:3; Hebrews 10:39; Hebrews 11:6). Anyone who teaches that an individual needs to anything other than “believe on Jesus Christ” to be saved is contradicting every scripture listed above.

Many believe that salvation is attained by believing on Christ, but what does it mean to believe? Some insist that truly believing is obeying the commandments of the Bible. But, is that the case? It cannot be, for the Bible states that no commandment of the law of God is capable of giving life (Galatians 3:21). Keeping laws and commandments is what the Bible calls “works of the law,” and by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified (Galatians 2:16). So, what does it mean to believe on Jesus Christ? Romans 3:22, Romans 4:5, Galatians 2:16, and Galatians 3:22 associate “believing” with faith. Ephesians 1:12-13 associates salvation with trusting. Believing on the Lord Jesus Christ is therefore “placing your faith in” or “trusting” Jesus Christ to save you. A person is saved by the grace of God when they realize that they cannot save themselves, and they consequently place their faith in Jesus Christ, trusting Him alone to save them. They are not trusting baptism; they are not trusting sacraments; they are not trusting church attendance or church membership; they are not trusting their belief that they have “quit sinning”; they are trusting Christ and Him alone for salvation. The split second that a person believes on Jesus Christ, they are saved. The only Bible mandate for salvation is believing on Christ. There is no Biblical command to “tarry” for salvation.

The Bible Provides No Example of Anyone “Tarrying” to Be Saved

Not only is there no Biblical command for anyone to “tarry” to be saved, but there is also no example of anyone in the Bible who “tarried” for salvation. If salvation were attained by the seeker kneeling and spending hours praying to be saved, it would make sense that we would have at least one example of this in the Bible. However, although the Bible provides examples of lost people being saved, not one of those examples includes an individual who “tarried”; not one of those examples includes an individual who spent hours, days, weeks, or months praying for salvation. The concept of “tarrying” for salvation is completely foreign to the scriptures. There is neither command for it nor example of it in the Bible.

Since there are some examples of lost people finding salvation in the Bible, let us look closely at a few of them.

THE PUBLICAN

In Luke 18:10-14, Jesus tells about two men who went to the temple to pray. One was a Pharisee; a religious man. The other was a publican; a tax collector. The Pharisee prayed a prayer about how thankful he was to be holy. He offered thanks to God for “not being as other men are.” As he prayed, he reminded God of how he fasted twice a week, gave tithes regularly, and even thanked God that he was not like the publican who knelt nearby.

Then the publican prayed. Jesus said that this tax collector would not even as much as look up to heaven. He simply smote his breast and said seven simple words – “God, be merciful to me a sinner.” After praying these seven simple words, Jesus remarked that this man – this sinful publican who prayed only seven words – went home justified rather than the other. The publican was justified before God after praying seven words.

ZACCHÆUS

In Luke 19, we are told about Zacchæus. Zacchæus was another tax collector – a tax collector who wanted to see Jesus but was too short to look over the crowd. He therefore climbed into a sycamore tree that he might catch a glimpse of Jesus as He passed by. Jesus saw Zacchæus and said, “Today I must abide at thy house.” Jesus then went with Zacchæus to his home.

After arriving at the home of Zacchæus, Zacchæus uttered one sentence to the Lord. This sentence was slightly longer than seven words, but it was still just one sentence that took less than ten seconds to say. Zacchæus said, “Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation, I restore him fourfold” (Luke 19:8).

Upon hearing these twenty-nine words, Jesus said, “This day is salvation come to this house” (Luke 19:9). There was no tarrying whatsoever. In a short moment of time, Zacchæus was a recipient of salvation.

THE THIEF ON THE CROSS

When Jesus was crucified, He was crucified between two thieves who were also crucified. The two thieves mocked our Lord. However, at a certain point, one of the thieves had a change of heart. He turned to the Lord and spoke nine words to the Lord. He said, “Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.” After speaking nine words to the Lord, the Lord answered, “Today shalt thou be with me in paradise.”

