can someone who hold to Lordship salvation define it?

[OldRegular]

This is backwards. Man has the responsibility to respond to Christ, even as Paul responded to the Lord on the way to Damascus. He called him Lord. He submitted to him. He said "Lord what will you have me to do." Only after submitting to him as Lord, or calling upon him, did Christ change his heart; not before. Before then he was on a mission to kill Christians.

As you state Paul was on his way to kill Christians. If God had not changed Paul's heart why would he submit?

 

[kyredneck]

This is backwards. Man has the responsibility to respond to Christ, even as Paul responded to the Lord on the way to Damascus. He called him Lord.

Yeah, he did:

...Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? And he said, Who art thou, Lord?... Acts 9:4,5

Yeah, he sure did call Him Lord, almost like second nature right on the tip of his tongue, on his mind, spontaneously, no hesitation whatsoever, Saul called him Lord; almost like Christ had Paul in mind when He said:

...whosoever killeth you shall think that he offereth service unto God. Jn 16:2

...He submitted to him. He said "Lord what will you have me to do." Only after submitting to him as Lord, or calling upon him, did Christ change his heart; not before...

So YOU say, according to YOUR philosophy, but according to scripture:

...when it was the good pleasure of God, who separated me, even from my mother`s womb, and called me through his grace, to reveal his Son in me... Gal 1:15,16

.... Before then he was on a mission to kill Christians.

IMO, Paul's sin wasn't near as grievous as David's. David's sin was outright presumptuous bold defiant sin, Paul actually believed he was doing the Lord's work.

 

[DHK]

As you state Paul was on his way to kill Christians. If God had not changed Paul's heart why would he submit?

God only changed his heart AFTER Paul responded to Christ and not before.
Faith came before the change. That is obvious and the lesson to be taken home from Paul's testimony in Acts 9.

 

[DHK]

Yeah, he did:

...Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? And he said, Who art thou, Lord?... Acts 9:4,5

Yeah, he sure did call Him Lord, almost like second nature right on the tip of his tongue, on his mind, spontaneously, no hesitation whatsoever, Saul called him Lord

Thus demonstrating the human responsibility of faith precedes salvation.

; almost like Christ had Paul in mind when He said:

...whosoever killeth you shall think that he offereth service unto God. Jn 16:2

Apples and oranges. Paul was yet unsaved before he met Christ on the road to Damascus. In John 16 Christ is speaking to his disciples who has already been with for three years.
Nothing like taking Scripture out of context. Unsaved as he was, Saul was not a disciple of Christ.

So YOU say, according to YOUR philosophy, but according to scripture:

NO. I say, according to Scripture.
In fact I explained the whole thing to you via the Scriptures.

...when it was the good pleasure of God, who separated me, even from my mother`s womb, and called me through his grace, to reveal his Son in me... Gal 1:15,16

We are all with one accord when it comes to quoting Scripture. :smilewinkgrin:

IMO, Paul's sin wasn't near as grievous as David's. David's sin was outright presumptuous bold defiant sin, Paul actually believed he was doing the Lord's work.

Did you want to talk about Noah's Ark too, and then his subsequent drunkenness?
What about Lot's immorality?
Abraham's cowardice (Gen.12)?
Solomon's multiple wives?
Just how much sin did you want to discuss, and then compare?
All sin is evil. God doesn't compare sin.

1 John 3:4 Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law.

 

[kyredneck]

Yeah, never mind the part about Paul being separated from his mother's womb.

Your philosophy: itsy bitsy God, great big man.

 

[kyredneck]

Never mind the part about when it was the good pleasure of God to reveal Christ in Paul.

Your philosophy: itsy bitsy God, great big man.

 

[Winman]

What are you talking about? If you are not dead in sin you would not need to be regenerated or "born again" as the Lord Jesus Christ said or "made alive" as the Apostle Paul said.

The wages of sin is death. Until your sins are forgiven you are dead in sin and cannot be regenerated. The word regenerated means "alive again". Of course, you had to be alive once to be alive again, but that is another subject.

A person is regenerated or quickened when their sins are forgiven.

Col 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

Colossians 2:13 shows exactly how and when a person is quickened or regenerated, when their sins and trespasses are forgiven. But you must first believe to have your sins forgiven, we are justified by faith.

The scriptures show this over and over and over again, but Calvinists simply ignore it.

 

[OldRegular]

God only changed his heart AFTER Paul responded to Christ and not before.
Faith came before the change. That is obvious and the lesson to be taken home from Paul's testimony in Acts 9.

