Is Lordship Salvation a misnomer?

I would say that in the NT it's the Book of John. As I posted above, Jesus makes this clear in John 6:40,47; 11:28-30.

If you want to get technical, one would say in Genesis.

"And he believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness." Gen. 15:6 (Rom. 4:1-5; Gal. 3:1-8) </font>[/QUOTE]Congratulations, JackRUS, you win the triple smiley! But you have the wrong passages.

John specifically states his purpose in 20:30-31--"And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name."

In order for me to believe in LS, someone is going to have to point out where in John Jesus or one of the Johns or anyone else tells us to receive Jesus as Lord in order to be saved. I simply can't find it. It CERTAINLY isn't there in John 3 or, where Jesus specifically deals with sinners about salvation. And it isn't there in the passages JackRUS mentions in John--except don't you mean Matt. 11:28-30 instead of John, JackRUS? </font>[/QUOTE]You must have misunderstood me. I don't believe in LS. So I don't believe it's anywhere in Scripture.

I was merely pointing out where the Gospel message could be found. And it is found in John 6 and 11. Mt. 11:28-30 speaks to the Jews that were heavy laden trying to please God by trying to keep the Law.

 

Sorry about that. I repent of my error.

 

Very simply--and I mean that literally. When Arend Ten Pas told us in class in 1971 that it is necessary to trust Christ as Lord in order to be saved, I raised my hand in my shy little way and said, "I was saved when I was 4, and understood nothing about the Lordship of Christ. So how could I have accepted it?" Ten Pas had no answer--of course granted he was in a pickle, since he couldn't accuse me in class of not being saved.

Jesus told us that to be saved we must become as a little child (Luke 18:17, etc.). A little child can simply trust, but has no concept of the Sovereignty of God--at least I didn't, and I remember very clearly my salvation experience at age 4. </font>[/QUOTE]Really? When did you learn that you ought to obey your father and mother? When did you learn that you ought to obey your Father even more than you ought to obey your father and mother? I knew that before I was 4, and I wasn't even saved until much later.

 

WHOA!! That's the first time I ever saw an interpretation that this passage did not refer to salvation!

Look again. The Greek word for "as" in v. 17 is

 

WHOA!! That's the first time I ever saw an interpretation that this passage did not refer to the salvation of adults!

ALL of my commentaries--A. T. Robertson, Jamieson-Fausset-Brown, Matthew Henry, John R. Rice, Walter Liefeld (Expositor's Bible Commentary), Norval Geldenhuys, etc.--interpret this as Jesus teaching how an adult should believe--humbly, simply, trustingly.

Look again. The Greek word for "as" in v. 17 is hos, meaning a number of things, but in this case it is universally interpreted as "like" or "as if." In other words, you must receive the kindgom of God as if you were, or like you were a little child. So say ALL my commentaries.

You say, "If we take verse 17 literally then those of us who claim to be saved as adults are still lost." Jesus was obviously using a metaphor, judging by the Greek. We literally interpret metaphors as----metaphors!!

 

Um, Lordship and obedience are different concepts. Even a dog can learn to obey, according to Pavlov (though I doubt a cat can learn to obey ). But I seriously doubt if a dog understands its owner's sovereignty over its life.

[ February 28, 2006, 01:03 AM: Message edited by: John of Japan ]

 

What LS advocates are driving at is the impropriety of the concept that I can choose Christ as my Savior but then I don't have to do what He says to do. What I actually said was that as a 4 year old I knew that I "ought to obey". Sure dogs can be trained to obey, but can they know that they ought to obey? I doubt Pavlov ever taught his dogs that.

 

What LS advocates are driving at is the impropriety of the concept that I can choose Christ as my Savior but then I don't have to do what He says to do. What I actually said was that as a 4 year old I knew that I "ought to obey". Sure dogs can be trained to obey, but can they know that they ought to obey? I doubt Pavlov ever taught his dogs that. </font>[/QUOTE]And the fallacy here is that NONE of us are totally committed, NONE of us do what we ought to do, even after we are saved, as witness Paul's struggle in Rom. 7 and yours and my struggle every single day. I want to obey the Lord--most of the time--but some times even as a Christian I just don't want to obey!! And we expect lost people to understand that they ought to obey the Lord at all times in order to be saved?

So, where do you draw the line? Does the prospect for salvation have to be absolutely committed in every aspect of his life? I know I'm not!! Then how much does he have to be committed to the Lord's leading? Halfway? All the way to being a missionary to Japan?

Sorry, "salvation is of the Lord," it is not of me and my will to obey. You can't have it both ways. You can't say on one hand that salvation is completely of the Lord, but then say that I must decide I'm going to obey Him if I want to get saved. That is illogical and unbiblical, I believe.