PAUL THE APOSTLE

Perhaps the most remarkable conversion to Christianity in history was that of the apostle Paul. Paul, whose name was Saul at the time of his conversion, was on his way to Damascus. Suddenly, he saw a light brighter than the noonday sun. He then heard a voice saying, “Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me?” Saul, trembling, said, “Who art Thou, Lord?” Jesus answered, “I am Jesus whom thou persecutest.” Then, Saul prayed eight words. He said, “Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?” That’s it. There was no tarrying. There was no long season of prayer. At that moment, before he was baptized; before he was filled with the Holy Ghost; Saul of Tarsus was saved by the grace of God.

Quite some time ago, I was preaching at a church when, after church, a woman came to me. I had preached regarding the simplicity of salvation. She simply could not believe that salvation could be attained in a short amount of time.

“You make it sound like a person can be saved in just five minutes!” she said.

Upon hearing these words, I apologized to her. “I did not mean to make it sound like a person could be saved in just five minutes,” I told her. She looked puzzled. “You misunderstood me,” I said. “A person can be saved in a split second!”

If you believe in “tarrying” to be saved, or praying a long time to be saved, then the burden of proof is on you. I have shown clearly that the Bible nowhere commands “tarrying” for salvation. I have shown just as clearly that there are no examples of anyone praying for a long length of time for salvation. On the contrary, I have given four clear, Biblical examples of people who prayed very short prayers and were justified by God’s grace as a result.

A Wrong Understanding of Salvation Produces this Concept

Having clearly shown that “tarrying” for salvation is neither commanded nor exemplified in the scriptures, I will now prove that, many times, this teaching stems from an incorrect understanding of salvation.

I have shown that man attains salvation by faith (Ephesians 2:8), but how does God save? How can God be just, and at the same time, justify sinners? Because the wages of sin is death (Romans 6:23), how can God save me, one who has sinned, from the penalty of sin? The truth concerning these questions is that God did not merely forgive me when I was saved. Let me say it another way. When I was saved, God did not just “write my sins off.” God did not look down on me when I prayed to be saved and say, “You sinned, but since I am nice, I will forget about your sins and simply forgive you.” God, because He is just, saw to it that the penalty of my sins was paid. The wages of sin is death, and death for my sins had to be executed.

That’s where the blood of Jesus comes in. The sins of the whole world were laid upon Jesus Christ (Isaiah 53:6). Christ died for the sins of the whole world (I John 2:2). While the blood of Christ is available for the salvation of all men, all men will not be saved.

In Galatians 5:3, the Old Testament law is referred to as a “debt,” and those who are under it are called “debtors.” God’s law is a debt that God demands to be paid. No man has ever paid that debt (John 7:19). But Jesus Christ, when in the flesh, fulfilled the law (Matthew 5:17). The word “fulfill” is a term relating to debt, as in “fulfilling one’s obligations.” Christ fulfilled the law in its entirety. He never broke one commandment of His Father. He never sinned in word, thought, or deed. But, prior to going to the cross, the sins of the world were laid upon Christ. He, who never sinned, had the sin of the whole world laid upon Him. He then paid the wages of sin – death – upon an old, rugged cross, fulfilling even the death penalty of the law. Although Christ paid the penalty of sin for the whole world, the whole world will not be saved. God set up salvation so that Christ’s righteousness is only imputed to those who believe (Romans 4:23-24). Basically, if you do not trust Christ’s payment for your sin, then you will be responsible for it yourself. But payment for sin must be made. God does not save people by overlooking their sins. He saves people because they trust Christ’s payment on the cross as the means by which they are saved (Romans 4:25).

Once I understand that I am saved solely because of Christ’s work upon the cross, the length of my prayer becomes irrelevant. Those who believe in “tarrying” for salvation often see salvation as simply forgiveness. They see salvation as God just forgetting about their sins and forgiving them. The problem, they think, is that they just need to convince God to forgive them. And if they beg long enough, maybe God will have mercy. If they shed enough tears, maybe God will be convinced that they mean business. But this is a thoroughly incorrect understanding of salvation. God saves no one because they convinced Him to do so with their tears. No one has ever been saved by begging God to do so. No one has ever been saved by convincing God that they meant business about changing his or her lifestyle. God does not save because of man’s sincerity; God saves because of Christ’s blood that He shed upon the cross. Once this is understood, “tarrying” is not necessary.

