Featured Lordship Salvation Defended

As I have stated before I like MacArthur's definition of Lordship Salvation as defined in the link. And I see nothing indicating a "Works Salvation" regardless of what some have stated!

 

As I mentioned in an early post the WILLINGNESS to give up all for Christ must be part of true conversion, although in the post conversion life that is certainly not reality.

Recognition of him as "Lord" is one thing but the actual practice in the post conversion life is quite another thing. Colossians 2:6 instructs HOW it is to occur, but does not guarantee us that it does occur at all times in the Christian life.

 

MacArthur and Scripture concede that the Christian walk is not without failure. From the link provided by Icon:

Jesus Christ tells us: Matthew 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.

I believe that passage, properly interpreted, teaches that Salvation is Lordship Salvation! I doubt that anyone serves God continuously but that service to Him should prevail. I believe that is what God through the Apostle Paul is teaching us in Romans 7!

The Apostle John tells us:

John 1:8-2:6
8. If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.
9. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
10. If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.
1. My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:
2. And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.
3. And hereby we do know that we know him, if we keep his commandments.
4. He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
5. But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.
6. He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

 

I realize that! I have read many of his books, but that is not the point. Admission that we fail does not explain the revealed life of Lot in contrast to Abraham and Abraham is set forth as the example of faith whereas Lot is said to be a saved person.

That is true! But the saved person does serve mammon as characteristicaly as he does God and his characteristic ups and downs prove that.

If all Christians lived righteous characteristic lives there would be no difference in spiritual growth and such drastic difference between an Abraham and a Lot.

The contrast here is between black (lost) and white (saved) but not between the wide spectrum of extremely weak versus extremely strong Christians as manifested in their lives.

The lost man can do NO RIGHTEOUSNESS in God's sight, and not all that man sees as righteous is really righteous. We "ought to" walk as he walked but NONE do and among saints the differences IN FAILURE is extreme.

 

If faith without works is dead, then recognizing Jesus as Lord is more than a mental acknowledgment of a fact of Jesus lordship but rather a practice of a very important truth.

 

James is describing a profession of faith before men that is WITHOUT WORKS before the eyes of men.

He is not addressing the extreme differences in manifest works as in progressive sanctification.

 

James did not say that the man is dead, rather that his faith is dead.

And dead doesn't mean nonexistent, dead means useless.

Dead battery, dead body, dead electrical circuit, all very much existing, but useless. In acoustics, wood is resonantly "dead", meaning it does not resonate at a particular frequency. Wood is useless as a resonator.

Next. To context. That faith, the one without works, is useless when we stand to be judged by the law of liberty (James 2:12, 3:1). Rewards, determined by works. Paul spoke of the same in 1Cor 3.

Some will have all their works burned up, and will stand at the Bema with faith only. His faith, by itself will be useless at that judgment. But he himself will be saved as one escaping a fire

 

You are wrong. John is writing to believers as shown clearly in verses 2:1-6!

 

Really??? B/c James asked the question "can that kind of dead faith w/ no works save? Not a chance!" Sounds like it is more than a profession of faith (whatever that is). It sounds like it is a description of what authentic faith in Jesus looks like.

Not that this is the point of my post above. Col. 2:6-7 nails you. You can jump over your exegetical hurdles and applying your theological proclivities all you want. But it says what it says. Believe in Jesus as Lord. That, like repentance, has action bound up with it b/c a belief like that will require a change of life. And then you grow.

 

DHK

In response to Kyreds fine post you said this;

There are many more possibilites than this, but let's see your concerns-

There is no such thing as regenerated ,unsaved people....this makes no sense.

If a person loses his professed salvation that would be good, because any professed salvation that can be lost, should be lost as soon as possible, as it is not God's salvation to start with.
Then Jesus can actually save the person.

Biblical salvation is all of grace. Biblical salvation contains good works that are ordained for us to walk in. We are enabled by God to do those good works,....we work as God works in us.
If this is not happening in your life....You are not God's child.


4

On the contrary, a correct understanding of biblical salvation is what The article laid out giving many basic specifics.

DHK....I asked Y1 but he disappeared so I will ask you and perhaps Biblicist,,

what are we saved from?:thumbs::thumbs:

 

There is a vast difference between a profession of faith WITHOUT works and profession of faith ranging from LITTLE to GREAT manifestation of works.

Really?

Col. 2:6 As ye have therefore received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk ye in him:
7 Rooted and built up in him, and stablished in the faith, as ye have been taught, abounding therein with thanksgiving.[/QUOTE]


Verse six tells what we should do and how to do it not that it is always true.

Verse seven tells us what our goal should be not what it is.

 

The double accusative likely means it should be taken as "received Christ Jesus as Lord" (as the NET renders it). And v. 6 isn't a command but a reality of a past act. The command comes at the end of v. 6. V. 7 explains what that command looks like. So again, it nails you. Receive Jesus as Lord, then grow.

