The Two Surrenders

[John of Japan]

I agree with what you say about regeneration. But in fairness to Calvinists they believe it too, even more so. Here is Mac again in his book "The Gospel According to Jesus" last edition, page 178, in the chapter "The Call to Repentance".

Well, of course they do believe in regeneration. But I object to your "even more so." But here you missed my point about the Holy Spirit.

"Nor is repentance merely a human work. It is, like every element of redemption, a sovereignly bestowed gift of God. The early church, recognizing the authenticity of Cornelius's conversion, concluded, 'Well then, God has granted to the Gentiles also the repentance that leads to life.' .... He goes on then says on page 179, "Above all, repentance is not a presalvation attempt to set one's life in order. The call to repentance is not a command to make sin right before turning to Christ in faith. Rather, it is a command to recognize one's lawlessness and hate it, to turn one's back on it and flee to Christ, embracing Him with wholehearted devotion."

The bolded part is done by me to hopefully put to rest some of the charges being made regarding so called "Lordship Salvation". I don't think we are saying anything really different. Is it possible to move from Lordship to legalism? Yes, if men are involved in teaching it. And is it possible for free grace teaching to move into antinomianism? Yes again. That's why we laymen have you guys as preachers and teachers. I would only ask that when you express concerns you wouldn't damage some honest guys who were saying what needed to be said.

I fail to see how I am damaging anyone by my theological points. On the other hand, LS advocates can cause trouble too. I heard of an "evangelist" who insisted that no one in the church was saved unless they had "confessed Him as Lord," and got the whole church "unsaved," causing great confusion.

What I have noticed is that while I really like Mac and all his books on Lordship Salvation I must admit I am a little uncomfortable with the way he takes Ryrie to task so often in his books. Though a free grace preacher, Ryrie, as far as I know, lived an exemplary life and didn't need anyone to tell him he didn't believe Christ was Lord. I remember it was your grandfather who once said when someone complained to him that "You make salvation seem so easy", he replied "Jesus died on the cross to make it easy". We do have to let the Holy Spirit work and you would of course deal with a person doubting whether God has any right to tell them what to do differently than someone who is convinced they are such a one as God would never want to save. The last person doesn't need to be convinced of the Lordship of Christ except in the sense that he is Lord enough and has the right and authority and desire to save them.

Washer's testimony has him with a Ryrie Study Bible right after he got saved.

And thanks for finally talking about the Holy Spirit in reference to salvation. To me, leaving Him out of the picture is a complete failure of anyone's soteriology.

And thanks for the John R. Rice quote. This is what some fundamentalists get wrong, as you will agree. I too object to simply giving a few verses without the surety that the Holy Spirit is at work. A deacon in our church went to a certain Bible college. One day the bus was coming back from soul winning downtown. Some girls on the bus were saying, "I got ten saved," etc., but they had only been out for a half hour.

 

[Ascetic X]

None of these refute my presentation of the Greek grammar. The KJV gets it right: "That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved."

And by the way, some of your versions are the same thing, just slightly revised: ASB, NASB, NASB '75, NASB '95, and Legacy are all essentially the same Bible. Same with the Holman and the CSB. Others of these have no standing and authority in Bible translation theory: Amplified, Weymouth, etc.

English translations tend to copy one another without thinking through the grammar. That is what you are showing, that's all.

Okay, but to confess the Lord Jesus means to acknowledge Him as Lord, the one to obey, does it not?

 

[John of Japan]

Okay, but to confess the Lord Jesus means to acknowledge Him as Lord, the one to obey, does it not?

No. The semantics (meaning) of "confess" and "obey" are not the same. "Confess" is well known as the Greek omologeo, "to say the same." (One of my students rode a plane with a Greek man, and it still means that!) To obey means to do what someone says.

Here is something else LS misses. The term "Lord" is a title, not a name. The name of our Savior is Jesus, meaning "God is salvation." To be saved, we obey the command to believe, not a command to make Christ Lord. If you don't agree, go back to my post on the Gospel as presented in John and Acts. So far no one has answered or refuted my points.

 

[Ascetic X]

No. The semantics (meaning) of "confess" and "obey" are not the same. "Confess" is well known as the Greek omologeo, "to say the same." (One of my students rode a plane with a Greek man, and it still means that!) To obey means to do what someone says.