Christ is Lord whether I obey Him or not. And I am saved through my faith because He saved me, not because I decided to receive Him as my Lord

 

I usually agree with JOJ. Romans, however, is a book that clearly teaches salvation doctrine.

I would say 1 John is the book because of the statement, "That ye may know that ye have eternal life." The gospel of John is a good guess as well.

I agree with those that said that the LS position is a reaction to easy believism. I remember back in my Bible college days that there was a book written titled, So Great Salvation. I believe it was a collaboration between Zane Hodges and Charles Ryrie. I may be wrong. At the time we were told it was a reaction to MacArthur's LS position.


I must ask the question, How can a person truly come to Christ as a worthless, depraved sinner in need of salvation, be bought by the blood of Christ, and Jesus Christ not be Lord? Isn't his Lordship (ownership) required by definition of Biblical salvation?

Now we may be unprofitable servants, but servants to the Master we are.

 

I think Lordship salvation is the exact message Jesus was teaching. Look at John 8:24:
"I told you that you would die in your sins; if you do not believe that I am the one I claim to be, you will indeed die in your sins."

That is the NIV translation, but it makes the same glossed-over error as all the English translations I am aware of. In the Greek, Jesus is saying, "if you do not believe I am I AM (ego eimi), you will indeed die in your sins."

In claiming the name of God, Jesus was certainly saying that if one did not believe He was God (and that is certainly the Lord of lords!), then one would die in one's sins.

The Jews certainly understood exactly what He was saying. In John 10:33, they are responding to Jesus' question about why they want to stone Him: "We are not stoning you for any of these [miracles]," replied the Jews, "but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God."

Lordship salvation means that one believes Jesus is God, first of all. Secondly it has everything to do with obedience to Him as Lord and God. Can one be saved and not be obedient to Him? Not in the long run, no, for in Philippians 1:6 we read that He is faithful to finish the work He began. If you were born again in Christ, you will be raised by the Holy Spirit until you are in the likeness of Christ (Romans 8:28-30) and He WILL finish that work.

Christ was obedient. That is how each of us will be, too, who are His. Salvation is not simply escaping hell; it is becoming like Christ BECAUSE He is our LORD as well as our Savior.

John of Japan, although I think it is wonderful that you responded to the Gospel message when you were four, it is not until you were in your late teens or early 20's that you became independent of others and could wrestle with God yourself and become born again in Him. You did not need to be born again when you were four for you had not yet spiritually died (been separated from God) -- thus it was easy for you, as it is for almost all children, to respond to the stories of Jesus with trust and faith. Their angels always see the face of the Father in heaven, for these little ones have not yet been separated from God.

That does not mean that they do not have sin natures. We all do, from our beginnings, but if you read Romans 7:7-11 carefully, you will see that Paul was alive before he knew the law and it was only when he knew it that he died spiritually. You already belonged to Jesus as a four-year-old. All four-year-olds do.

It was later, when you chose to do wrong for the joy, or thrill, or simple sake, of doing what you knew was wrong in terms of GOD'S law, that you were separated from Him and died spiritually. It was then that you had to wrestle with Him and respond to Him with either
a 'yes' or a 'no.'

In Genesis 8:21, God tells Noah that the hearts of all men tend or are inclined toward evil from their YOUTH. That is not babyhood or childhood, but youth -- somewhere around mid to late teens. That's when the understanding of what rebellion really is finally comes into play. That is when choices start getting made that are not due to peer pressure or the promise of good grades or a raise in allowance or because of avoidance of punishment, etc. It is when right is chosen because it is right or wrong is chosen because it is wrong that a person has left childhood and must respond to Christ one way or another as a young adult.

 

What Lordship is not. A view that defines Lordship Salvation as “a person must trust Jesus Christ as his Savior and must also commit himself to Christ as Lord of his life, submitting to His Sovereign Authority." This is from the January-March 1986 issue of Bibliotheca Sacra (the Journal of Dallas Theological Seminary) defining Lordship Salvation.

There are many forms that Lordship salvation has taken. They cannot all be true. The one above puts an “also” into His grace through faith. If we find “one also” we believe should be included, chances are there will “also” be something else necessary. By the time we are through we can then really feel good about ourselves, for then we can say, I “also” had a hand in my salvation.

Jesus Christ is our Lord, but what we must watch for is Lordship salvation that there is something tacked onto our Lord Jesus. Something more we must believe or do. Some come down very hard on the side of “works” that we should be doing after we are saved. We may be born to good works, but we don’t need someone trying to put a guilt tag around our necks, telling us how this “works” salvation works. It is just like our monetary giving; we give as we wish, and not of command, or law of ordinance. We are one on one with our Lord Jesus Christ, and He’ll place us in our proper place in His Body, with or without our works.

