Doctrinal Defintions of Faith

What does "making Christ Lord of our lives" mean? That phrase is just some pious sounding words, that mean absolutely nothing. I once heard Mike Cocoris, at the time the Sr. Pastor of The Church of the Open Door in Los Angeles say something to this effect, but unfortunately I'm going from 15 year ago memory (after two major surgeries, as well), and cannot be sure of each of the exact words. So I'll make this an alleged quote:

As he thundered the last sentence. He then added something to the effect of

I agree! What kind of unspoken ego trip does it take for one to claim that he can make the Creator of heaven and earth, the one who is and always has been King of kings and Lord of lords do or be anything? I really want to know. IMO, it has the effect of slapping God - the Father, The Holy Spirit, and the Lord Jesus Christ, in the face, by telling Him that his Lordship is not good enough, and I'm gonna' help you out a little bit more by "making You Lord of my life". (My emphases are given in the scriptures, below.)

And yet I hear people, time after time, who have never bothered to think any of this through, in so many words, tell the Lord about the same thing Johnny told the Devil, in a line in the Charlie Daniels' song of "The Devil went down to Georgia", where Johnny said to the Devil, "Well, you're pretty good, Ol' Son! But You sit down in that chair, right there, and let me show You how it's done!"

What insolence!!! What an insult!

IMO, that is sure is a far cry from

Instead that is much more like -

Ed

 

AMEN.

I don't see anything in there about Him needing, wanting, or even asking our permission.

 

AMEN! to that, as well!

Ed

 

Sorry, I can't help you out, here, for I have not the first clue as to whom you are referring.

Ed

 

Absolutely correct!

Ed

 

Amy.G, I wish you would read what I wrote about "is Jesus Lord of our life" a coouple fo posts ago, adn think about what I said, in accordance with the Scriptures I posted, here.

Thanks,

Ed

 

I agree that we do not make Jesus Lord of our lives. I never made any statement that we do. Jesus becomes Lord of our lives by His will, not ours.

All I've ever said was that our works (behavior, thoughts, desires) are evidence of our faith in Jesus as our Savior. We will have a changed life after conversion.

I don't understand why this is a problem for you. This is the same thing James speaks of.


Jam 1:18 In the exercise of His will He brought us forth by the word of truth, so that we would be a kind of first fruits among His creatures.


Jam 2:14 What use is it, my brethren, if someone says he has faith but he has no works? Can that faith save him?

 

I take that for granted. I don't see the problem, either.

 

Sorry, I don't agree with most of this post. In the first place, the Amplified here is 'commentating', by attempting to re-define "believe" (pisteuO) and not 'rendering" what the text is actually saying, IMO. And the Greek language simply does not say this, at all, here. I have just pulled up and read all the 21 versions of this verse in English, on Bible gateway (including the Amplified). These versions included some rather blatant paraphrases. Yet not one of them is even remotely close to being in the same time zone with the Amplified, here, but all are consistent with the NKJV, which is the version I use. Nor are any of the 5 Greek versions that I have any access to - none of the three on Bible Gateway (The WHNU, TR1550, TR1894 are the three on Bible gateway.), nor the Aland/Black UBS or the Hodges/Farstad MT (these last two which I hold in my hot little paws), any closer, either. And there is no real dispute as to the Greek wording, either, as far as I can tell.

The phrase "intellectual belief" is likewise a pejorative attempt by some to "strip" "believe" of its inherent meaning, for the purpose of 'inserting' new content here, as well. Believe and/or faith occur well over 200 times in the NT. John uses the word 'believe' 99 times in his gospel, alone. It is not some slap-dash word devoid of meaning, either in our lives or the Bible. The Bible knows nothing of additional 'baggage' attached to the meaning of believe. It knows nothing of "head knowledge", "head faith", "intellectual belief" or any such thing such as "really and truly, genuinely believe" or any such nonsense. It knows nothing of "false faith", for another, for none of the above phrases are ever to be found in Scripture. It does speak of 'believe' and 'believe not' (disbelieve), but as far as I can tell, that is the only two categories the Bbile talks of. It does speak of 'what' and "whom" one believes, as some have noted. (Jas. 2) Merely believeing "there is a god", or even "one god" doesn't cut it, as James notes. But "believe in/on the Lord Jesus Christ" in accordance with His sacrificial work, is exactly and precisely what is necessary for salvation. (John 3, John 5:24; Eph. 2:5-9; Rom. 4, etc.)