Here is something else LS misses. The term "Lord" is a title, not a name. The name of our Savior is Jesus, meaning "God is salvation." To be saved, we obey the command to believe, not a command to make Christ Lord. If you don't agree, go back to my post on the Gospel as presented in John and Acts. So far no one has answered or refuted my points.

To confess the Lord Jesus, but not make Him your personal Lord seems contradictory.

In fact, Jesus warned us about obedience-deprived people confessing Him as Lord.

The gospel as presented in Matthew includes this:

Matthew 7:21-23

Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.

Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’

And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

 

[John of Japan]

Majority Standard Bible
that if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.

World English Bible
that if you will confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

New International Version
If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

New Living Translation
If you openly declare that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

English Standard Version
because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

Berean Standard Bible
that if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.

Berean Literal Bible
that if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised Him out from the dead, you will be saved.

New American Standard Bible
that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;

NASB 1995
that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;

NASB 1977
that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you shall be saved;

Legacy Standard Bible
that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;

Amplified Bible
because if you acknowledge and confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord [recognizing His power, authority, and majesty as God], and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.

Berean Annotated Bible
that if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus (YHWH saves) is Lord {Kyrion}, and believe in your heart that God {Theos} raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.

Christian Standard Bible
If you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

Holman Christian Standard Bible
If you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.

American Standard Version
because if thou shalt confess with thy mouth Jesus as Lord, and shalt believe in thy heart that God raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

Contemporary English Version
So you will be saved, if you honestly say, "Jesus is Lord," and if you believe with all your heart that God raised him from death.

English Revised Version
because if thou shalt confess with thy mouth Jesus as Lord, and shalt believe in thy heart that God raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved:

GOD'S WORD® Translation
If you declare that Jesus is Lord, and believe that God brought him back to life, you will be saved.

Good News Translation
If you confess that Jesus is Lord and believe that God raised him from death, you will be saved.

International Standard Version
If you declare with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

NET Bible
because if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

New Heart English Bible
because, if you acknowledge with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.

Weymouth New Testament
that if with your mouth you confess Jesus as Lord and in your heart believe that God brought Him back to life, you shall be saved.

Literal Standard Version
that if you may confess with your mouth that Jesus [is] LORD, and may believe in your heart that God raised Him out of the dead, you will be saved,

Berean Literal Bible
that if you confess with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised Him out from the dead, you will be saved.

Anderson New Testament
that if you will confess with your mouth, that Jesus is Lord, and will believe in your heart that God has raised him from the dead, you shall be saved.

Coverdale Bible of 1535
For yf thou knowlegest Iesus with thy mouth, that he is the LORDE, and beleuest in thine hert, that God hath raysed him vp from the deed, thou shalt be saued.

Tyndale Bible of 1526
For yf thou shalt knowledge wt thy mouth that Iesus is the lorde and shalt beleve with thyn hert that God raysed him up from deeth thou shalt be safe.

​

9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. (KJV)

9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. (NKJV)

9 that if thou mayest confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and mayest believe in thy heart that God did raise him out of the dead, thou shalt be saved, (YLT)

9 Because if you confess the Lord Jesus, and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you shall be saved. (MKJV)

9 that if you will confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. (WEB)

９　なぜなら、もしあなたの口でイエスを主と告白し、あなたの心で神はイエスを死者の中からよみがえらせてくださったと信じるなら、あなたは救われるからです。(Japanese SKY)

９　つまり、もしあなたの口で主イエスを言い表し、心の中で神はイエスを死人たちの中から復活させたと信じれば、あなたは救われます。(Lifeline Japanese NT)

Etc., etc.

 

[John of Japan]

To confess the Lord Jesus, but not make Him your personal Lord seems contradictory.

In fact, Jesus warned us about obedience-deprived people confessing Him as Lord.

Well of course.

The gospel as presented in Matthew includes this:

Matthew 7:21-23

Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven.

Many will say to Me in that day, ‘Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?’