Christian faith, ituttut

 

Helen, I assure you I was saved when I was four. I knew that I was a sinner and I knew Christ was the Savior. I'm struggling to figure out what you mean here. You say I wasn't born again when I trusted Christ as Savior as a child? So do you believe that salvation and the new birth come at different times?

As for fruits of righteousness, I agree that we can wonder if someone is saved if their life doesn't change. I showed fruit in my life. I could quote many Scriptures. I won my first soul to Christ in kindergarten. I was baptized at the age of six. I read the book of John through as soon as I could read. At the age of 16, I did go forward in a service to say to the Lord, "Everything I have is yours." But that was NOT the time I was saved. I was as sure of my salvation by the blood of Christ before that day as I am now.

But no one is answering my questions. If LS is the norm, why did not the apostles and others in the book of Acts teach it when they did personal evangelism? Why did Jesus not teach it when He did personal evangelism in John 3 and 4 and other places? In John 8:24 Jesus was dealing with His enemies, the Pharisees, who explicitly rejected His deity, so He said what He did. When He dealt with people about their personal salvation, He did NOT mention His Lordship.

 

I think the terms Lordship Salvation and other terms like discipleship, spiritual growth, walking in the Spirit, being Spirit filled, get all mixed up and thrown into one big basket. I do not mean this as a cop out, but, are we really struggling with semantics. I like what one poster above said, if we "add" complete obedience at all times to the requirement for salvation then we have big problems. Were the disciples always obedient at all times after their conversion. Does that mean they lost their salvation if they were not? No, I will believe the Bible that we are kept by the power of God.

 

BTW, JOJ, welcome to the family. I have agreat new converts book I'd like to share with you.

 

John, the Jewish people knew their Scriptures. They KNEW that God HIMSELF was their Savior. They knew Isaiah, where God specifically states that. So it was taught, but as part of an implicit doctrine, not an explicit one.

And no, you didn't need saving at four. You were not yet lost. Your sins were part of your nature, not part of your conscious will at that point. And Jesus, the one Sacrifice for all, for all time, died for unknown and unintentional sins as well as the others. Thus, you were covered as a child. You were not being held accountable for the sins you may or may not have commited -- in the same way that the Israelites under 20 were not held spiritually accountable for the rebellions they must have participated in with their parents in the wilderness, but were instead allowed into the Promised Land. That is a picture God gave us of something very important. If you look back (I am assuming you are over 25 years old!) to the years of ages 15 or 16 to about 22 or 23, I am thinking you will find there was a time when you 'recommited' as a youth/young adult -- and that it was at this time a new life was given to you. What you did as a child was in response to your parents and, essentially, to please them. What you did as a young adult was totally between you and God, and that is the way salvation (or damnation) is.

 

Helen, I usually find your posts along the track that I attempt to travel. I, at least, appreciate one that is informative rather than an attempted one or two sentence answer, that does not do justice to the question. So, once again, you have hopped aboard the train as it rolled away from the station. However on this ride, I believe you need to check the ticket. You rolled out of Grand Central with a ticket that read Washington; unfortunately the train is the one bound for Chicago.
You are basically correct on the first part of the trip, IMO. Most translations are missing the train altogether with the rendering of John 8:24. The usage of additional words added here to the translation has the singular effect of taking away by adding, something that is usually difficult to accomplish. But not here. The WYC is one of the few I saw on 'Bible Gateway' that came close to gettin it right. And even it misses the full force. My 'emphasis added' here will show that, I think. At least that is my intention.

This would seem to be consistent with the Greek text, which as far as I can determine, at the minute, is bascially unquestioned as to the construction of this verse, with four checked by me, showing no cited variants-

The emphatic usage " 'εγ'ω 'ειμι " would seem to carry the 'force' in English of a thunderous "I AM", if I may use that figure of speech. And you are correct in that the Jews definitely got the picture. And how! The blasphemy you spoke of shows we are rolling right along.

However, the train has now just gone through a switch. It doesn't yet seem too different, for with the tracks running parallel here on the same ROW, the landscape doesn't seem to really have changed much at all. Looks familiar, so all's well? Hardly! For there is a blind "Horseshoe Bend" ahead, and on this track is approaching a giant locomotive slowly pulling a fully loaded freight train, that somehow wound up on this track. I believe it somehow got diverted from the Canadian/American railroad. It is emblazoned with a giant C/A on the locomotive, so must be from that RR. It never seems to get off on too many sidings but lumbers on, oblivious to other traffic. Someone (me) just opened another switch to a siding, to avoid the impending disaster, and allow your engineer to safely stop the train you are riding, and avoid a derailment.

