-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Is there biblical support for Lord ship salvation?
- Thread starter MB
- Start date
1) No support? Every time you see Jesus referred to as "our Lord" you see support.
2) See Acts 15:26, Acts 20:21, Romans 1:4, Romans 4:24, Romans 5:1 and so forth and so on.
3) Thus the issue is do lost individuals need to fully commit to Christ, not only to trust Him as Savior, but also to trust Him as Lord (boss) of their entire life, holding nothing back, like soils #2 and 3 of Matthew 13 didn't to their destruction.
Naturally those advocating unconditional election, precluded by James 2:5 and 2 Thessalonians 2:13, deny any need of commitment in order for God to credit their faith as righteousness.
It was a debate started in the 1970's between Zane Hodges and Grace Theological Seminary people (They believe that if you call Jesus 'deity' you are saved, and no changes need to happen in your life to give evidence of this faith) with Calvinists.
The seminal book was John MacArthur's "The gospel according to Jesus?" I read it in the 1990's and it made total sense. It is not an easy question. I suggest getting the book. If you cannot afford it, I'll but it for you.
https://www.amazon.com/Gospel-According-Jesus-Authentic-Faith/dp/1543604285
Would you agree with this Wiki explanation?
Somewhat. It says:
The lordship salvation controversy (also called lordship controversy) is a theological dispute regarding a soteriological question within Christianity on the relationship between faith and works. This debate has been notably present among some non-denominational and Evangelical churches in North America at least since the 1980s.[1][2]
The dispute opposes two soteriological visions: "whether it is necessary to accept Christ as Lord in order to have Him as one's Savior. The question then becomes, If someone accepts Christ as Savior without also explicitly accepting Him as Lord, is such a person truly saved?". That is, whether accepting Jesus Christ as saviour necessarily implies one must make a concrete commitment in life toward the Christ such as following a certain behaviour or moral system. The first opinion, that of the lordship salvation supporters, is, as Arthur W. Pink summarises: "No one can receive Christ as His Savior while he rejects Him as Lord. Therefore, those who have not bowed to Christ’s scepter and enthroned Him in their hearts and lives, and yet imagine that they are trusting Him as Savior, are deceived". The second opinion is that of those opposing lordship salvation: that one can accept Jesus Christ as saviour, but does not need to accept the Christ's lordship
Does it really make a difference, since Jesus is God and the holy spirit. All one in the same. There is only one God. There is only one savior.
MB
Definitions ??
1) Upon salvation Jesus is our Lord even if we do not realize
2) Jesus becomes our Lord when we fully understand the concept
3) Jesus becomes our Lord when we dedicate our life to Jesus
4) When you ask Jesus to be your Savior - you did not ask him to be your Lord
(from Piper)
5) (Jesus as the) Savior, (is also) Christ the Lord. . .
from 37)
any other definitions?
(IF so, I will add them on this list)
1) Upon salvation Jesus is our Lord even if we do not realize
2) Jesus becomes our Lord when we fully understand the concept
3) Jesus becomes our Lord when we dedicate our life to Jesus
4) When you ask Jesus to be your Savior - you did not ask him to be your Lord
(from Piper)
5) (Jesus as the) Savior, (is also) Christ the Lord. . .
from 37)
any other definitions?
(IF so, I will add them on this list)
Last edited:
The one at Wikipedia is good.
The dispute opposes two soteriological visions: "whether it is necessary to accept Christ as Lord in order to have Him as one's Savior. The question then becomes, If someone accepts Christ as Savior without also explicitly accepting Him as Lord, is such a person truly saved?". That is, whether accepting Jesus Christ as saviour necessarily implies one must make a concrete commitment in life toward the Christ such as following a certain behaviour or moral system. The first opinion, that of the lordship salvation supporters, is, as Arthur W. Pink summarises: "No one can receive Christ as His Savior while he rejects Him as Lord. Therefore, those who have not bowed to Christ’s scepter and enthroned Him in their hearts and lives, and yet imagine that they are trusting Him as Savior, are deceived". The second opinion is that of those opposing lordship salvation: that one can accept Jesus Christ as saviour, but does not need to accept the Christ's lordship
Be sure to get the SECOND EDITION!
It was the first edition that was the problem… MacA defined Lordship Salvation as works based. In his second edition he refines his wording, hiding its work-based foundation.
Zane Hodge had some wacky ideas as well.