You are assuming facts not in evidence! Either that or dodging the question! Perhaps you should consider the following:

1 Corinthians 12:3. Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

Then of course there is the passage the kyredneck quoted!

 

[OldRegular]

The wages of sin is death. Until your sins are forgiven you are dead in sin and cannot be regenerated. The word regenerated means "alive again". Of course, you had to be alive once to be alive again, but that is another subject.

A person is regenerated or quickened when their sins are forgiven.

Col 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

Colossians 2:13 shows exactly how and when a person is quickened or regenerated, when their sins and trespasses are forgiven. But you must first believe to have your sins forgiven, we are justified by faith.

The scriptures show this over and over and over again, but Calvinists simply ignore it.

Winman, you said earlier:

You can't be regenerated while you are still dead in sin,

I responded:

Originally Posted by OldRegular
What are you talking about? If you are not dead in sin you would not need to be regenerated or "born again" as the Lord Jesus Christ said or "made alive" as the Apostle Paul said.

You have not answered the question I posed above.

 

[DHK]

You are assuming facts not in evidence! Either that or dodging the question! Perhaps you should consider the following:

1 Corinthians 12:3. Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

Then of course there is the passage the kyredneck quoted!

Here is the topic: salvation, Lordship salvation, salvation by faith.
Here is what the topic is not: predestination, the decrees of God, the gifts of the Holy Spirit, the future suffering of the disciples. These red herring topics you have introduced into this thread as proof-texts to support a doctrine that is not biblical. Why should I even bother with them.

For example the above text: 1Cor.12:3. What is Paul talking about?
Look at the context:
1 Corinthians 12:1 Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant.
--He is speaking of spiritual gifts; not salvation. The verse has nothing to do with this discussion. It doesn't need to be addressed. I think they call it: Non sequitor.
It is like having a discussion on cars and you introduce your cat. Huh???
That is what you have done here. There is no relevance. None!!
If you are going to debate at least use scripture that has relevance to the topic.

 

[Iconoclast]

You are assuming facts not in evidence! Either that or dodging the question! Perhaps you should consider the following:

1 Corinthians 12:3. Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.

Then of course there is the passage the kyredneck quoted!

It was a very fine question indeed.He cannot answer it,except he invent things as he has. Kyred offered an important verse that DHK again has no valid response to. In time as he reflects on the verses he will see it differently.:thumbs:

 

[preacher4truth]

God only changed his heart AFTER Paul responded to Christ and not before.
Faith came before the change. That is obvious and the lesson to be taken home from Paul's testimony in Acts 9.

You're theologically out on a limb as usual. Lydia's heart was also opened BEFORE as well -- Acts 16:14. Every truly regenerate born from above believer has had his or her heart opened first by the Spirit of God so that they can see. Every person is blinded to the gospel by Satan and it takes God to open their hearts and eyes, 2 Cor. 4:4. We only believe by the power of God (Eph. 1:19) not via the innate inherent faith error. God get's ALL the glory not just a portion of it.

 

[Yeshua1]

could you show 1 or 2 examples of anyone who says this

'If jesus is not Lord over ALL, then He is lord over none"

many also see its not JUST the desire to do good, to mean to obey and follow jesus, but MUST also do that, but the problem is how many works, how long, what if you fall down etc!

 

[Yeshua1]

Here is the topic: salvation, Lordship salvation, salvation by faith.
Here is what the topic is not: predestination, the decrees of God, the gifts of the Holy Spirit, the future suffering of the disciples. These red herring topics you have introduced into this thread as proof-texts to support a doctrine that is not biblical. Why should I even bother with them.

For example the above text: 1Cor.12:3. What is Paul talking about?
Look at the context:
1 Corinthians 12:1 Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant.
--He is speaking of spiritual gifts; not salvation. The verse has nothing to do with this discussion. It doesn't need to be addressed. I think they call it: Non sequitor.
It is like having a discussion on cars and you introduce your cat. Huh???
That is what you have done here. There is no relevance. None!!
If you are going to debate at least use scripture that has relevance to the topic.

we will continue to disagree on the logical sequence/order of salvation, because in the ultimate basis sense, we see it due to the election of God, while you by election due to our faith response, but lets focus on Lordship again, shall we>

 

[Yeshua1]

You're theologically out on a limb as usual. Lydia's heart was also opened BEFORE as well -- Acts 16:14. Every truly regenerate born from above believer has had his or her heart opened first by the Spirit of God so that they can see. Every person is blinded to the gospel by Satan and it takes God to open their hearts and eyes, 2 Cor. 4:4. We only believe by the power of God (Eph. 1:19) not via the innate inherent faith error. God get's ALL the glory not just a portion of it.

there is no inate faith residing in unsaved persons, as our very sin natures were ones that despised God, sought to break away, and ended up killing Christ!

