Featured Is there biblical support for Lord ship salvation?

I think scripture is clear that a right relationship with God will always result in a transformed life.

I do, however, understand the concern that we appear to be “fruit inspectors”.

peace to you

 

John Macarthur

 

The only requirement for salvation is faith to receive God's grace. But true faith will lead to good works because one of the things we as Christians believe is that Christ is also God and is the one who created and sustains the universe. When we come to know who Christ is and his sovereignty, the lordship aspect is automatically linked with his role as our savior. As Christians we understand the reality of truth and who God is and along with the regeneration of the Holy Spirit, this leads to submission to the Lordship of Christ. Dr. Charles Stanley

 

Morgan was a great preacher, and IMO he got it almost right here. Repentance and faith are two parts of the same act, in my view (following John R. Rice and others here). In other words, in salvation the lost sinner repents (realizing he was a sinner on the way to Hell), and turns to Christ in faith. I illustrate this physically, by turning my body from one thing to another.

Soon after we arrived in Japan in 1981 I taught this to an English student of mine. He came back the next week and said, "I did it." Mystified, I said, "Did what?" He said, "Turned from my sin to Jesus." Later he went to the other side of Tokyo to start a church. I still have a letter from him somewhere.

I put surrender as part of the follow-up/discipleship process. After all, Romans 12:1-2 was written to Christians. So, yes, I believe that MacArthur over-reacted. He took the pendulum too far away from easy-believism and into dangerous territory.

Thanks for the quote. However, Rice certainly did not believe in LS. In the quote you give, the "set out to live for him" is subsequent to salvation. Where the rubber meets the road is in evangelism. You can tell whether writer holds to LS by his method of evangelism, and Rice's books on evangelism do not advocate telling a lost soul to receive Christ as Lord.

I have to reluctantly say that Rice held on to his friendship with Hyles too long. However, Rice's daughters did not think much of Hyles, if I may put it gently, and under their influence cracks appeared in the friendship. (See Ch. 15 of my biography of Rice.)

For sure, if Rice had known how the soul-winning at HAC was often (not always) carried on, he would have disagreed with it. Where I teach, we do not have a "Soul-Winner of the Year," and though evangelism is required of the students, no one asks them how many they led to Christ. That engenders carelessness with the Gospel, and spiritual pride.

Refusing to make Christ as one's Lord after salvation has dire consequences.

 

Thanks for the clarification. But what I was objecting to was nothing you post here, but your statement:

This is semantically different from "turning from sin." "Turning from ourselves as lord" is not repentance by any definition I know of.

 

I think that is a pretty balanced statement. I knew that over the years that Dr. Stanley seemed to be all over the place on this and it only took a minute to find someone taking him to task for saying that.
Charles Stanley’s Confusing Comments on Repentance and Salvation, In Touch Ministries Broadcast, July 7, 2016 – Grace Evangelical Society
It's good to see this though to help people realize that MacArthur was responding to a real thing that is really being taught. I mean, if regeneration leads to submission to the Lordship of Christ is it allowed for a Bible teacher to say if it doesn't then maybe you have a real problem? Or do you really have a problem. According to that website, all is well regardless.

 

Fair enough.

I don't recall ever hearing this phrase. As long as it is not Scripture, I have to yield to the inventor of the phrase (not really one term). Do you have a source in Scripture for the phrase?

 

I believe the proper definition of matanoia in the NT is a change of mind on a fundamental issue. Such a true change of mind will unavoidably result in a change of action.

So, while I do not include surrender of the will to Christ as Lord as part of the Gospel (cf. 1 Cor. 15, and the entire book of Acts), I do see it as a necessary corollary. Someone who truly trusts Christ will then turn to Him as Lord, though that is a separate action. This is not to say all Christians follow Christ as Lord.

 

Okay, thanks for the clarification.

 

Forget… that. As far as writing books, I will leave that to those with all that (perseived) intellectual superiority.

 

If it's an ice latte, I'll drink the other half.

If that's not a fundamental issue, nothing is!

Fundamental issues in the salvation of a sinner would include understanding and changing one's mind about sin and one's self as a sinner, understanding that Christ died for those sins, and understanding that Christ rose from the dead, thus guaranteeing eternal life to the one who believes.

Neglect of these issues is where easy believism enters.
1. If the witness does not talk about sin, the Holy Spirit will not convict (John 16:8-9, of course), and thus repentance will not take place.
2. If the witness does not tell the prospect that Christ died for his or her sin, then the supposed salvation might depend on a prayer or simply going forward. How many times have we heard of someone inoculated against the Gospel because they "said a prayer"?
3. "And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain; ye are yet in your sins" (1 Cor. 15:17). As a missionary, I saw tracts sometimes that left out the resurrection, and thus had an incomplete Gospel. I avoided those. The resurrection is a very important part of the Gospel.

So here is where easy believism comes in: "Jesus died for you and loves you. Just pray this prayer...." (Soul-winner: Oh goody, I can chalk up another one!)

 

Easy believism.

 

Soon as the BB gets a coffee shop, I'll buy you your favorite!