And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’

Yes, John MacArthur declared that the Sermon on the Mount is a salvation message, but it isn't. Nowhere in Matt. 5-7 do the words "saved," "salvation" or "repent" or "sin" occur. So that admonition was to believers, warning them not to believe everyone who claims to speak for God. It is not saying, "Be sure you confess Me as Lord so you are saved." The context is about false prophets, and Jesus specifically says, "Beware of false prophets" in v. 15 before He spoke what you quote. So no, what you quote is not "The gospel as presented in Matthew" as you say it is.

And once again I ask, can you refute my points about the Gospel of John and the book of Acts?

 

[Anthony Pritchard]

I know that in the case of Paul Washer and John MacArthur this is exactly what their concern was too. I mentioned in an earlier post that some of the prominent Calvinist theologians specifically took MacArthur to task for his unclear presentation of salvation in his attempt to address this but I don't see how anyone can really not see that what MacArthur repeatedly addressed was exactly what your concern is - that being that there is a common evangelical teaching nowadays that living the Christian life and changing behavior is perpetually and always an option. He sited repeated works from the guys who say this as evidence.

I would argue, and can provide references, that in "The Gospel According to Jesus" MacArthur is completely faith only with repentance as a change of mind for initial salvation. And, in his final version he even added a chapter on justification where he further clarified anything that might cause misunderstanding of his case.

Furthermore, there is as I'm sure you know, an ongoing discussion of what saving faith actually is, with many Christians of previous generations especially, putting within "saving faith" at least an intention to obey and a realization that Jesus is Lord, which, if you think about it, how in the world does he have the right to forgive your sins if he's not!

And then, there is the aspect of soteriology where if you are Calvinist enough to believe that the Holy Spirit is driving your attainment of faith in the first place it would be totally absurd for the Spirit to not go on to sanctification and repentance - thus any division is not speaking of a possibility of one without the other, but merely theological definition. And if I understand you right, you would agree with that.

Last of all, if you listen to the famous "Shocking Youth Message" by Paul Washer, which looks a little dated now, you will see for sure that his only problem is with the fact that his young audience thought that they could say a prayer and then continue to live as they wished - forever, and be safe from judgement. I think it is still on Youtube.

Dave, I appreciate the clarification, and I agree with you on the central concern: MacArthur and Washer were reacting against the idea that a person can “get saved,” say a prayer, and then treat obedience as permanently optional. That is the same concern I’m addressing. On that point, we are aligned.

But that concern does not remove the doctrinal distinction I’m making.

1. Salvation repentance and sanctification repentance are not the same act.
MacArthur, Washer, and others may emphasize the inevitability of a changed life, and rightly so, but inevitability does not erase category. Scripture still distinguishes:

repentance unto life (Acts 11:18),

repentance in sanctification (Rev. 2–3),

faith as the condition of salvation,

obedience as the consequence of salvation.

Their pastoral concern is valid.
But their concern does not collapse the categories.

2. The intention to obey is not the obedience itself.
You mentioned older theologians who included “an intention to obey” within saving faith. That is fine, intention belongs to the heart’s direction, not the life’s performance. It is still repentance unto life, not obedience as a condition.

The distinction remains:

The heart turns to Christ → salvation.

The life turns under Christ → sanctification.

The second flows from the first, but it is not the first.

3. The Calvinist point strengthens the distinction, not erases it.
You noted that if the Spirit grants faith, He will also grant sanctification. I agree completely. But that is precisely why the two surrenders must be distinguished:

The Spirit grants repentance unto life at conversion.

The Spirit produces repentance in sanctification throughout the Christian life.

They are inseparably connected, but not identical.

If there is no sanctifying surrender, then there was no salvation surrender, not because sanctifying surrender causes salvation, but because sanctifying surrender flows from salvation. The fruit reveals the root.

4. Washer’s “Shocking Youth Message” illustrates the same point.
Washer was confronting the idea that salvation could occur without any subsequent obedience. That is the same concern I’m addressing. But Washer was not redefining the condition of salvation, he was insisting on the consequence of salvation.

That distinction matters.

The summary
We agree on the pastoral concern: salvation produces obedience, and obedience is not optional.

But we must keep the doctrinal order clear:

Obedience and surrender at salvation = repentance unto life.

Obedience and surrender after salvation = sanctification.

They are distinct acts, but inseparably connected.
The second proves the first, but does not define it.