So how can persons like that suddenly just decide for themselves"wow, been wrong about jesus all this time!"

 

[Iconoclast]

'If jesus is not Lord over ALL, then He is lord over none"

many also see its not JUST the desire to do good, to mean to obey and follow jesus, but MUST also do that, but the problem is how many works, how long, what if you fall down etc!

I do not see how this answers what you stated here;

Originally Posted by Yeshua1 View Post
Yes, but many in Lordship area sees us required to have finished saunctification status to be really saved!

I do not see how those statements say anything about having a finished sanctification....I do not think you can find anyone saying such a thing.

 

[convicted1]

What's this "if Jesus isn't Lord...yadda yadda yadda"? He's Lord whether we like it or not. He's even Lord over the.....gasp.....goats....they just don't know it, neither do they care...

 

[convicted1]

You're theologically out on a limb as usual. Lydia's heart was also opened BEFORE as well -- Acts 16:14. Every truly regenerate born from above believer has had his or her heart opened first by the Spirit of God so that they can see. Every person is blinded to the gospel by Satan and it takes God to open their hearts and eyes, 2 Cor. 4:4. We only believe by the power of God (Eph. 1:19) not via the innate inherent faith error. God get's ALL the glory not just a portion of it.

:jesus::godisgood::jesus::godisgood:

 

[Yeshua1]

I do not see how this answers what you stated here;




I do not see how those statements say anything about having a finished sanctification....I do not think you can find anyone saying such a thing.

Please refer to posting by james #61!

 

[DHK]

It was a very fine question indeed.He cannot answer it,except he invent things as he has. Kyred offered an important verse that DHK again has no valid response to. In time as he reflects on the verses he will see it differently.:thumbs:

I did answer it. You refused my answer. Why? You refuse to look at context.
Talk about cars and you enter the subject of cats. non sequitor.
You have done the same thing here. Totally ridiculous!!

Remember, the discussion we are supposed to be having is about salvation, particularly salvation by faith as related to Lordship salvation.

Here is your "proof text" in context:
1 Corinthians 12:1 Now concerning spiritual gifts, brethren, I would not have you ignorant.
2 Ye know that ye were Gentiles, carried away unto these dumb idols, even as ye were led.
3 Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost.
4 Now there are diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit.

1. He is speaking to "brethren" the saints of God.
2. He is speaking to them of the "spiritual gifts," not about salvation.
3. He is speaking to them about the abuse of spiritual gifts.
4. In verse 2 he relates them to their pagan past. What happened in their pagan past? They spoke with ecstatic tongues, and they also spoke in tongues not knowing what they were saying. In paganism speaking in tongues is often speaking through a demon (demonism or even demon-possession). Paul reminds them of these practices.

5. He reminds them that their are two kinds of "spirits"--one that will call Jesus Lord, and one that will curse Jesus.
There were some that were speaking in a foreign language cursing the name of Jesus because they were speaking in another language (through a demon) and not knowing what they were saying. They were actually cursing Jesus.
Corinth was a port city where people of many different ethnic backgrounds gathered. Some may have recognized what that person was saying. The complaint may have reached Paul. The point is obviously this: Not everyone that speaks in tongues has the God-given gift of "speaking in tongues." Some were doing it out of the flesh. Some were going back to their pagan past and relying on what they learned in paganism. Perhaps some were not even saved and still in the grips of paganism and speaking through demons.
How were they to tell.
First, as Paul further explains, everyone that spoke in tongues must have an interpreter.
Second, the one speaking must speak in a known language, and what they would say would be judged by the prophets (doctrinally sounnd).
Third, it would be spoken by the Spirit of God testifying that Christ is Lord.

BTW, any unsaved person can say that Christ is Lord. Catholics do it all the time. I used to do it as an unsaved Catholic. It isn't a test of salvation.
You are using the verse out of context.

Notice verse four. He goes on and starts listing the spiritual gifts.
This has nothing to do with salvation. Your "proof text" is just another red herring.