John MacArthur did not invent Lordship Salvation

[evangelist6589]

Many these days think that Mac invented LS and popularized it in 1988. But this is false as Jesus is the one that invented it, but after him many others have followed his teachings. I read a book from 1982 and it has LS all over it.

Also if you read the book Slave by Mac he has an appendix in the back and has voices from Church history so apparently church fathers agreed with LS.

 

[DHK]

Many these days think that Mac invented LS and popularized it in 1988. But this is false as Jesus is the one that invented it, but after him many others have followed his teachings. I read a book from 1982 and it has LS all over it.

Also if you read the book Slave by Mac he has an appendix in the back and has voices from Church history so apparently church fathers agreed with LS.

The "lordship salvation" controversy (also "Lordship Controversy") is a theological dispute regarding key soteriological questions within Evangelical Protestantism, involving some non-denominational and Evangelical churches in North America since at least the 1980s.

Given the accepting-as phraseology of the popular GNB of Colossians 2:6, and the receiving-as phraseology in the widely popular NIV of Colossians 2:6, an exegesis based on the NIV, for example, offered an explanation of what manner of receiving this was.John F. MacArthur Jr, in turn, taught that such a receiving was both non-passive toward Christ and actively submissive to Christ, offering this as a way of understanding the English idiom, of what receiving a person "as" Lord, really means.

http://www.cyclopaedia.fr/wiki/Lordship_salvation_controversy

The so-called controversy can date right back to Pink if one so desires to take it that far. But that is not the issue. MacArthur basically redefined what Lordship salvation is. He made it a works salvation. He becomes the author of what the modern definition, a we know it is. We speak of "Lordship Salvation" today in the sense that MacArthur defined it, and therefore MacArthur "invented" (as you say) the doctrine.

 

[Yeshua1]

http://www.cyclopaedia.fr/wiki/Lordship_salvation_controversy

The so-called controversy can date right back to Pink if one so desires to take it that far. But that is not the issue. MacArthur basically redefined what Lordship salvation is. He made it a works salvation. He becomes the author of what the modern definition, a we know it is. We speak of "Lordship Salvation" today in the sense that MacArthur defined it, and therefore MacArthur "invented" (as you say) the doctrine.

That is indeed correct, for Scofield did not invent Dispy theology, but most would see him as being THE chief one to get what it means from!

 

[evangelist6589]

That is indeed correct, for Scofield did not invent Dispy theology, but most would see him as being THE chief one to get what it means from!

Is that a fact? If so I did not know this. Thanks..

 

[preacher4truth]

You're correct, John MacArthur Jr, contemporary to each of us here has expounded upon this truth. LS is truth, but is rejected, attacked and misunderstood by many. The same also attack other Biblical truths...but...make claims.

Unfortunately many are indoctrinated to C. G. Finneyism and therefore buy into his false doctrine that attack this truth.

Therefore we see many 'Baptist' churches, preachers, laymen, missionairies, ex-missionairies, 'moderators' attack truth.

Why?

They're too busy assuring people who have 'repeated a couple lines' they're guaranteed heaven.

'Clear all your sins.
Get born again,
Just repeat a couple lines,
yeahhhhhhhhhhhh.'

AIC preached the same message.

May the curse of easy believism be damned, but at the same time it has been Sovereignly allowed. raying:

 

[DHK]

You're correct, John MacArthur Jr, contemporary to each of us here has expounded upon this truth. LS is truth, but is rejected, attacked and misunderstood by many. The same also attack other Biblical truths...but...make claims.

Unfortunately many are indoctrinated to C. G. Finneyism and therefore buy into his false doctrine that attack this truth.

Therefore we see many 'Baptist' churches, preachers, laymen, missionairies, ex-missionairies, 'moderators' attack truth.

Why?

They're too busy assuring people who have 'repeated a couple lines' they're guaranteed heaven.

'Clear all your sins.
Get born again,
Just repeat a couple lines,
yeahhhhhhhhhhhh.'

AIC preached the same message.

May the curse of easy believism be damned, but at the same time it has been Sovereignly allowed. raying:

That is why the error of LS is spreading. It needs to be exposed for what it is: error. It is a reaction to easy-believism; that is true. But many of us have never preached or practiced easy-believism, but rather have condemned the theology of Finney as heresy, and still condemn the theology of LS. There is a middle ground. The pendulum of MacArthur has swung too far; it is extreme. It is so extreme that it has entered into a works based salvation.

