Lordship Salvation

[DHK]

But we were made alive and given the free gift of eternal life apart from obedience. Man is totally passive in the birth from above.

Man is not totally passive. That would lead to a teaching of universalism.
A much better definition of regeneration is given by Ryrie:

“God regenerates (John 1:13) according to His will (James 1:18) through the sovereign work of the Holy Spirit (John 3:5) when a person believes (John 1:12) the gospel as revealed in the Word of God (1 Peter 1:23).”
― Charles C. Ryrie, The Holy Spirit

 

[jbh28]

The difference is this: Non-lordship salvation teaches that we should obey Jesus BECAUSE we are saved, where Lordship Salvation teaches you should obey Jesus TO be saved.

again, false. You don't obey to get saved. LS teaches repentance and because we have repented we will obey. EDIT: do you have any context on the JM quote? I'm curious on his quote. EDIT 2: The quote was updated

Don’t believe anyone who says it’s easy to become a Christian. Salvation for sinners cost God His own Son; it cost God’s Son His life, and it’ll cost you the same thing. Salvation isn’t gained by reciting mere words. Saving faith transforms the heart, and that in turn transforms behavior. Faith’s fruit is seen in actions, not intentions. There’s no room for passive spectators: words without actions are empty and futile. Remember that what John saw in his vision of judgment was a Book of Life, not a book of Words or Book of Intellectual Musings. The life we live, not the words we speak, reveals whether our faith is authentic.

Now, they will deny that, but then they will contradict themselves and say if you are not being obedient, then obviously you are not saved. However, they will NEVER tell you how obedient you must be.

What did you say just above here? you said, "obey Jesus BECAUSE we are saved." Exactly. We obey because we have a new heart, a new nature. If there is no obedience, then there is probably not a new heart and probably not a new nature and thus probably not saved.

Suppose you ask me if I love my wife? I respond with yes. But I run off and cheat on her. Do I really love her? I can say I do, but my actions show that I don't. (I do by the way love my wife!)

As Christians we really have ONE BASIC RULE, and that is that we should "love one another". Love works no ill to his neighbor, therefore love fulfills the law.

But we do not do this to be saved, we do this because we are already saved (vs. 11).

Well said. Agree 100%. We do this because we are saved.

 

[Winman]

again, false. You don't obey to get saved. LS teaches repentance and because we have repented we will obey.

If Christians could not sin there would not be all the commandments given in the NT to Christians. Half of the NT is telling Christians what they should not do, like put away lying and tell your neighbor the truth.

Eph 4:26 Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath:
27 Neither give place to the devil.
28 Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labour, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth.
29 Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers.
30 And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.
31 Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice:
32 And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you.

You are not getting it, scripture like this would not be necessary unless Paul actually EXPECTED Christians to sin. Paul didn't believe a believer instantly becomes holy, he expected it to be a long slow growing process.

So the fact that Christians sin IS NOT proof they are not saved.

What did you say just above here? you said, "obey Jesus BECAUSE we are saved." Exactly. We obey because we have a new heart, a new nature. If there is no obedience, then there is probably not a new heart and probably not a new nature and thus probably not saved.

Calvinists understand nature wrong. A sinner is not utterly compelled to sin as Calvinism teaches. Romans 6:16-18 teaches that sinners obeyed the gospel, and when they did, THEN they were made free from sin and became servants to righteousness.

A slave can disobey his master. Being a slave to sin does not mean you cannot do right. Likewise, when we trust Jesus we become slaves to righteousness, but a slave can disobey. We can still sin, even though we are slaves to righteousness.

When the scriptures speak of being a slave, it is speaking of BELONGING to sin, being a POSSESSION of sin like an ancient slave. It is not saying how we MUST act.

Likewise, when we become slaves of Jesus we can still sin, and that is why it was necessary to give so many commandments in the NT to Christians to behave.

Suppose you ask me if I love my wife? I respond with yes. But I run off and cheat on her. Do I really love her? I can say I do, but my actions show that I don't. (I do by the way love my wife!)