Here is the problem, as I see it. One who is a believer has two natures. Simply put, LS tends to forget this. It also does not make enough distinction, at least here, in that we have been once, for all, saved from sin at a point in time. That to say, from the penalty of sin. In discipleship, or Lordship, the concept of we are being saved from the power of sin, comes into play. The error is that these are too often confused, and unfortunately we wind up in a situation where we want to confuse our standing with our state. I could continue this further for many pages, but will for the sake of brevity quote verse four of one of the 6000+ hymns by Charles Wesley:

"He breaks the power of cancelled sin, He sets the prisoner free. His blood can make the foulest clean, His blood avails for me."

As to the last part of the post, concerning JoJ, I'd suggest that your position is eisogesis at best. You are putting too much emphasis on what you think God is saying to Noah, and Paul's illustration, as opposed to what I believe is actually being said, both here and in other Scriptures, IMO. Too many have testified they have been saved long before they were "mid to late teens", for me to believe they were not. I will admit to being 'cautious' when one testifies 'out of the blue' that they were saved at such an age as JoJ. However, in hnis case, at least, his testimony is not inconsistent with Scripture. Good enough for me. I "walked an aisle" as a teenager around fourteen or so. Was I saved at that time? I think so. Am I sure? No. I certainly felt different, in ways I cannot even describe. Did I understand? I think so. But salvation is not an 'experiential' thing. It is not, nor cannot be based on 'experience'. It is based on "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved." I have done that, ergo I am saved. That is likewise the testimony of JoJ.
In His grace,
Ed

 

Well said, Ed! (Nice rhyme, eh?) I like your point about LS missing the boat on the sin nature, especially.

This is related to my question about how committed you have to be to receive Jesus as Lord. Question: is anyone reading this positive they are 100% committed to Christ as Lord? I certainly am not! My sin nature interferes with that!

 

My two problems with LS is that...

1)What is the percentage of lordship over ourselves that we must give up in order to be saved, and where is the number found in Scripture? (If it's 100%, then the doctrine falls flat on it's face since we all sin.)

2)God does not play 'Let's Make A Deal' (you give Me something, and I'll give you something) with people. And that or any other 'deal' is no where to be found (thank God!) in the Gospel. End of argument on that one alone.

 

Hi John,

Why assume that those who reject one extreme (no concern for obedience at all) are automatically affirming the opposite extreme ("100% committed to Christ as Lord")? That's not the LS position, that's a strawman.

 

Lordship Salvation

Helen, I have something I want to say. Please lean in close to the speaker on your computer. A little closer. Okay, right there. I WAS SAVED WHEN I WAS FOUR YEARS OLD!!! There, I just had to get that out of my system.

I'm sorry if it breaks your stereotype, but I most certainly did need saving at age four. I was a conscious sinner, sinning willfully. I remember this. I remember being under definite conviction of my sin. I did not get saved to please my parents or family but to please Jesus. No one pressured me, I did not go forward in a service, no one tried to win me to Christ.

I remember lying in bed and thinking, "I can wait until I'm on my deathbed and then be saved. That way I can live like I want to and still go to Heaven." Soon after, I went to my mother of my own accord and told her I wanted to be saved. She dealt with me carefully, using John 3:16 (which I could quote along with many other verses) and having me insert my name to teach me that Christ died in my place: "For God so loved Johnny, that he gave his only begotten Son, that if Johnny would believe on him Johnny would not perish, but have everlasting life." Mom did not have me say the typical "sinner's prayer,' but a prayer to thank Jesus for dying for me. I have absolutely no doubt in my soul that I was saved that day.

Helen, correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to be laboring under an old SBC teaching that says little children cannot be saved, with the age of accountability arbitrarily set at 12. There is no Biblical basis for this at all. Approximately a hundred years ago in Texas my grandfather went to his father, an SBC lay preacher, and told him he wanted to be baptized. Unfortunately, SBC churches in those days had a policy that a child could not be baptized until the arbitrary age of 12. When my grandfather told his father as a boy of 9 that he had trusted Christ and wanted to be baptized, his father said, "Well, son, when you are old enough to know you are a sinner and honestly repent of your sins and be regenerated, then it will be time enough to join the church." He went forward in a service around that time, too, and the pastor set him aside on a pew and didn't deal with him, thinking he was too young.

We do a huge disservice to children by thinking they can't understand spiritual things. Samuel understood spiritual things when he was a little boy. The Hebrew word used for him in 1 Samuel 3 is na'ar, which is a boy under the age of adolescence. We find in 2 Tim. 3:15 that Timothy understood the Bible from the time he was a child (Greek brephos, a tiny child, which is what I was at 4). And Jesus said, "Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child (Greek paidion, certainly not an adolescent but a little child), he shall not enter therein." (Mark 10:14). Even an adult cannot be saved unless he comes to Jesus with the trusting heart of a small child.

P. S. To set the record straight, I am 54 years old!