I prefer to ask people to simply believe, leaving the Lordship tag for the Spirit to grow within a maturing believer.
Rob
37818
Well-Known Member
Luke 2:11, ". . . For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord. . . ."
Romans 14:9, ". . . For to this end Christ both died, and rose, and revived, that he might be Lord both of the dead and living. . . ."
Philippians 2:8-11, ". . . And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. . . ."
Early Christian’s we’re persecuted for not saying Caesar is Lord, they argued that Caesar is not Lord, Jesus is Lord
canadyjd
Well-Known Member
First, Jesus said not all that call Him “Lord” will enter the Kingdom. His answer to these people is He never knew them. Therefore, to be in a right relationship with God (salvation) is far more than mouthing the the word “Lord”. It requires Jesus to “know you” in that right relationship.
Second, 1 Corinthians 12:3 “no can say Jesus is Lord, but by the Spirit” is also referring to much more than mouthing the word “Lord”. For someone to come into that right relationship with God (salvation) where Jesus is, in fact, Lord of their life and “knows them” requires the work of God Holy Spirit. That will result 100% of the time in a transformed life.
Concerning “Lordship Salvation” my understanding from reading MacAuthor is the expectation of a profession of faith is a transformed life.
I cannot declare anyone “saved” or “unsaved”. However, If your life hasn’t been transformed, then you shouldn’t have assurance of your salvation. It could be you are saved but immature or it could mean you were never known by our Lord Jesus to be in that right relationship.
LS is a cautionary rebuke of “easy believism”, where people are declared “saved” if they say a prayer, repeat after me, etc… and then never show evidence God Holy Spirit indwelling.. I.e. a transformed life.
Peace to you
Mikey
Active Member
Savior But Not Lord?
In the New Testament salvation and discipleship are so closely related as to be indivisible. They are not identical, but as with Siamese twins they are joined by a tie which can be severed only at the price of death.
Yet they are being severed in evangelical circles today. In the working creed of the average Christian salvation is held to be immediate and automatic, while discipleship is thought to be something optional which the Christian may delay indefinitely or never accept at all.
It is not uncommon to hear Christian workers urging seekers to accept Christ now and leave moral and social questions to be decided later. The notion is that obedience and discipleship are unrelated to salvation. We may be saved by believing a historic fact about Jesus Christ (that He died for our sins and rose again) and applying this to our personal situation. The whole biblical concept of Lordship and obedience is completely absent from the mind of the seeker. He needs help, and Christ is the very one, even the only one, who can furnish it, so he takes Him as his personal Savior. The idea of His Lordship is completely ignored.
A. W. Tozer
In the New Testament salvation and discipleship are so closely related as to be indivisible. They are not identical, but as with Siamese twins they are joined by a tie which can be severed only at the price of death.
Yet they are being severed in evangelical circles today. In the working creed of the average Christian salvation is held to be immediate and automatic, while discipleship is thought to be something optional which the Christian may delay indefinitely or never accept at all.
It is not uncommon to hear Christian workers urging seekers to accept Christ now and leave moral and social questions to be decided later. The notion is that obedience and discipleship are unrelated to salvation. We may be saved by believing a historic fact about Jesus Christ (that He died for our sins and rose again) and applying this to our personal situation. The whole biblical concept of Lordship and obedience is completely absent from the mind of the seeker. He needs help, and Christ is the very one, even the only one, who can furnish it, so he takes Him as his personal Savior. The idea of His Lordship is completely ignored.
A. W. Tozer
So basically it is asking whether repentance is necessary?
I am not a fan of this…
because In the Lordship Salvation paradigm, regeneration and discipleship are so intertwined that one does not exist without the other. This is a concept
torn straight from the Puritans and we know well how they lived. I’m referring to the Salem witch hunts and the expulsions from their community etc.
because In the Lordship Salvation paradigm, regeneration and discipleship are so intertwined that one does not exist without the other. This is a concept
torn straight from the Puritans and we know well how they lived. I’m referring to the Salem witch hunts and the expulsions from their community etc.
Last edited:
Silverhair
Well-Known Member
I am not a calvinist but I have to ask, why would you not think Christ was your Lord if you were trusting in Him to save you? When a person freely trusts in Christ Jesus for their salvation they are saying that He is the only one that can save them. Christ did not need us to make Him Lord. He was, is and always will be Lord.