"Lordship Salvation" answers

[MB]

I have looked at this and how LS advocates misinterpret the passage to suit the Lordship interpretation of the Gospel. Here is John MacArthur from his original The Gospel According to Jesus:



Salvation is not conditioned on commitment or willingness, "to forsake everything," that is works salvation, and that frustrates grace.

MacArthur also wrote,

The Luke 14 passage is not dealing with salvation but instead the good works one might expect of the believer. “Giving up all his own possessions” or even the willingness to do so would not have brought the rich young man any nearer to eternal life than keeping the Law, getting baptized, or joining and financially supporting a local church. John MacArthur has misinterpreted the message that Jesus gave this young man.

For more read, The Rich Young Ruler


LM

It would seem that MacArthur believes in works for Salvation.

If we read the whole story it would seem that this is the way it is until we get to the disciples question. "Who then can be saved ?"
Christ said;
Mat 19:26 But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.
IMHO the lesson here is that man wouldn't be saved even if it were possible to buy it, because man wouldn't want to pay the price. There is no bargining for Salvation no matter what amount of value is place on it. The reason all things are possible with God is because it isn't up to the man, but God.
We simply aren't saved by anything we do but in stead are saved because of what Christ has already done. We are Saved by His faith and righteousness.
Gal 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

With out God we don't even know there is a God. It is God who has revealed HimSelf to us through His word. Again something that would not exsist with out God. It is His Spirit that convinces us of the truth and convicts us of our sins through the hearing of His word. It is God who gives us our faith and saves us by the faith of His Son. It is the righteousness of Christ that we wear, not our own. Our faith is only the hope that we will be saved by the Faith of Jesus Christ.

What we give up we give up because of our Love for God. Our possessions aren't so important anymore once we have Salvation.
MB

 

[skypair]

Just like no bride who truly loves her husband and has surrendered her single life in marriage to him entertains the thought of perhaps maintaining a boyfriend on the side. No way!
When a wife marries her husband, she pledges to remain faithful and fully intends to do so.
Future sins may occur and for a time, interrupt those intentions, of course, but on her wedding day she intends to give herself to that man alone, no other committment is desired.
That is the picture of a sinner embracing Christ.

Bless you, Isa 40:28. That is precisely right! Wifey and I are going through yet another adjustment -- retirement. We're learning what it's like to be on each other's last nerve all day long!! :laugh:

Our Christian lives are like that, too. New situations, new friends, etc. Always "anchoring" back to each other and God, of course.

skypair

 

[skypair]

Lou

I want you to consider something that came to me the other days -- there's a parallel between how the Catholic Church handles Augustinianism and how JM handles Calvinism. Do you see it?

The Catholic Church "bought off on" Augustinianism with this understanding -- that "regeneration" occurred at infant baptism. No problem with Augustine's "election" (whatever it was called), SACRAMENTS were all that was necessary to "prove" Christianity and salvation.

"Fast-forward" to the 20th century. Regeneration isn't infant baptism -- but it IS something just as "passive!" So JM is all concerned about our "behaviors" now that we claim to be regenerated [Catholic?]. Sure, JM looks to the Bible and Catholicism looks to TRADITION regarding what we ought to be doing. But it seem obvious to me -- they're both about outward appearances, not the condition of the heart.

NEITHER ARE REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT REGENERATION, LOU. If you told either that you believed on Christ, your profession wouldn't be enough, would it. Can anyone say "confirmation?"

What are your thoughts?

skypair

 

[Lou Martuneac]

Works Based & Man Centered

It would seem that MacArthur believes in works for Salvation.

If we read the whole story it would seem that this is the way it is until we get to the disciples question. "Who then can be saved ?"
Christ said;
Mat 19:26 But Jesus beheld them, and said unto them, With men this is impossible; but with God all things are possible.
IMHO the lesson here is that man wouldn't be saved even if it were possible to buy it, because man wouldn't want to pay the price. There is no bargining for Salvation no matter what amount of value is place on it. The reason all things are possible with God is because it isn't up to the man, but God.
We simply aren't saved by anything we do but in stead are saved because of what Christ has already done. We are Saved by His faith and righteousness.
Gal 2:16 Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

With out God we don't even know there is a God. It is God who has revealed HimSelf to us through His word. Again something that would not exsist with out God. It is His Spirit that convinces us of the truth and convicts us of our sins through the hearing of His word. It is God who gives us our faith and saves us by the faith of His Son. It is the righteousness of Christ that we wear, not our own. Our faith is only the hope that we will be saved by the Faith of Jesus Christ.

What we give up we give up because of our Love for God. Our possessions aren't so important anymore once we have Salvation.
MB

MB:

Lordship Salvation is a man-centered, works based message.

MacArthur and LS advocates cal on the lst to make a commitment to discipleship in exchnage for the reception of eternal life.