Well said. Agree 100%. We do this because we are saved.

Well, whether you treat your wife good or not, she is your wife. Likewise, we are now MARRIED to Jesus (Rom 7:4). And just as you CAN be unfaithful to your wife, you can be unfaithful to Jesus as well.

The difference is Jesus will not take you to court and take everything you own. :thumbs:

 

[RLBosley]

But Lordship Salvation does deny that you have been saved the moment you trust Jesus. Lordship Salvation demands that you endure to the end to be saved.

So does the Bible.

[Mat 24:13 NASB] 13 "But the one who endures to the end, he will be saved.

[Mar 13:13 NASB] 13 "You will be hated by all because of My name, but the one who endures to the end, he will be saved.

[Rev 2:10 NASB] 10 'Do not fear what you are about to suffer. Behold, the devil is about to cast some of you into prison, so that you will be tested, and you will have tribulation for ten days. Be faithful until death, and I will give you the crown of life.

You can't be saved if your faith does not endure. You need to understand that saved has several different definitions in scripture, the word does not always mean the same thing. Only those who endure to the end will be saved (glorified, spend eternity w/ God) and only those who are genuinely saved (Justified) will endure.

According to John MacArthur you do not pass from death to life the instant you believe as Jesus said in John 5:24, but salvation comes from "a life lived in obedience and service to Christ". If this is so, no man could ever know he is saved until he endures to the end, if that.

See above. Nothing MacArthur said there is wrong. You just have a too narrow understanding of what the word "saved" means.

The difference is this: Non-lordship salvation teaches that we should obey Jesus BECAUSE we are saved, where Lordship Salvation teaches you should obey Jesus TO be saved.

Nope.

Now, they will deny that, but then they will contradict themselves and say if you are not being obedient, then obviously you are not saved. However, they will NEVER tell you how obedient you must be.

Of course we deny it. It is an outright lie.

You keep asking this "how obedient" nonsense, totally missing that that isn't the point. There is no measurement of how obedience. The whole thing is we grow in holiness and obedience to Christ. And all true believers will grow in grace and will obey. Infallibly and not without sin, but they will still obey. Those who are unchanged by the gospel, were saved saved by the gospel. 1 John and other passages make that abundantly clear.

Rom 13:8 Owe no man any thing, but to love one another: for he that loveth another hath fulfilled the law.
9 For this, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness, Thou shalt not covet; and if there be any other commandment, it is briefly comprehended in this saying, namely, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
10 Love worketh no ill to his neighbour: therefore love is the fulfilling of the law.
11 And that, knowing the time, that now it is high time to awake out of sleep: for now is our salvation nearer than when we believed.

As Christians we really have ONE BASIC RULE, and that is that we should "love one another". Love works no ill to his neighbor, therefore love fulfills the law.

But we do not do this to be saved, we do this because we are already saved (vs. 11).

Possible the most accurate thing you've said in this forum that I've seen. :thumbs:

Also the bolded above is exactly what LS teaches. You are closer to it than you realize.

 

[RLBosley]

I didn't deliberately leave out any words. I condensed a lengthy passage into a shorter one for brevity's sake.

I'll give you the benefit of a doubt that it was not intentional. Still, what you said was not an accurate representation of the article. Your 2-4 points are the result of justification. That is the teaching of LS.

Your accusation is about as frivolous
as accusing Paul as leaving out "in your heart" in Romans 10:13,
"For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved,"
When he includes the phrase "in your heart" in Rom.10:9"
--I guess he disobeyed God; did spite unto the Holy Spirit, eh?
--Lordship salvation is based on works as that quote shows. It includes the things listed in that quote, according to that definition, and therefore is based on works and not faith alone.

Do you even know what you are talking about here? I sure don't.

Please debate this issue without offense. I am not making anything personal. When I said, "You believe salvation is by works..." the only intent is "you" by your agreement with the article in which you are defending. It is the article that I am debating which you are representing. My comments are actually made in reference to the article. I don't even know your personal beliefs.