One should never overlook that James is talking about how we 'show' our faith "You see then", "show me your faith", "A man may say", etc. The two examples given of Abraham and Rahab, both show this, as well. Abraham believe in the Lord, and it was imputed to him for righteousness, by God, apart from any works he did. (Gen. 15:6; Rom. 4:3, 17; Gal. 3:6) Yet "before man", this was not "fulfilled" until some 20-25 years later with the 'sacrifice' of Isaac on Mt. Moriah. (Jas. 2:23) Rahab? the Harlot? Great testimony, hunh? It doesn't ever say Rahab "used to be", or was a "former" harlot, that I find, in Scripture. Check it out! Rahab was already a believer (Josh. 2:9-11), hence already justified before God (Rom. 4:3-5), but showed this faith to the spies, by hiding them, and then letting them down over the wall. (Heb. 11: 30-31; Jas. 2:24-26) "You see" when? When Rahab hid the spies. "God saw" when? When Rahab believed in the LORD, just as had Abraham, many years before. It just did not take 20-25 years before Rahab showed her faith with "You see", unlike Abraham, many centuries before.

Yes, Lordship Salvation is the antithesis of the misnomer of "free grace", for grace that is not "free", is not grace, at all, but some other amalgamated monstrosity, as is Lordship Salvation, FTR. The problem comes by confusing and confuting salvation, a free gift of grace (Rom. 5:10-21; Eph. 2:5-9), with discipleship or 'sanctification', which is not free, at all, but can and maybe will cost you everything, including your health (Job, Paul), your family (Job), and even your very life (Stephen, Abel, James the Great).

"Live like the Devil?" Just another confusing pejorative phrase of 'religiosity', IMO. How does the Devil live? Let's see. He appears in the presence of God, and has "the run of the earth"; (Job. 1:6-7; 2:1-2) he has great beauty; (Gen. 3:1; Ezek. 28:12b-17a) he is a prosecuting attorney; (Job. 1:8-11; 2:3-6; Rev. 12:10) he appears as an angel of light; (II Cor. 11:14) he has a lot of folks working for him; (II Cor. 11: 12-15) and he is called the god of this world; (II Cor. 4:4) conversed face to face with Jesus (Matt. 4:1-10; Lk. 4:1-13) and who has all the kingdoms of the world at his disposal. (Lk. 4:5-6; Matt. 4:8-9)

Finally, "May I say" that the only thing we are guaranteed to have/do of your list is the relationship with God. (Jn. 1:8-13) The rest take effort on our part, as well as the aid of God. David, a saved man (Rom. 4:4-8), did not have this joy of his salvation, at the time he penned this Psalm, after the affair with 'Whats-her-name?', and the subsequent murder of Uriah, but needed it restored (Ps. 51:12), and prayed for that to happen. We should walk in good works (Eph. 2:10; Jas. 2:26), once we are created in Christ Jesus, but it doesn't say this is automatic. We are commanded to walk in the Spirit, meaning it is not automatic, either (Gal. 5:1- 6:5), and if we do, we then, and only then, can have the fruit of the Spirit. (Gal. 5:16-26)

G'nite, all. Big day tomorrow, Lord willing.

Ed

 

Wow. Do you just like to argue or do you have a personal problem with me?
Have you read anything I've said??
I have said repeatedly that we are saved by grace through faith and that ALONE! Why do you keep implying I said otherwise with the huge sermons?
But, if you believe that saved, Spirit indwelt people live their entire lives like the world, with no change whatsoever in their thoughts, desires and behaviors then I think you are totally wrong. I will ask you as I did Alex, where is the scripture that tells us that? I have posted scripture after scripture that shows when God saves us we become new and different. That's what I see in scripture, not to mention just plain common sense.
What does it mean when God says He'll give you a new heart? Does it mean that the new heart will be exactly like the old stony one?
Our good works do not save us. But they are evidence of the new heart. Do we do good works 100% of the time? No. It is possible to go in and out of our relationship with God, but not in and out of salvation. You and others keep saying that we can be saved and yet have no change whatsoever for our entire lives. Where do you get that? Not from the Bible, maybe from personal experience?