Salvation is by grace through faith. Through LS he has taken salvation off of those two very important moorings. What every happened to the great reformation doctrines:
sola gratia,
sola fide,
Don't they exist any longer?

 

[preacher4truth]

That is why the error of LS is spreading.

Not quite, LS has been under attack via the easy believism proponents who've preached this new doctrine for some 150 years plus.

Yes, truth has been under attack and we have missionairies, preachers, laymen attacking biblical truth. They're hoodwinked into believing, preaching easy-believism, and being sent abroad to do so, as if they are of the truth.

The thing is this -- they're only preaching a Finneyism gospel that is quite young and laden with error.

To top it off they assure many they're guaranteed heaven if they repeat some lines. It all sounds good to their 'sending church's' as they garner more financial support.

 

[DHK]

Not quite, LS has been under attack via the easy believism proponents who've preached this new doctrine for some 150 years plus.

Yes, truth has been under attack and we have missionairies, preachers, laymen attacking biblical truth. They're hoodwinked into believing, preaching easy-believism, and being sent abroad to do so, as if they are of the truth.

The thing is this -- they're only preaching a Finneyism gospel that is quite young and laden with error.

To top it off they assure many they're guaranteed heaven if they repeat some lines. It all sounds good to their 'sending church's' as they garner more financial support.

An easy-believism type of gospel was popularized by Jack Hyles and his followers and church/college. It has spread quickly. It has done its damage. Not every one is a fan of Hyles and his methodology.

The reaction against such was MacArthur who came out with some extreme statements such as total submission was necessary for salvation. That is wrong. It isn't. It is nowhere taught in the Bible. I challenge you to give one verse of Scripture that says total submission is necessary for salvation, and yet he does turning the grace of God into vile works. It is wrong.
Salvation is always to be received as a gift, never to be worked for by submitting and obeying. Obedience comes after salvation, not before.

 

[Yeshua1]

Not quite, LS has been under attack via the easy believism proponents who've preached this new doctrine for some 150 years plus.

Yes, truth has been under attack and we have missionairies, preachers, laymen attacking biblical truth. They're hoodwinked into believing, preaching easy-believism, and being sent abroad to do so, as if they are of the truth.

The thing is this -- they're only preaching a Finneyism gospel that is quite young and laden with error.

To top it off they assure many they're guaranteed heaven if they repeat some lines. It all sounds good to their 'sending church's' as they garner more financial support.

Thoseng to LS theology have rightly attacked the concept that one can get saved and yet have no change have a real salvation!eir lives after that, yet they do promote a works based theology in the sense have to have enough "right works" for long enough period of time in order to have a real salvation!

 

[Yeshua1]

An easy-believism type of gospel was popularized by Jack Hyles and his followers and church/college. It has spread quickly. It has done its damage. Not every one is a fan of Hyles and his methodology.

The reaction against such was MacArthur who came out with some extreme statements such as total submission was necessary for salvation. That is wrong. It isn't. It is nowhere taught in the Bible. I challenge you to give one verse of Scripture that says total submission is necessary for salvation, and yet he does turning the grace of God into vile works. It is wrong.
Salvation is always to be received as a gift, never to be worked for by submitting and obeying. Obedience comes after salvation, not before.

If tghhe law, not by faith in jesus alone!ey do not watch it, those holding to an extreme form of LS seem to come close to being the pharisees in our ranks, meaning well, but having sinners saved by obeying and keeping the Law, and not by faith in Jesus alone!

 

[Yeshua1]

That is why the error of LS is spreading. It needs to be exposed for what it is: error. It is a reaction to easy-believism; that is true. But many of us have never preached or practiced easy-believism, but rather have condemned the theology of Finney as heresy, and still condemn the theology of LS. There is a middle ground. The pendulum of MacArthur has swung too far; it is extreme. It is so extreme that it has entered into a works based salvation.

Salvation is by grace through faith. Through LS he has taken salvation off of those two very important moorings. What every happened to the great reformation doctrines:
sola gratia,
sola fide,
Don't they exist any longer?

irony here is thouse who push the hardest for getting salvation explained the LS way are also those coming from the traditions of the reformers, who clearly held to saved by grace alone, faith alone!