It's kind of hard to not be offended when you said to me "you believe _____" when I believe no such thing. That is lying and making a false accusation in my opinion. As a Mod I would expect you to know better.

Yes, I always define repentance as the flip side of faith. If one has faith in Christ (faith must have an object), then he has repented at the same time. His life will change. It must. He is putting his faith in Christ as Lord, rather than allowing sin to be his lord. How can it not change?

Exactly! That is the core of LS! This is why I'm convince you have been misinformed as to what LS actually teaches because you have it right here. "his life will change. It must... How can it not change?" Amen. Exactly right!

I would rather not use repentance because there is so much confusion about the word and it becomes an issue of works, such as the Church of Christ uses it. If you say "Repent of all your sins" (as many do), that is unbiblical, and impossible. No one can even remember all their sins much less repent of them. That feat is a work.

Agreed.

True, justification leads to sanctification, but that is not what LS teaches.
The only true example of Lordship salvation that I know is the Apostle Paul. Upon salvation, calling Christ Lord, he immediately said "Lord what will you have me to do?" And obeyed the Lord, was baptized, and a few days later was found preaching boldly, in public. That is an example of Lordship salvation. I don't know of any others. His salvation was unique and different from all others.

Couple issues. First, yes LS does teach that sanctification follows justification. That's the whole point. LS combats those who have a practically optional view of sanctification-that you can be saved but give no evidence by having a changed life. Second, Paul's salvation is no different than ours, except in the events that surrounded it. We are saved in the same way, by the same gospel. And we all must submit to Christ as Lord. He is Lord!

We are not speaking of the "process." That is a red herring. We are speaking of the event. No need to mix up theology. If you want to speak precisely about justification we can do that. The process of sanctification and of discipleship do not take place at the time of justification as Washer and MacArthur and others insist they must.

I realize what you are responding to. However, I have clearly maintained and repeated often that sanctification always follows salvation. It is simply a growing process. That is what LS leaves no room for. I don't believe I am back-tracking in saying that. Yes sanctification follows salvation (progressively) and is only part of salvation, positionally. The LS advocates put it as part and parcel of salvation--set apart, ready to do God's work immediately. They aren't ready. They need to grow.

No red-herring. You said salvation is not a process. I simply was saying that yes it is when you take in the full scope of salvation - justified, sanctified, glorified. That is a lifelong process. Washer nor MacArthur teach or believe that sanctification takes place at conversion. Can you find any primary source where either one says that?

I get the feeling you are getting a lot of your info from secondary sources that have an axe to grind against these men.

Yes I have and it is a self-defeating argument.

Do you disagree with the following:

If someone is truly saved, he has been made alive by the Holy Spirit and has a new heart with new desires. There is no way that one that has been “born again” can later be “unborn.” Because of His unique love for His children, God will keep all of His children safe from harm, and Jesus has promised that He would lose none of His sheep.

 

[jbh28]

If Christians could not sin there would not be all the commandments given in the NT to Christians. Half of the NT is telling Christians what they should not do, like put away lying and tell your neighbor the truth.

Eph 4:26 Be ye angry, and sin not: let not the sun go down upon your wrath:
27 Neither give place to the devil.
28 Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labour, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needeth.
29 Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers.
30 And grieve not the holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed unto the day of redemption.
31 Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you, with all malice:
32 And be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted, forgiving one another, even as God for Christ's sake hath forgiven you.

You are not getting it, scripture like this would not be necessary unless Paul actually EXPECTED Christians to sin. Paul didn't believe a believer instantly becomes holy, he expected it to be a long slow growing process.

So the fact that Christians sin IS NOT proof they are not saved.

of course. I said this yesterday when I spoke of growth. 2 Corinthians 3:18

Well, whether you treat your wife good or not, she is your wife. Likewise, we are now MARRIED to Jesus (Rom 7:4). And just as you CAN be unfaithful to your wife, you can be unfaithful to Jesus as well.

The difference is Jesus will not take you to court and take everything you own. :thumbs:

That's true. We have a wonderful Savior who paid for our past sins and our future ones.