Here are some quotes by MacArthur, that have even some of his sympathizers concerned:

The following is a statement by MacArthur, from a chapter titled, “The Cost of Discipleship” from The Gospel According to Jesus:

“Let me say again unequivocally that Jesus’ summons to deny self and follow him was an invitation to salvation, not . . . a second step of faith following salvation. . . . Those who are not willing to lose their lives for Christ are not worthy of Him. . . . He wants disciples willing to forsake everything. This calls for full-scale self-denial--even willingness to die for His sake if necessary.”

From John MacArthur’s The Gospel According to Jesus this statement appears in both the original and revised version (pp. 218 & 252 respectively).

“Perhaps the most comprehensive invitation to salvation in (all) the epistles comes in James 4:7-10... The invitation in 4:7-10 is directed at those who are not saved...”

See Is This an Invitation to Salvation?

You might also like to read, The Relationship Between God's Grace & Lordship Legalism


LM

PS: I expect the MacArthur apologist canadyjd to cry misrepresentation even though MacArthur's statements are very clear. BTW, canadyjd has acknowledged he never read any one of the four LS books JM has written, yet he has made himself exprt on the theology of LS. Go figure?! I just ignore him.

 

[Lou Martuneac]

Lou

I want you to consider something that came to me the other days -- there's a parallel between how the Catholic Church handles Augustinianism and how JM handles Calvinism. Do you see it?

The Catholic Church "bought off on" Augustinianism with this understanding -- that "regeneration" occurred at infant baptism. No problem with Augustine's "election" (whatever it was called), SACRAMENTS were all that was necessary to "prove" Christianity and salvation.

"Fast-forward" to the 20th century. Regeneration isn't infant baptism -- but it IS something just as "passive!" So JM is all concerned about our "behaviors" now that we claim to be regenerated [Catholic?]. Sure, JM looks to the Bible and Catholicism looks to TRADITION regarding what we ought to be doing. But it seem obvious to me -- they're both about outward appearances, not the condition of the heart.

NEITHER ARE REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT REGENERATION, LOU. If you told either that you believed on Christ, your profession wouldn't be enough, would it. Can anyone say "confirmation?"

What are your thoughts?

skypair

Sky:

I have not looked too deeply at that aspect, but I have some notes on that theme from a theologian who has looked into the Catholic connection to LS.

I'll try to post those notes here tonight.


LM

 

[Lou Martuneac]

Ls & Rcc

Sky:

Here is a brief excerpt. I may be using some of this man's notes in the revised and expanded edition of my book.

The “tag along” doctrine often linked with Lordship Salvation, and with this erroneous definition of repentance, is that a change in someone’s life or character is the product of saving repentance. This concept ultimately has its roots in pre-Reformation Roman Catholic doctrine, and is predicated upon an erroneous definition of “grace,” which allowed the church to depart from the biblical definition of grace. This doctrine is called “sovereign grace” or “irresistible grace.” Under this definition, grace is redefined a sensual or ethereal substance that is infused into man to effect changes in his beliefs and behavior. Because it is “sovereign” or “irresistible,” it will necessarily and inevitably cause changes in a person’s behavior! The changes effected by sovereign grace as, sequentially as defined in the Roman Catholic treatise Summa Theologica by Thomas Aquinas, Part I of the Second part, Treatise on Grace, questions 109-114, are: 1) Detesting one’s sins; 2) the resolve to turn from one’s sins; 3) believing on Christ; 4) performing meritorious works by which one earns salvation, and 5) “persevering” in the faith and good works.

LM

 

[JustChristian]

Define "known sin". Is that sins that are in your recolection or sin you know are sin? This sounds like only some sin needs to be confessed in order to be saved, while other sins do not need to be.

This is what I'm talking about.

Mat 6:24 No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.

As "Lordship salvation" infers it means making Christ Lord of your life. I don't think many people would question just what that means specifically.

 

[skypair]

Here is a brief excerpt. I may be using some of this man's notes in the revised and expanded edition of my book.

Thanks, Lou. I think we can get even simpler than that and not lose our readers.

If "passive" or infant baptism is all the "proof" one has of regeneration, then one is left only 2 things: 1) You can only be saved once and Paul says it is impossible to be saved again "putting Christ to an open shame," and 2) so works become the means of securing salvation (whatever that salvation can be said to entail).

Basically, it is the secular world rather than the heart that judges one's salvation. And so among Catholics, we see sacraments. Among LS, we see biblical behavior (that's good) but if not, what is the "elect" to do? How deep in sin is enough to be lost? What should the church do with the sinner -- treat him/her as an outsider never saved or an insider under discipline but opening the whole church to the "devices of Satan?"

HYPOTHETICAL: I guess it is the "Luther" problem in that what if you allow 'em back and they end up to be "whacked out?" Luther went through some mental anquish. Was that a "device of Satan" or acceptable behavior from the great teacher?

skypair