Honest debate of Lordship Salvation

[TCGreek]

Look at the context here. The outline of Peter's message is, "This is a great event prophesied in Joel (vv. 14-21). You killed the Christ (22-23), but He rose again (24-28), and God once more exalted Him to His previous position as Lord of all" (29-36). It's a parallel to that wonderful passage in Phil. 2:5-13. At that time it was necessary for the Jews to know the complete truth about Christ, including His deity and His crowning as King of all, Lord of all. He had laid that down to die for all mankind, and the Father had restored Him to the throne.

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

But Peter gives an invitation that does not include "Receive Christ as Lord," even if you say that v. 21 teaches that. Peter's invitation is simply repent and be baptized (a symbol of the Gospel, of course). The message states that Christ is once again restored as King of kings, then says trust Him as Savior! Be baptized in what name? The name of Jesus the Christ.

The Lordship of Christ is a very powerful message that can lead very easily into a salvation message, as many other themes in Scripture can! I say let's preach the Lordship of Christ--but just not make it part of the Gospel as given in 1 Cor. 15:1-8! I'm told to preach the Gospel to every Japanese, and I do so as best I can. Sometimes I use the doctrine of creation, sometimes I use the law, sometimes the Lordship of Christ (especially that He is above all idols and ancestors). Recently in Sunday School I asked a lost woman who comes to our church, "What do you believe?" and she was so shocked she wept! She couldn't think of anything she actually believed! God uses many truths to bring people to Him.

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.

 

[TCGreek]

TC:

Thanks for the transparency. Most people who read my book or blog and are predisposed to the LS message recoil at first look. They do not want to believe that JM or any of the men in that camp would believe and teach some of the things, such as you have noted above, that are clearly in their theology.

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

There are well-known men in my IFB circles who, like you, struggled with what I had presented, but many have since come back to me and acknowledged that they had missed some of what I have brought to the front.

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

I, for one, appreciate most of what MacArthur has contributed over the years. His work on the Charismatic movement and the church marketing issues are first rate. On the Gospel, however, it is my opinion he has checked out on Scripture.

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

It gives me no joy to have to deal with this, but I was drawn into it in 1988, and the Lord has seen fit to keep me involved.

If some of these critics would read my book they would find that I go out of my way to be gracious and charitable toward JM while I contend for the faith.

Kind regards,


Lou

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

 

[Lou Martuneac]

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

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.

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

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.

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

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.

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

As the Lord wills.

Kind regards,


LM

 

[Isaiah40:28]

canadyjd asked this question of webdog:

The moment JM publicly retracts and corrects his "overstatements," and states without hesitataion or apology that the free gift of God cannot be received through "full surrender, unconditional surrender, whole hearted commitment to leave sin and follow Jesus at all costs, a commitment to take up the cross, deny self and follow Him," I will be happy to re-examine his teaching on the Gospel.

And note that I put those things in quotes!

If he will publicly state that none of these things play any role whatsoever in and for the reception of eternal life; that calling for these things for the reception of eternal life frustrates grace (Gal. 2:21) I will be happy to say JM does not teach a works based message.


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.

Hebrews 3:12-14
12 See to it, brothers, that none of you has a sinful, unbelieving heart that turns away from the living God. 13 But encourage one another daily, as long as it is called Today, so that none of you may be hardened by sin's deceitfulness. 14 We have come to share in Christ if we hold firmly till the end the confidence we had at first.

 

[reformedbeliever]

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!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[webdog]

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.

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?

 

[TCGreek]

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.

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).

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.

2. Keep us posted here at BB.

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.

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).

 

[Isaiah40:28]

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?

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.

 

[webdog]

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.

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

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.

 

[webdog]

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.

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

*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.

 

[Isaiah40:28]

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

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.

 

[webdog]

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

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

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

 

[webdog]

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.

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

 

[2 Timothy2:1-4]

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

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

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.

 

[webdog]

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)

 

[Isaiah40:28]

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

A believer is justified by faith.

Romans 6:16-17,22
16 Don't you know that when you offer yourselves to someone to obey him as slaves, you are slaves to the one whom you obey—whether you are slaves to sin, which leads to death, or to obedience, which leads to righteousness? 17 But thanks be to God that, though you used to be slaves to sin, you wholeheartedly obeyed the form of teaching to which you were entrusted....
22 But now that you have been set free from sin and have become slaves to God, the benefit you reap leads to holiness, and the result is eternal life.

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

 

[webdog]

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

 

[Isaiah40:28]

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?