 

[kyredneck]

Salvation by obedience.

Wait. That's not a sentence.

What is commonly called Lordship Salvation is the idea that one is saved by obedience.

But we were made alive and given the free gift of eternal life apart from obedience. Man is totally passive in the birth from above.

:thumbs:

Jesus IS Lord, whether a man confesses Him or not. He is Lord of the believers and unbelievers alike. No man "makes" Him Lord. He IS Lord.

Man is not totally passive.

Incredible. You’ll stop at nothing to deny sovereign grace.

“That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.”

DHK, tell me what part you had to do in your physical birth and it will be the same as with your spiritual birth. Absolutely nothing.

That would lead to a teaching of universalism.

No. It leads to the correct understanding.

A much better definition of regeneration is given by Ryrie:
“God regenerates (John 1:13) according to His will (James 1:18) through the sovereign work of the Holy Spirit (John 3:5) when a person believes (John 1:12) the gospel as revealed in the Word of God (1 Peter 1:23).”
― Charles C. Ryrie, The Holy Spirit

No, it’s explained in several places in the scriptures but you deniers of sovereign grace refuse to accept the fact that you have nothing to do with your eternal salvation, that it’s all of God. You insist on inserting the will of man into the birth from above which is just as asinine as insisting you had something to do with your parents bringing you into this world.

But he that doeth the truth cometh to the light, that his works may be made manifest, that they have been wrought in God. Jn 3:21

That’s the correct understanding of the order, FIRST God works within THEN come to Christ.

12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:
13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. Jn 1

That’s the correct understanding of the order, FIRST born of God THEN come to Christ.

He that believeth on the Son hath eternal life;......Jn 3:36

.....He that heareth my word, and believeth him that sent me, hath eternal life,...Jn5:24

... He that believeth hath eternal life. Jn 6:47

That’s the correct understanding of the order, FIRST made alive THEN come to Christ.

 

[Yeshua1]

It's not at all. DHK and Winman do not understand what is mean by Lordship Salvation.



Exactly.


Rolf, check our Theopedia for a brief explanation of LS.

http://www.theopedia.com/Lordship_salvation

Do those advocating for it see then that there are no such thing as 'carnal" Christians, that either one has sold out all for jesus, or else just professing a false faith?

 

[Yeshua1]

Not true at all, but even if it were so, what's your point? Are you on the vitriolically anti-Calvinist side 'round here?



You are mistaken.



You misquote and misrepresent the source.

1. A turning IN THE HEART from sin. That is repentance. Do you believe that we must repent in order to be saved?

2. Do you believe one can be saved and never submit to Christ? I can be saved yet live my entire life in disobedience? Is that what you believe?

3. So you believe that you can go your entire life claiming to be a Christian, never grow in holiness, and ultimately repudiate the gospel and yet still be saved?

4. You seem to have misunderstood the article here, but regardless do you disagree that a true believer will continue in faith until death?




No sir, this is exactly what the Bible teaches. It never once says that we must do works in order to be saved.




Exactly! That is what the LS position states. That believers are ordained to good works - we will do them. As Piper says in the sermon referenced above "there is a necessary connection between knowing Christ and obeying Christ."

the jailor asked Apostle pul "What MUST O do to be saved?"

Did paul explain to him that salvation required him to be willing and able to fully cubmit all areas of his lost life unto Jesus, or just to receive him now as His Lord/Saviour thru faith?

 

[Yeshua1]

I'm actually sympathetic to detractors of lordship salvation.

I agree that the new believer should not be expected to be very sanctified upon his conversion or even for quite some time thereafter.

I agree that to demand otherwise is to add to what the Bible requires for salvation.

But, I would challenge the detractors to not swing the pendulum too far in response.

NOBODY should believe that faith without works is alive.

And everybody should agree that the thing one is expected to believe is that Jesus Christ is Lord.

Some proponents of Lordship salvation are simply saying those two things. I am one of them.

