Honest debate of Lordship Salvation

1. Yes, I see what you are saying--again, it has to do with what questions we ask of a text.

2. But the command to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ no doubt points to His Lordship, but not a support of LS---good perspective John.

 

1. Well, I want to commend you for contending earnestly for this aspect of the gospel message--the LS formula is cleary an oversell.

2. Forgive me for not reading your book but only the articles that you have offered.

3. JM remains a favorite of mine, but I think he has erred on the LS issue.

4. Well, I am glad that you stuck with it.

 

Thank you for the kind remark. If it were a mere “oversell” I would not be nearly as concerned. The problem is that the "oversell" over states and complicates the Gospel to the point where it frustrates grace and becomes a non-saving message.

If you ever get a notion to read it, wait for the revised and expanded version. It will be ready in early 2008. The on line debates have helped to fine tune several sections.

He has erred, and regrettably he has erred on the most vital doctrine in the Christian faith. I do reiterate, however, JM has made excellent contributions in other areas. None of which lessens the damage his LS teaching has done to the cause of Christ.

As the Lord wills.

Kind regards,


LM

 

Frankly, who cares what you will be happy to say about John MacArthur and his position.
I don't.

I've read Kenneth Gentry's book on Lordship salvation and the position presented is so theologically and exegetically sound, I am astounded by the numbers here on this board who are decrying this teaching.

Wake up, people.
Show some discernment.

Forget John MacArthur.
Forget anybody.

Read your Bibles.

Some of you are pastors and teachers.
Your level of accountablity to God is magnified by your leadership position.

I really fear for many of God's people in North America.

The perscuted church understands these things far better than any of us.

It will be them having to teach us.

You may disreagrd MacArthur, that's fine.
You may not disregard God's Word.

 

Amen brother Isaiah sister!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

It really has nothing to do with JM, but the heresy know as Lordship Salvation.

Do you hold to Messiahship Salvation, too? Lambship Salvation? Jesusship Salvation? Christus Salvation? Can you truly HAVE salvation without all of the above, then, if you hold to LS?

 

1. The reason why I said overselll as opposed to total distortion is because JM also says, "Biblical Christianity alone recognizes divine accomplishment--the work of Christ on humankind's behalf--as the sole basis of salvation" (Gospel According to Jesus, Revised & Expanded, p. 205).

2. Keep us posted here at BB.

3. But at several points I must agree with JM: "A concept of faith not producing surrender of the will corrupts the message of salvation" (p. 191).

 

I don't care what name is attached to the position.
It's biblical.

The term Lordship salvation was not coined by the Lordship Salvation side.
It was given to them by their opponents.

So call it whatever, the truthfulness of the position remains the same.

 

Do you hold to Messiahship Salvation, too? Lambship Salvation? Jesusship Salvation? Christus Salvation? Can you truly HAVE salvation without all of the above, then, if you hold to Christ's Lordship being a REQIREMENT for salvation?

If you think any requirement besides faith is necessary for salvation, you don't know what "biblical" salvation entails.

 

The faith of which you speak leads to Christ being Lord of your life.

 

*sigh*...as I have repeatedly said, I know that this is the case AFTER salvation. This is not a requirement FOR salvation.

 

Faith and Christ being Lord are not seperable. They are one in the same.

 

Exactly. And since sanctification is a process not an immediate result, we spend the rest of our Christian lives understanding the full implications of his mastery over us.

 

I don't think you even agree with that...

The faith of which you speak leads to Christ being Lord of your life.

 

...but if you don't understand and accept Christ's full "Lordship" prior to justification you are not saved? Huh?

 

If I didn't I would not have said it. The phrase "leads to" doesnt have to mean that it comes at a later time.

 

Are you serious? So when, then? (you imploy some strange grammar practices)

 

A believer is justified by faith.

I have no idea what you're arguing for, webdog.

 

If you don't know what I'm arguing, you probably don't truly know the LS position.

 

Yes, just assume I'm ignorant.
It's convenient for you.

Do you believe that there are false professors?