John MacArthur takes on some of Arminianism's teachings

[HungryInherit]

Post the links

I don't agree with everything Hodges wrote but he has opened my eyes on a lot of issues along with prayer and studying scripture. He's teaching on Hebrews and "possessing" the kingdom are some of the most hope filled messages I've ever heard.
http://www.faithalone.org/journal/1998i/Hodges.html

http://www.faithalone.org/journal/2000ii/Hodges_HowTo.pdf

 

[Winman]

I saw this pattern several times during my time at Bob Jones. People would get saved multiple times! No consistency in their theology. They would go out and sin and walk in the flesh and then think they need to get saved again. Some may have believed in the Fall from Grace lie.

I repented when I was five years old and may have been truly saved at age 17 (only God knows). I have sinned an walked in the flesh at times, but God has preserved me to walk in Holiness. Just because I have walked in the flesh at times did not make me not saved.

Oh, you are walking in holiness now? Not to be critical, but aren't you out of work right now? The scriptures say the man who does not provide for his family is worse than an infidel.

1 Tim 5:8 But if any provide not for his own, and specially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith, and is worse than an infidel.

Now, I'm not trying to criticize you, I am just trying to point out the dangers of going around telling folks they are not saved because they are not living up to your standard of holiness. Just remember, folks in glass houses should not throw stones.

As I said before, if we have to stop sinning to be saved, then we are all in a world of trouble.

 

[JonC]

I read the article but my mind mostly fixated on the errors of Hodges and I forgot what he said of MacArthur. Can you kindly summarize what he said of John? Thanks..

He didn’t say anything of either men, but his analysis of the debate offered cautions for both sides of the argument. Regarding lordship theists he noted a misrepresentation or misunderstanding of the opposing view. He highlighted the emphasis of regeneration over justification. MacArthur’s insistence of works as evidence of genuine salvation seems to be saying (at times) “where there are works, there is salvation,” which is problematic.

The bottom line was a suggestion that they refine their logic. “MacArthur has also been ambiguous in his discussion of the relationship of obedience to faith. He seems to alternate between saying that obedience is synonymous with faith, that it is a part of faith, and that it is an inevitable accompaniment of faith. Such statements do not contribute to precise understanding. Similarly, he seems to say both that repentance is part of faith and that it is an invariable companion of faith. This also introduces confusion.”

He notes that both sides are closer than they may realize and suggests that they need to lower the emotional tone of the rhetoric and engage in Christian debate/exploration of the issue. “This dispute has the potential for dividing congregations and the entire church of Jesus Christ, perhaps unnecessarily.”

Lastly, he notes that “it is one thing to be unaware, or at least not consciously aware, of the lordship of Christ, and another to be aware of it and reject it…it is quite possible that a great deal is implicit in a commitment to Jesus Christ.” Erickson sees this area in need of refinement.

 

[JonC]

Dont read what Zane Hodges believes and thats all one needs to do is say a prayer. Those that say a prayer but have not repented from sin lack fellowship with God and rewards in Heaven. What hogwash! By this logic many atheists, Mormons and Muslims will be heaven as they said the prayer when they were kids.

I'm not exactly sure where this is or was going. The "grace by faith" crowd like Hodges does not believe that you "say a prayer" and are saved.

Hodges thinks that you are saved by faith apart from works - works are a result of faith, but not necessary for salvation. He definitely does not believe that a true Christian can become "unsaved" - even if they desired such. I don't agree with a lot of his theology (the two types of redeemed, for example) - but you can't dismiss his views on lordship so easily. He does point out a difficulty in MacArthur's position (works as a requirement of salvation rather its result - sometimes, depending on the sermon Mac's giving).

I lean more towards MacArthur - except that I believe works are a product of genuine faith and not necessary for salvation itself (I don't think you can separate believing Christ as Savior AND Lord and I don't think that you can separate repentance from belief - they are two sides of the same coin). But some of MacArthur's comments are questionable or at least in need of some refinement.

 

[Yeshua1]

MacArthur is a good teacher and I also like Lutzer and Stanley. I was thinking less of works by pastors and more by theologians (I like Erickson and Grudem, for example – while their views bleed through, they are more objective than should be a pastor).

I like both of them also, as studied Erickson as a text book, Grudem for fun reading!

I do think DR acArthur rails against cheap grace from the perspective at times of one almost laking keeping the law required to keep saved, as he sems to think those holding to Free Grace views tell their members to not worry about living right, Giod still accepts and loves you, while at times he seems to indicate cannot be really sure of salvation, as not sure have done enough right enough and long enough!

 

[JonC]

He does get dogmatic about some things that are not definitively prescribed in Scripture – but all in all I like his sermons. I do feel that he is week in examining opposing beliefs – he misrepresents opposing theology or views - but he has a strong understanding of his own and articulates his position well.

 

[Van]

True believers will persevere in faith to the end.

This simply restates 1 Peter 1:3-5.

We are to examine ourselves at communion to see if we are of the faith, thus we are looking for evidence of a changed life. If our heart, our knowledge of our inner thoughts, attitudes, and attributes, does not condemn us, i.e. telling us we are a hypocrite or phony lip service Christian, then we can engage in communion in a worthy manner.

Easy Believeism, which claims a person is saved if they profess Christ, leaving out God who knows our hearts, must accept our wretched faith, and He when He does not, He does not cause the person to be spiritually born again and indwelt with the Holy Spirit. These, are the ones who will hear Jesus say, "I never knew you."

OTOH, it is fair to say striving to follow Christ is evidence of a changed life. We know we sin and fall short if we examine ourselves, and thus must pick up our cross and strive each day to avoid sin and demonstrate our love of Christ and all those he died for, which according to Arminianism includes everybody.

 

[Yeshua1]

This simply restates 1 Peter 1:3-5.

We are to examine ourselves at communion to see if we are of the faith, thus we are looking for evidence of a changed life. If our heart, our knowledge of our inner thoughts, attitudes, and attributes, does not condemn us, i.e. telling us we are a hypocrite or phony lip service Christian, then we can engage in communion in a worthy manner.

Easy Believeism, which claims a person is saved if they profess Christ, leaving out God who knows our hearts, must accept our wretched faith, and He when He does not, He does not cause the person to be spiritually born again and indwelt with the Holy Spirit. These, are the ones who will hear Jesus say, "I never knew you."

OTOH, it is fair to say striving to follow Christ is evidence of a changed life. We know we sin and fall short if we examine ourselves, and thus must pick up our cross and strive each day to avoid sin and demonstrate our love of Christ and all those he died for, which according to Arminianism includes everybody.

2 extremes to avoid are the ones that state "just come Jesus, accept Him in your heart" and trust that act, even if your life stsayed same as before, other is "MSUY have Him lord over all, or he is lord of none!"