That is a good post, as we nee to realise that we have been saved by Grace of God alone, received thru faith in Jesus alone, and NOW being saved, we are to walk in a way to reflect that truth!

Its just there is progessive sauctification involved here, there are maturity levels to be reached, so NONE ever gets to where Jesus is always obeyed 24/7 basis!

That would be sinless perfection..

 

[Yeshua1]

Growth. As I said before, you don't have to have any obedience in order to be saved. After you are saved, there isn't any amount of anything you can do to keep it. God promised to keep you. How much do you have to have in order to prove? Growth. It's not an amount. 2 Corinthians 3:18 God is transforming us. We don't all grow at the same rate, but we grow.

You are making good points here, as the true Christian will indeed be transforming more into the image of jesus after salvation, but that is the work of the Holy Spirit to do that, and think some LDS think that all of us get matured all at the same time, as if we cannot any longer act against him being now our Lords, that there is no room for carnal christianity in any fashion, that unless we are willing and able to surrender all, we cannot be saved?

Does this mean that ALL LDS advocates have sold off all their materal possessions as the Apostles did, and followed Jesus as missionaries/evangelists then?

 

[Yeshua1]

Jas 2:14 What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him?


Jas 2:17 So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.


Jas 2:18 But someone will say, "You have faith and I have works." Show me your faith apart from your works, and I will show you my faith by my works.


Jas 2:19 You believe that God is one; you do well. Even the demons believe—and shudder!
Jas 2:20 Do you want to be shown, you foolish person, that faith apart from works is useless?
Jas 2:21 Was not Abraham our father justified by works when he offered up his son Isaac on the altar?
Jas 2:22 You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by his works;
Jas 2:23 and the Scripture was fulfilled that says, "Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him as righteousness"—and he was called a friend of God.
Jas 2:24 You see that a person is justified by works and not by faith alone.

Saving faith is the one that comes from the Holy spirit to us as sinners, that enables us to call upon the name of the Lord jesus to get saved!

Demons refuse to accept jesus as their Lord/saviour, in rebellion against Him, know that God is God, but refuses to bow fown to him...

Saving faith is that moment when we bow our kness to him as our Lord/saviour, as ONLY way to get right with God...

Are we justified before God by faith alone in jesus, or must we have full obedience for a certail lenght of time to merit salvation from God?

 

[Yeshua1]

I think I am beginning to regret asking my question publicly, though it was educational. I did not intend to start another argument.

I simply was looking for a simple, plain definition of Lordship Salvation. Thanks to everyone (well most everyone :laugh for the help.

Don't feel bad, as you posted a very good question, and Christians should be able to discuss theology without going "bonkers!"

 

[Yeshua1]

:thumbs:

Jesus IS Lord, whether a man confesses Him or not. He is Lord of the believers and unbelievers alike. No man "makes" Him Lord. He IS Lord.

From the perspective of the father, ALL who have received jesus as Him Lord over their lives, as we are right now to God seated in high places, and will be glorified one day to be as he now is regarding the Body, but while here, we are also growing and maturing in our walk with Jesus, so some LDS teachers seem to want us to be in that fi
nal state while here on earth, before we can claim real salvation!

Does seem to be a combo package when taken to it extremes of RCC , as one must get sauctified enough to merit salvation, Wesylyn Holiness, having obtained statee of sinless perfection, and Inverstigation jusgement of our lives to make aure we were odedient long enough/well enough to merit final salvation!

Know most LDS do not hold to that, but the practical aspect ids that those views seem to get to that!

 

[DHK]

Do you even know what you are talking about here? I sure don't.

In the original article, provided by the link, I gave a summary for brevity's sake. You then accused me of leaving out the phrase "in the heart" intentionally, claiming it changed the meaning (which it did not).

My response to that accusation was this illustration:

Your accusation is about as frivolous
as accusing Paul as leaving out "in your heart" in Romans 10:13,
"For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved,"
When he includes the phrase "in your heart" in Rom.10:9"
--I guess he disobeyed God; did spite unto the Holy Spirit, eh?
--Lordship salvation is based on works as that quote shows. It includes the things listed in that quote, according to that definition, and therefore is based on works and not faith alone.