Phl 1:6 being confident of this very thing, that He who has begun a good work in you will complete it until the day of Jesus Christ; (NKJV)

This is what I believe. You believe what you believe. I'm done with this discussion.

 

Compare this to Paul's first letter to the Corinthians.

You can count Paul and myself as those who don't believe in ME...and stil believe a person can show no outward signs. I lived this very lifestyle suppressing the Holy Spirit for many years.

 

'Amen! It's nice to agree again

However, this is the opposite of Lordship Salvation, that which you (and BaptistBeliever) were arguing for earlier.

Also...what is the litmus test for how long this change needs to last? An hour? A day? Five years? The thief on the cross had no time, and I believe I will fellowship with him some day.

 

If Lordship Salvation teaches that one must make an upfront commitment to Christ, then I totally disagree with it. What I was disagreeing with early in this discussion was that John MacArthur taught that. I don't believe he teaches that a person is saved in any other way than faith alone. That was the problem I was addressing.

There is no litmus test that I'm aware of. What I've been saying all along is that there will be change. I never put any time limits or expiration dates on it. The theif on the cross was changed as is evident by the fact that one minute he was ridiculing Christ and the next he wanted Him to remember him when He came into his kingdom. He obviously had no time to do any good works. The same applies to a person who believes on their deathbed. But a change in heart took place nonetheless.
Regarding your own experience, I already stated that we can go out of fellowship with God, without losing salvation of course. But God will bring us back as He did with you. He disciplines us.

Paul says we are to examine ourselves. We are not to examine others. This is personal between you and God.
We must ask ourselves some tough questions. We must work out our own salvation.
I think church members should be reminded of this from time to time because there are people who are decieved into thinking they are saved because they said the "prayer" or because they've always attended church or because they are a "good" person.
This is what I think Lordship Salvation is about. You have a different view. I don't know who's right, but I hope I've at least made my own personal belief understandable.

 

Hebrews 12:8 "But if you are without discipline, of which all have become partakers, then you are illegitimate children and not sons."

Isn't the author of Hebrews telling them that some of them who are claiming to be Christians, are in fact not really Christians. They are "illegitimate".


The way they can tell is that they are either walking in sin and God is not disciplining them, or they are disregarding the "training" that God has given to all Christians?

peace to youraying:

 

What "different view" do I have I only stated what Lordship Salvation is. If you disagree with LS, and I disagree with LS...what's different about my view of it?

 

No, you stated what someone who opposes LS says. To get an accurate view you need to find some quotes by someone who teaches LS. I posted a quote by John MacArthur saying that LS does not teach salvation by an upfront commitment to Christ. You didn't agree with that and said that wasn't "really" what he teaches. So there is the difference in our views. You think LS teaches an upfront commitment to Christ to be saved. I say it doesn't teach that, at least by what JM said.
Feel free to post quotes by those who actually teach LS and we'll compare that to the info from the opposing side.

 

Amy, the links I provided earlier (I can't remember if it was this thread or the other thread discussing LS) had direct quotes from Macarthurs book...direct quotes from him. It's apparent you did not read them.

There were some earlier in this thread, to be exact.
http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=1132085&postcount=12

 

I apologize WD. I missed that quote. I don't agree with that. I hope I have made it clear though that I believe with my whole heart that we are saved by grace through faith and that alone. The commitment comes afterward as the beginning of our discipleship and I believe it comes naturally as a result of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. Not that we will always be devoted to God as sometimes we fall into sin and fall away from God, but He will always bring us back to Him if we are truly His children.
After reading that quote, I do not agree with LS. I could have saved us both a lot of trouble if I had just read that to begin with.

 

:laugh: No problem, Amy. I kind of thought you didn't agree with LS, but wanted you to be clear exactly the commitment LS required in exchange for salvation.