That is the point I’m making.

 

[Ascetic X]

2. The intention to obey is not the obedience itself.
You mentioned older theologians who included “an intention to obey” within saving faith. That is fine, intention belongs to the heart’s direction, not the life’s performance. It is still repentance unto life, not obedience as a condition.

The distinction remains:

The heart turns to Christ → salvation.

The life turns under Christ → sanctification.

The second flows from the first, but it is not the first.


Obedience and surrender at salvation = repentance unto life.

Obedience and surrender after salvation = sanctification.

Can you clarify what this “heart turns to Christ” means if it does not include turning to Christ as both Savior and as Lord?

The change in the heart’s direction would mean it is pointed toward Jesus as the one to follow, which is the lordship quality.

What is this “obedience and surrender at salvation”? Obedience to Christ as commander? Surrender to Christ as master?

I do not see how Jesus can be my Savior, if He is not also my Lord.

A savior who is not obeyed is just a fire escape from hell.

 

[Anthony Pritchard]

Can you clarify what this “heart turns to Christ” means if it does not include turning to Christ as both Savior and as Lord?

The change in the heart’s direction would mean it is pointed toward Jesus as the one to follow, which is the lordship quality.

What is this “obedience and surrender at salvation”? Obedience to Christ as commander? Surrender to Christ as master?

I do not see how Jesus can be my Savior, if He is not also my Lord.

A savior who is not obeyed is just a fire escape from hell.

Ascetic X, Bother, the thief on the cross is the clearest example of what I mean by “the heart turns to Christ.” He turned to Christ as Lord and trusted Him, that is repentance unto life. But he had no time to obey, follow, or surrender behaviorally. His life could not turn, but his heart did. That is the distinction between salvation repentance and sanctification repentance.

 

[John of Japan]

Personally, I trusted Christ as Savior at age 4. One of my Bible college profs (1972) was Erend Ten Pas, who wrote a pamphlet advocating LS, quoted years later in MacArthur's book. I asked him if I was saved, since a 4 year old can't understand the Lordship of Christ. That was unfair to him, really. Is he going to say, "No, you're not saved"? But it is certainly a valid and Scriptural point.

Here is the relevant Scripture: "Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein" (Mark 10:15). Little children have a hard time learning to obey, much less making someone their lord/Lord. But they are very trustful. When I get to go to the nursery to get my 2 year old granddaughter, she runs to me with her arms outstretched to be picked up. This is trust. To be saved, you believe/trust the Lord Jesus Christ to be your Savior, just like you trust a doctor to cure you, or a fireman to rescue you. You put your eternal destiny in the hand of Christ.

 

[John of Japan]

Personally, I trusted Christ as Savior at age 4. One of my Bible college profs (1972) was Erend Ten Pas, who wrote a pamphlet advocating LS, quoted years later in MacArthur's book. I asked him if I was saved, since a 4 year old can't understand the Lordship of Christ. That was unfair to him, really. Is he going to say, "No, you're not saved"? But it is certainly a valid and Scriptural point.

Here is the relevant Scripture: "Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein" (Mark 10:15). Little children have a hard time learning to obey, much less making someone their lord/Lord. But they are very trustful. When I get to go to the nursery to get my 2 year old granddaughter, she runs to me with her arms outstretched to be picked up. This is trust. To be saved, you believe/trust the Lord Jesus Christ to be your Savior, just like you trust a doctor to cure you, or a fireman to rescue you. You put your eternal destiny in the hand of Christ.

Correction: The prof's name was Arend Ten Pas, not Erend. Here is his pamphlet on Amazon: The Lordship of Christ: Or can a person be saved without receiving Christ as Lord?: Pas, Arend J. ten: Amazon.com: Books

He was allegedly later fired from BJU for endorsing 4 point Calvinism. Ironically, BJU leans Calvinistic nowadays.

 

[Ascetic X]

Ascetic X, Bother, the thief on the cross is the clearest example of what I mean by “the heart turns to Christ.” He turned to Christ as Lord and trusted Him, that is repentance unto life. But he had no time to obey, follow, or surrender behaviorally. His life could not turn, but his heart did. That is the distinction between salvation repentance and sanctification repentance.