Paul leaves out "in your heart" also in Romans 10:13 as compared to Romans 10:9, without any great change in meaning. Remember I was giving a summary of the passage.

It's kind of hard to not be offended when you said to me "you believe _____" when I believe no such thing. That is lying and making a false accusation in my opinion. As a Mod I would expect you to know better.

I already explained myself. Try not to take things so personally. I will try to use the impersonal pronoun "one" if that helps. We are talking about an article, right? "You" believe, or when "one" believes... Usually my "you" is generic, just like it is when I preach.

Exactly! That is the core of LS! This is why I'm convince you have been misinformed as to what LS actually teaches because you have it right here. "his life will change. It must... How can it not change?" Amen. Exactly right!

But I have heard or read some of these guys. They teach "whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple," (Lk.14:33), and apply that to salvation. If the new convert is not prepared to be a missionary right there and then as soon as he is saved, then he really isn't saved. That is why LS is works. That is why it leaves out progressive salvation. That is why it is error.
Yes there is change, but it is not all at once.

Couple issues. First, yes LS does teach that sanctification follows justification. That's the whole point. LS combats those who have a practically optional view of sanctification-that you can be saved but give no evidence by having a changed life. Second, Paul's salvation is no different than ours, except in the events that surrounded it. We are saved in the same way, by the same gospel. And we all must submit to Christ as Lord. He is Lord!

I have no problem with that, except to say that we are all different and grow at different rates. LS advocates seem to leave out the step of sanctification and believe that one must be a mature Christian as soon as they are saved.

No red-herring. You said salvation is not a process. I simply was saying that yes it is when you take in the full scope of salvation - justified, sanctified, glorified. That is a lifelong process. Washer nor MacArthur teach or believe that sanctification takes place at conversion. Can you find any primary source where either one says that?

I respect MacArthur and use many of his books. It is this doctrine of LS that is being taught which I don't respect. It is an extreme doctrine. To say that if Christ is not Lord of all he is not Lord at all, is wrong.
To say that one must "make Christ Lord of your life." is also wrong.
There is nothing you or anyone else can do that can "make" Christ Lord. He always has been and always will be Lord. The question is, "Will you submit to your sovereign as Lord." He already is the Lord. There is nothing you can do about that.

Do you disagree with the following:

If someone is truly saved, he has been made alive by the Holy Spirit and has a new heart with new desires. There is no way that one that has been “born again” can later be “unborn.” Because of His unique love for His children, God will keep all of His children safe from harm, and Jesus has promised that He would lose none of His sheep.

God has never promised that he will keep all of his children safe from harm. Read the biography of Adoniram Judson and see how much he suffered in the land of Burma.
Every one of the Apostles were martyred except for John.
Paul was stoned and left for dead. But miraculously arose and encouraged his brethren to keep on going. The Lord told Ananias concerning Paul: "I must show him how many things he must suffer for my sake."
Paul wrote to Timothy: "All who live Godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution."

The rest of the quote I can agree with.

 

[Yeshua1]

In the original article, provided by the link, I gave a summary for brevity's sake. You then accused me of leaving out the phrase "in the heart" intentionally, claiming it changed the meaning (which it did not).

My response to that accusation was this illustration:

Paul leaves out "in your heart" also in Romans 10:13 as compared to Romans 10:9, without any great change in meaning. Remember I was giving a summary of the passage.

I already explained myself. Try not to take things so personally. I will try to use the impersonal pronoun "one" if that helps. We are talking about an article, right? "You" believe, or when "one" believes... Usually my "you" is generic, just like it is when I preach.

But I have heard or read some of these guys. They teach "whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple," (Lk.14:33), and apply that to salvation. If the new convert is not prepared to be a missionary right there and then as soon as he is saved, then he really isn't saved. That is why LS is works. That is why it leaves out progressive salvation. That is why it is error.
Yes there is change, but it is not all at once.

