Featured People are so ignorant these days of Lordship Salvation...

Well, the burden is on you. Watch the video, make notes of the time of the point you address, and do the work of addressing what you feel is error. I've done this a number of times (addressed videos) and while facebook limits you, you can cater the discussion to that format. Start watching the video, and when it/he makes a statement you can counter, mark the time, and present the point, and your response. Tell him "We can take this point by point," and see if they are willing to approach the dispute that way.

Watch the entire video, and be familiar with everything that is said in it before addressing it. Then, start with the first point. Don't waste your time documenting every point until you know they are going to actually debate it. One of three things will happen: you will expose their error; they will expose your error; the issue will be dropped. You shouldn't have any problem exposing the erroneous belief that MacArthur teaches works-based salvation, so you enter into this from the higher ground.

People are ignorant of many things these days, but many simply want someone to hate. They are not going to get both sides unless you take them by the hand and explain why they are in error to teach apart from understanding the opposing side's teachings. But again, the burden is on you, so it is up to you to do the work. They aren't going to.

Good luck with that.


God bless.

 

He won't read the books, and you won't watch the videos.

You should just unfriend him, and watch your blood pressure go down.

But if you really want to refute him, you should watch the videos, then use your books to refute the videos point-by-point. Unless you're afraid your mind might be changed.

 

It's not unreasonable to conclude about a preacher or teacher without having read their books. Have you read any books by those you consider to be false teachers? Do you consider Benny Hinn a false teacher? Read any of his books?

The truth is, even with great teachers like Jeremiah and MacArthur, because they are men, it isn't that hard to find something to criticize. When it comes to the issue of Lordship Salvation, I agree, it is annoying that people do not understand it, and could, if they simply read MacArthur's statements about this controversial issue.

But it is my belief that our time is better spent addressing what Scripture teaches, rather than what men teach, because that cannot be called into question. Nothing wrong when addressing it when it comes up, but it isn't something that should evoke anger, because it is not our responsibility to defend MacArthur or Jeremiah, but to defend the faith. John is a big boy, and can defend himself, lol. He has a habit of bringing controversial issues to the forefront, and it is no surprise he takes fire for it. And he does a great Job defending the positions he takes. In fact, in my view, he stands at the top of the heap. Jeremiah, in my view, is actually harder to bring charges against, because Jeremiah doesn't usually focus on issues we know is going to raise the hackles of certain groups. So we don't see him coming under fire as John does.

In regards to Comfort, I have only heard one message by the guy, and I can, from that one message, understand how one might see a bit of a legalistic bent in him. So if I base my own view on what I've heard, I am not going to be a credible witness for the guy. I'll tell you one who I think is a bit over legalistic, Aleister Begg. Use to like to listen to him, but, after listening to him quite a bit (his program comes on daily and I have opportunity to listen while I am in between calls), he isn't someone I would recommend to people. MacArthur, yes. Jeremiah, yes. Begg, not really. Not that he is legalistic or teaching works-based salvation, but because he can be misunderstood by the typical listener, in my opinion. That;s not the case with MacArthur and Jeremiah.

I was at one time not ready to recommend Charles Stanley, even though in his younger years he was a formidable preacher. Because I heard a few messages I kind of viewed him as sort of candy-coated, and assumed that he had softened his preaching to reach a broader audience, which is not a far step away from tickling ears, lol. But, because I get opportunity to listen to him failry often, and have heard more of his preaching, I have realized...he is still a formidable preacher.

But I would basically say, don't get too worked up about the facebook crowd. Look at it this way: you need to cater to that mentality, and this is actually one of the easiest crowds to witness to.


God bless.

 

Any person who actually believes and teaches the truths of the Gospel and it's emphasis on evidence of salvation/true conversion will be construed as some sort of LS'er. Those who attack the truths of the Gospel while holding a truncated version generally conflate evidence of salvation with works/personal effort for salvation. They also make a false dichotomy of a believer and disciple. Good works have been so often melded with the works salvation camp that when works are merely mentioned they are attacked as some sort of ones own efforts to get to heaven.

 

Now don't go reading a Benny Hinn book to prove me wrong...