 

Some of the objectors are confusing justification with sanctification. Many are looking for excuses to sin as if sin is their friend and not a mortal enemy.

This in part is due to the antinomian spirit in evangelical churches that teach the carnal Christian heresy......no fruit in the life...no problem!

They pull out of context the...we are not under law ,but under grace passage as a get out of hell free card and ignore holiness in the life as a command.

So they encourage that old goat they meet saying....so you have not been out to church in 29 yrs, since you walked the aisle at age 6..

Do not worry about that, it is a new year and who knows, maybe you might make it out one day soon.
We have a special bowling night on tues. if you can make it.

 

You have just nailed yourself. If it is to be translated as you claim (which I deny) "receive as Lord, then grow" then he is writing professed Christians who never received him as Lord.

Furthermore, I have never denied that one receives him as "Lord" as that is who He is and He can't be received any other way. Nor have I ever denied that one must have the intent upon reception of complete submission and willing to give up all for Christ. That has never been a issue with me. What I contest is the latter part of the verse "then grow" as that is not a statement of fact but a command and like all commands Christians break them every day.

 

FTR, I don’t hold to Lordship Salvation doctrine. I’ve never professed to be His disciple nor considered myself worthy to be called His disciple. I simply love the Lord, I love His people, and I love His word.

To me, as ‘LORD’, Christ is Kurios, Yahweh of the OT revealed. He has equipped each of His own, OT & NT, with a heart to follow His simple expectations as laid out in passages such as Mic 6:8, which constitutes ‘holding fast’ and ‘continuing’ within His simple religion. LS doctrine complicates and makes difficult the simplicity that we have in Christ Jesus.

The fact is we were all at some point regenerate and ‘unsaved’. We’re given several examples of it in the scriptures. ‘Saved’ is NOT synonymous with the heavenly birth.

DHK, yes, a person can lose their temporal deliverance but never their eternal deliverance as per the example of 1 Cor 5:5.

Sigh, DHK, if we sow to the flesh we shall of the flesh reap ___________. If we sow to the Spirit we shall of the Spirit reap __________. [the quality of]

So Icon, I think I’ve asked you this before, do you Lordshippers have appointed fruit inspectors to determine if one is a child of God or not?

DHK, what do you do with those ‘hold fast’ and ‘continue’ passages in post 109? Ignore them?

We were eternally delivered from hell when our names were written in heaven.

We are temporally delivered from our former vain manner of life through obedience to the gospel.

 

You never defended anything, and you have no idea where I stand. If you look through the posts, you will see I never once said either way, just asked you to defend your stance. You have NOT yet done that, I even told you how to do it, yet you still haven't.

 

Personally I don't accept the precept of "making Jesus the Lord of my life" (though He is indeed) because that puts the onus upon me to perform in a manner worthy of this boast (of which BTW I would have failed miserably and more than once during my 52 year walk with Christ).

I also accept the title of "easy believism" because I indeed find believing in Christ one of the easiest things I know how to do. Its like breathing, its effortless but beyond that it is (or has become) the joy of my life.


HankD

 

You pretty much speak my mind here. And like you, trusting in Christ has always been easy for me; from my earliest memories He has always been 'my hero', but I grew up going to church. And I can't imagine life without Him. Nothing has ever given me the fulfillment I find in worshiping Him and marveling in His word.

 

That depends on "what type of Calvinist" you are.
"savedbymercy" believes you are regenerated in heaven before the foundation of world, but saved on earth.
I believe that kyredneck also believes that there can be a large gap between regeneration and salvation.
You may not believe that but there are many Calvinists that do. If that premise is true, then there are many regenerated unsaved people running around this earth--an absurdity.

So you believe in a "works based salvation" as well.
I never mentioned anything about "any professed salvation."
The verses posted by kyredeneck had to do with "continuing." What if the person does not continue.
Here is the one place in the NT where Jesus used the word "continue."

John 8:31 Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed;
The next verse says:
John 8:32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.
Continuing was a result of salvation not a condition of salvation. So it is used the same way throughout the NT. A believer continues. It is a result not a condition. LS makes it a condition.
Therefore you have a works-based salvation.

If Biblical salvation demands good works in order to be saved it is not of grace at all. Remember we are speaking of salvation not sanctification. Sanctification is not involved in salvation. Why conflate the two? That is the mistake of LS. If works is involved in salvation then it is of works and not of grace.

When Christ died on the cross his blood, his sacrifice was sufficient to pay the penalty for all our sins. By adding "good works" you deny the sufficiency of that sacrifice to pay the penalty for our sins. You believe we have to pay part of the penalty ourselves. That is what LS teaches.
As Hank expressed, and you apparently agreed to:

Works come after salvation; are not a requirement of salvation.
LS makes them a requirement of salvation.
For by grace are ye saved by faith not of works.