I have no problem with that, except to say that we are all different and grow at different rates. LS advocates seem to leave out the step of sanctification and believe that one must be a mature Christian as soon as they are saved.

I respect MacArthur and use many of his books. It is this doctrine of LS that is being taught which I don't respect. It is an extreme doctrine. To say that if Christ is not Lord of all he is not Lord at all, is wrong.
To say that one must "make Christ Lord of your life." is also wrong.
There is nothing you or anyone else can do that can "make" Christ Lord. He always has been and always will be Lord. The question is, "Will you submit to your sovereign as Lord." He already is the Lord. There is nothing you can do about that.

God has never promised that he will keep all of his children safe from harm. Read the biography of Adoniram Judson and see how much he suffered in the land of Burma.
Every one of the Apostles were martyred except for John.
Paul was stoned and left for dead. But miraculously arose and encouraged his brethren to keep on going. The Lord told Ananias concerning Paul: "I must show him how many things he must suffer for my sake."
Paul wrote to Timothy: "All who live Godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution."

The rest of the quote I can agree with.

ALL christians have Jesus as their Lord, as God installed Him over us once saved, so that LDS is dubious thinking...

Think he meant that God will spiritual protect His own, keeping them saved unto the last day...

Really, extreme LDS getting close to what the Church of Rome/Wesylym Holiness groups advocate, that one MUST have grace and works to merit real salvation, or else to keep it!

 

[RLBosley]

In the original article, provided by the link, I gave a summary for brevity's sake. You then accused me of leaving out the phrase "in the heart" intentionally, claiming it changed the meaning (which it did not).

My response to that accusation was this illustration:

Paul leaves out "in your heart" also in Romans 10:13 as compared to Romans 10:9, without any great change in meaning. Remember I was giving a summary of the passage.

I think there is a difference in the situations and I disagree that what you left out doesn't change the meaning. I think it clearly does, but let's move past that OK?

I already explained myself. Try not to take things so personally. I will try to use the impersonal pronoun "one" if that helps. We are talking about an article, right? "You" believe, or when "one" believes... Usually my "you" is generic, just like it is when I preach.

Fair enough.

But I have heard or read some of these guys. They teach "whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple," (Lk.14:33), and apply that to salvation. If the new convert is not prepared to be a missionary right there and then as soon as he is saved, then he really isn't saved. That is why LS is works. That is why it leaves out progressive salvation. That is why it is error.
Yes there is change, but it is not all at once.

Jesus said that, not to his 12 (already) disciples, but to the crowds who were following him, who did not yet believe, they only wanted to see his miracles. So Jesus himself correlates this abandoning everything, with salvation. Being a disciple of Jesus, following Jesus, and being a Christian are all the same thing. You cannot be a Christian and not be a disciple. That idea is totally foreign to scripture.

But no one is saying what you are accusing them of saying. Washer, MacArthur, or any other LS advocate that I am aware of thinks that you need to be prepared to be a missionary immediately otherwise the person isn't saved. It emphatically is not works salvation, in any way. You have either been horribly misinformed or you have severely misunderstood everything these men teach and believe.

I have no problem with that, except to say that we are all different and grow at different rates. LS advocates seem to leave out the step of sanctification and believe that one must be a mature Christian as soon as they are saved.

No they don't. Everyone understand and acknowledges that people grow at different rates and that some are more mature in the faith than others. I have never once heard them say otherwise.

I respect MacArthur and use many of his books. It is this doctrine of LS that is being taught which I don't respect. It is an extreme doctrine. To say that if Christ is not Lord of all he is not Lord at all, is wrong.
To say that one must "make Christ Lord of your life." is also wrong.
There is nothing you or anyone else can do that can "make" Christ Lord. He always has been and always will be Lord. The question is, "Will you submit to your sovereign as Lord." He already is the Lord. There is nothing you can do about that.

It's funny, I actually saw this clip of Paul Washer saying this exactly, almost word for word, he calls it "preposterous" in fact. Again, you seem to be misunderstanding what these men believe because you are arguing against it, but at the same time saying everything they say!