God bless.

 

This was probably for the best.

Consider what happened. He watched/listened to some videos about some books, without going back to the books to verify that what the videos said was true.

But you refused to watch the videos, so you were unable to point out where they were untrue; and lost the opportunity to show him that he was basing his opinion on a false premise.

In essence, you lowered yourself to his level. Or, to put it another way, think about Proverbs 26:4-5.

 

I agree. It is the Spirit of God that makes him a formidable preacher of the Gospel.



The point was designed to address the point of judging a preacher or teacher with only having heard minimal preachings or teachings. For some of them, that is enough. Heard one sermon by Benny Hinn's daughter...

...and that way more than enough to know she is a false prophetess.

Stanley will appeal to some, not to others, but, when it comes to his sermons we can only judge his doctrine. Hard to judge the fruit of his ministry, unless we were part of his fellowship or followed his ministry closely, which is not something I am going to do. He holds to one doctrine, which I won't mention, that I disagree with vehemently, but, in fairness to him, I have never heard him preach this doctrine, only heard others say he holds to it. Which is relevant to the topic of judging a preacher, teacher, or doctrine based on what amounts to hearsay and gossip. We expect this from the facebook crowd, but that doesn't mean we have to replicate their approach.


God bless.

 

Here is my off-the-wall opinion and you will see why I don't often mention LS.

LS is not good enough.

Note what Thomas said:

John 20:28 And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God.

Notice also:

KJV John 8:24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

The KJV italicizes missing words so it is "I am" not "I am he".

Therefore Jesus said - if you believe not that I am you will die in your sins.

Or " if you believe not that I AM you will die in your sins".

The deity of Jesus Christ (God come in the flesh) totally eclipses His "Lordship".

IOW, if a Christian does not eventually acknowledge the deity of Christ, he was never saved in the first place.

LS taken at face value allows for Mormons and JW's rebirth salvation as they both acknowledge his lordship.

And many other error types can say "Jesus is Lord".
But only the saved can say "Jesus Christ is God come in the flesh".

RE: Repentance : metanoia (a change of mind).

A true passive change of mind:
Philippians 2:5 Let this mind be in you, which was also in Christ Jesus:

IOW trade the mind of Adam for the mind of Christ by allowing God to do the transformation (post salvation).

2 Corinthians 3:18 But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord.

"are changed" metamorphoo (to transform).
Another passive work performed on us by the Holy Spirit presumably as we behold the glory of the Lord via the word then the image of Christ shows through greater and greater in our projected countenance.


HankD

 

Lordship Salvation is not an either/or position, except as taught by those that oppose the principle. It's simply a matter of acknowledging that we do not make Christ Lord...He is Lord. While there is room to debate irrelevancies, for example, the obedience of the new believer as opposed to that of the more mature believer, anyone thinking that they can be saved and ignore the will of God as expressed in Scripture is likely not following the salvation presented in Scripture.

Most of us would not accept a license to sin mentality in a believer, and rebuke it as a perverted understanding of Christianity. But, because we also reject a legalistic view which brings about a works-based mentality, the issue of Lordship Salvation becomes confused. That is the problem with extremes, and usually, those who debate the issue would probably, if discussion remained reasonable, agree in large part with each other. If we can simply remove what Lordship Salvation does not teach, and concentrate on what it does teach, I think we would all agree that it is true, when we are saved, God is to be Sovereign in our lives. Doesn't mean we think that is demanded to obtain salvation, because we already acknowledge that salvation is a gift, which makes the issue moot.


God bless.

 

You might want to better explain this statement so it is not misunderstood, lol.


God bless.

 

I'm not really familiar with the book, and don't really get outside of Scripture for my studies these days, though I do take a look at some commentary from time to time. Anything that directs our attention to Scripture as a source for understanding the issues we are faced with is okay in, no pun intended, my book.


God bless.

 

John 8:24 I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

The "he" in John 8:24 is not in the Greek.
To proclaim him lord in the here and now of the 21st century does not guarantee an orthodox view of who Jesus Christ is. As Paul said there are gods and lords many. He is God come in the flesh, every other title, phrase is subservient.

HankD