The Concept Is As Illogical As It Is Unscriptural

I would like to speak personally to the advocates of “tarrying” for salvation in this final point. I want to show you how illogical your belief is. I want to begin by asking you some questions. If a person comes to God in prayer, and asks God to save them because of Christ’s work on the cross, why wouldn’t God save them? Is God playing games? What do you think happens in heaven when someone asks God to save them? Do you think God just stands there waiting for them to pray for at least a certain length of time? Do you think that God sends Gabriel down to check the puddle of tears to see how many tears have been shed before He saves the individual? Do you not see how silly this concept really is? If the phrase, “believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved” does not mean “believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved,” then what does it mean?

We have already discussed the story of Zacchæus. After Zacchæus prayed a short prayer, Jesus said, “This day is salvation come to this house.” In the very next verse, Luke 19:10, Jesus said, “For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which is lost.” Did you get that? Christ is not playing games. Will He really save Zacchæus after Zacchæus prays a short prayer? Of course He will – THAT’S EXACTLY WHAT HE CAME TO DO! Why wouldn’t He? Will Christ really save Saul of Tarsus after Saul prays only eight words? Absolutely! THE SON OF MAN CAME TO SEEK AND TO SAVE THAT WHICH IS LOST! To believe that Christ will not save an individual immediately upon believing is unscriptural, but it is even more illogical. It makes no sense to believe that Christ came to save them that believe, but for some reason won’t save someone immediately upon their believing on Christ.

Conclusion

This doctrine of “tarrying” for salvation, like all false doctrines, is a dangerous teaching. For one thing, this concept encourages people to seek for a feeling. That’s why they “tarry” to be saved. If you ask a person who is “tarrying” to be saved what he is waiting for, he will tell you that he is waiting until he knows for sure that he is saved. How will he know for sure that God has saved him? He will tell you that he will know for sure when he “feels” confident that God saved him. This is very dangerous. To start with, feelings are deceptive.

I can give you a list of people who I know personally who “tarried” for salvation – every year at youth camp. Every year they would go to youth camp, go to the altar, and pray for a great length of time to be saved. Often, salvation that is obtained by “tarrying” does not prove to be salvation at all.

In the ministry, I have had the privilege of winning souls to Christ. I have won some souls to Christ in church as a result of preaching. Others I have won as a result of one-on-one confrontation, outside the church. It has been my experience that, in nearly every instance, those who simply trusted Christ to save them (Ephesians 1:13), believing simply the written record (I John 5:10-11), were the ones who enjoyed a great assurance of salvation, served God with gladness, became soul winners, and lived the Christian life with stability and consistency. On the other hand, those who “tarried” until they reached a certain emotional experience enjoyed great joy – as long as the emotions were running high. But, as a rule, those who are saved by “tarrying” do not consistently work for God, do not have constant joy, win no souls for Christ, and prove to be very unstable. The concept of “tarrying” for salvation provides no results that I want in my life.

There is much more that could be said, but the point is adequately proven.

Read the Bible Entirely in 2014!

H.H. Halley, the author of the famed Halley’s Bible Handbook, was an avid reader of the Holy Scriptures. In his article on the habit of Bible reading, Halley comments on the Christian’s regular reading of the Bible:

Once a year, we think, through the Old Testament, and twice through the New Testament, would be a good minimum plan for the average person to follow. And it would simplify matters to make it co-terminous with the calendar year, beginning with January and ending with December. Such a plan would mean an average of four or five chapters a day, and would require something like an average of fifteen or twenty minutes a day. Can’t find the time? Well, it is important enough to take time. One minute a day, or three minutes a day, for religious devotion is child’s play. If we are Christians, why not take our religion seriously? Why play at it? Let us not fool ourselves. We CAN find time for the things we WANT to find time for.

I could offer no better challenge to the believer than what Halley has offered in the above words.

Discouragements to Daily Bible Reading

Many people set out at the beginning of the year to read their Bible through, only to get discouraged and give up at some point through the year. What causes these discouragements?

For one thing, it has been my observation that many people are discouraged when they get behind. Using most Bible-reading plans, one does not have to miss too many days until the Bible reader believes that he is so far behind that he feels there is no use to try to catch up. I believe I have a solution for this discouragement.