The thief on the cross was a special, atypical case.

A paralyzed person also may not be able to obey Christ much, aside from praying, forgiving, and changing what occurs in their mind.

Most people who repent and turn to Christ do have time to follow Him as Lord and obey Him in various areas of their life.

To turn to Christ as Savior, but not as Lord, this seems to contradict the scriptures that proclaim Jesus with the title Lord Jesus Christ. As I said, the scriptures speak of Christ as Lord far more than Christ as Savior.

Jesus is Lord. To turn to Him is necessarily to turn to One who must be Master to obey, and not just Savior who saves.

 

[Anthony Pritchard]

The thief on the cross was a special, atypical case.

A paralyzed person also may not be able to obey Christ much, aside from praying, forgiving, and changing what occurs in their mind.

Most people who repent and turn to Christ do have time to follow Him as Lord and obey Him in various areas of their life.

To turn to Christ as Savior, but not as Lord, this seems to contradict the scriptures that proclaim Jesus with the title Lord Jesus Christ. As I said, the scriptures speak of Christ as Lord far more than Christ as Savior.

Jesus is Lord. To turn to Him is necessarily to turn to One who must be Master to obey, and not just Savior who saves.

There are no atypical salvation experiences, we are all saved the very same way, no exceptions. Salvation is inward, then, given the chance of continued life, works it's way outward. The salvation experience of the thief on the cross "is" typical, his experience an exemplar, it was paradigmatic. We are all saved the very same way, there are no special cases.

 

[Ascetic X]

There are no atypical salvation experiences, we are all saved the very same way, no exceptions. Salvation is inward, then, given the chance of continued life, works it's way outward. The salvation experience of the thief on the cross "is" typical, his experience an exemplar, it was paradigmatic. We are all saved the very same way, there are no special cases.

I would consider a deathbed confession, a last minute turning to Christ, as special and atypical, in the sense that no obedience, no change in lifestyle can possibly occur, but most saved people can and should obey Christ as Lord, and change their lifestyle.

Apostle Paul is someone who had a special, atypical conversion experience, in that Christ came to him as a blinding light. You can say that Paul’s moment of repentance and conversion was typical, but what led to it was not.

 

[Anthony Pritchard]

I would consider a deathbed confession, a last minute turning to Christ, as special and atypical, in the sense that no obedience, no change in lifestyle can possibly occur, but most saved people can and should obey Christ as Lord, and change their lifestyle.

Apostle Paul is someone who had a special, atypical conversion experience, in that Christ came to him as a blinding light. You can say that Paul’s moment of repentance and conversion was typical, but what led to it was not.

Brother, differing circumstances do not create differing kinds of salvation. A deathbed conversion, a roadside conversion, a childhood conversion, or a conversion in mid‑life all share the same inward reality: the heart turns to Christ in repentance unto life, and Christ saves. That inward work is the same for every believer, without exception.

Circumstances may vary, but salvation does not.

The thief on the cross is not atypical. His circumstances were unusual, but his salvation was typical. He experienced the same inward turning to Christ that every believer experiences. His lack of time for outward obedience does not make his salvation a different category; it simply means sanctification had no time to unfold.

Paul’s circumstances were unusual, but his salvation was not. The blinding light was unique, but the moment of repentance and faith was the same inward turning to Christ that every believer undergoes. The external events were extraordinary; the salvation itself was identical to all others.

We are all saved the very same way. There are no special cases.

 

[John of Japan]

I would consider a deathbed confession, a last minute turning to Christ, as special and atypical, in the sense that no obedience, no change in lifestyle can possibly occur, but most saved people can and should obey Christ as Lord, and change their lifestyle.

Apostle Paul is someone who had a special, atypical conversion experience, in that Christ came to him as a blinding light. You can say that Paul’s moment of repentance and conversion was typical, but what led to it was not.

Did the thief on the cross believe he was a sinner? Check.
Did the thief on the cross believe in Jesus? Check.
Did he speak to Jesus, accepting Him as the One who could take him to Heaven? Check.
Was the thief then born again? Check.
Will we see him in Heaven? Check.

What exactly was atypical?

I would love for you to comment on my point about no one in John or Acts publically claiming Christ as Lord in order to get saved.