Some are discouraged in their Bible reading when they come to a part of the Bible that they have difficulty understanding. Do not let that hinder you. Read anyway! If you read a chapter in the Bible and understand none of it, keep reading! No one understands every word of the Bible. We must put into practice what we do understand, and the Holy Spirit will open more to us as we grow in Him.

Getting Behind and the Solution for It

One of the greatest discouragements to the Bible reader occurs when he gets behind in his Bible reading schedule. I try to encourage people to read the Bible daily. The inner man needs spiritual food like the outer man needs natural food. However, nearly everyone, at some time or another, doesn’t read their scheduled portion of scripture for the day. It could be that a person means to do so in the evening, but falls asleep before reading. It could be that a person means to do so in the morning, but an unexpected event occurs, taking their time away from the Bible. It happens to the most devoted of ministers, and you need not feel guilty should that happen.

To make matters worse, most Bible-reading plans are 365-day plans that do not allow for the reader to miss even a single day. To those of you who tried to read the Bible in a year, but quit because you got behind, let me ask you a question. Would it be any encouragement to you if I gave you a Bible-reading plan that allowed you to miss a day here and there? Now, please understand something. I do not encourage missing a day here and there. I encourage you read the Bible every day without exception. But, if you got the flu for five days, and couldn’t hold your head up to read even a single sentence during those five days, would it encourage you if you knew that after those five days, you were not behind on your Bible reading at all? Sure it would! I would like to offer three Bible-reading plans that offer a little “wiggle room” for those days when life happens.

Plan 1

Read the Bible from Genesis to Revelation

Read 4 chapters per day beginning on January 1

Finish on October 25 with 67 days remaining in 2014

Plan 2

Alternate Between the Testaments

Instead of reading the Bible from Genesis to Revelation, read some out of the Old Testament, then some out of the New. This plan acknowledges the fact that overall, the New Testament is often easier to read than the Old. H.H. Halley recommends that Christians not go too long without reading in the New Testament. This plan will ensure that if you are reading in the Old Testament now, it will not be long until you are reading in the New. If you wish to use this plan, I recommend reading the Bible in the following order:

1. Genesis – Deuteronomy (the Pentateuch)
2. Matthew – John (the Gospels)
3. Joshua – Job (Old Testament History)
4. Acts (New Testament History)
5. Psalms – Song of Solomon (Poetry)
6. Romans – Hebrews (Pauline Epistles)
7. Isaiah – Ezekiel (Major Prophets)
8. James – Jude (General Epistles)
9. Daniel – Malachi (Minor Prophets)
10. Revelation (New Testament Prophecy)

Read 4 chapters per day beginning on January 1

Finish on October 25 with 67 days remaining in 2014

Plan 3

Read from Both Testaments Daily

This plan works very well if you are certain that you will read the Bible in at least two sittings daily, such as morning and evening. You will be reading out of the Old Testament in one sitting and out of the New Testament in the other sitting. Please note that if you use this plan, you must read at least three chapters out of the Old Testament daily, or else you will not finish the Old Testament within the year.

Read 3 chapters from the Old Testament each morning beginning on January 1

Read 1 chapter from the New Testament each evening beginning on January 1

Finish the Old Testament on November 6 with 55 days remaining

Finish the New Testament on September 17 with 105 days remaining

Using Remaining Days
These plans are each completed with a certain numbers of days in the year remaining. You may use these remaining days as “sick days,” if I can call them that. This gives you a little “wiggle room” should you not be able to read the Bible on a day here and there. Keep in mind you do not have as many “sick days” as it sounds. You do not have even have two “sick days” per week. You cannot use a “sick day” every other day, or you will not finish the Bible within the year. They are available, but use them sparingly! Unused “sick days” may be used to reread the New Testament a second time in 2014.

Which plan you choose is not the most important aspect of Bible reading. The most important thing to remember is that we want to hide God’s word in our hearts that we might not sin against Him.

I will close with a quote by George Müller, that great man of faith:

I believe that the one chief reason that I have been kept in happy useful service is that I have been a lover of Holy Scripture. It has been my habit to read the Bible through four times a year; in a prayerful spirit, to apply it to my heart, and practice what I find there. I have been for sixty-nine years a happy man; happy, happy, happy.