God has never promised that he will keep all of his children safe from harm. Read the biography of Adoniram Judson and see how much he suffered in the land of Burma.
Every one of the Apostles were martyred except for John.
Paul was stoned and left for dead. But miraculously arose and encouraged his brethren to keep on going. The Lord told Ananias concerning Paul: "I must show him how many things he must suffer for my sake."
Paul wrote to Timothy: "All who live Godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution."

The rest of the quote I can agree with.

I agree with you 100%. I admit I snagged that from another site and read the beginning and end and missed that part until it was too late to edit. My bad. But yes I agree that God never promises to keep us safe. There is actually a really popular Christian song out right now with that as one of the lines and it makes me cringe every time I hear it...

Anyway, if you agree with the rest of the statement, then congratulations, you believe in the perseverance of the saints.

 

[RLBosley]

Do those advocating for it see then that there are no such thing as 'carnal" Christians, that either one has sold out all for jesus, or else just professing a false faith?

That is a false dichotomy, assuming by "sold-out for Jesus" (I really ate that term) you mean someone is always in church always evangelizing, always reading their Bible. LS does see and affirms progression in the believers growth.

the jailor asked Apostle pul "What MUST O do to be saved?"

Did paul explain to him that salvation required him to be willing and able to fully cubmit all areas of his lost life unto Jesus, or just to receive him now as His Lord/Saviour thru faith?

Do you think that the jailor misunderstood what Paul meant by "Lord"? Lord is a political term, that was often applied to Caesar. I imagine the jailor better understood what it meant Paul said "the Lord Jesus" than we do.

ALL christians have Jesus as their Lord, as God installed Him over us once saved, so that LDS is dubious thinking...

Think he meant that God will spiritual protect His own, keeping them saved unto the last day...

Really, extreme LDS getting close to what the Church of Rome/Wesylym Holiness groups advocate, that one MUST have grace and works to merit real salvation, or else to keep it!

LDS or LS? BIG difference there my friend. :laugh:

 

[DHK]

Jesus said that, not to his 12 (already) disciples, but to the crowds who were following him, who did not yet believe, they only wanted to see his miracles. So Jesus himself correlates this abandoning everything, with salvation. Being a disciple of Jesus, following Jesus, and being a Christian are all the same thing. You cannot be a Christian and not be a disciple. That idea is totally foreign to scripture.

This is a red herring.
Let's look at the differences:
1. We don't live in an "age of miracles," that is, the spiritual gifts have ceased.
2. Jesus is not here in the flesh performing miracles in front of us, miracles in which he did to demonstrate his deity that not even the apostles could replicate. (Thus they followed him for his miracles).
3. No one is following you or me for the miracles that we perform.
4. It is speaking of Jesus, in the flesh, who could read the hearts of men, something we cannot do. This is one of the faults of LS along with Calvinism, an assumption that they can read the hearts of men--only God has this ability.
Jesus is delineating between the saved and the unsaved. It has nothing to do with LS.

But no one is saying what you are accusing them of saying. Washer, MacArthur, or any other LS advocate that I am aware of thinks that you need to be prepared to be a missionary immediately otherwise the person isn't saved. It emphatically is not works salvation, in any way. You have either been horribly misinformed or you have severely misunderstood everything these men teach and believe.

I don't think so. In fact you only have to do a simple search to find dozens of links like this:
http://expreacherman.com/2011/03/24/...nd-repentance/

http://expreacherman.com/2012/08/08/...-of-salvation/

No they don't. Everyone understand and acknowledges that people grow at different rates and that some are more mature in the faith than others. I have never once heard them say otherwise.

Why is it called "Lordship" salvation?
Because if Jesus is Lord, then you are his "disciple," and all the verses on discipleship apply to you immediately upon trusting Christ as Savior. Therefore you are a mature Christian ready "to forsake all" at the moment of justification. Nonsense. But that is what these guys teach.

It's funny, I actually saw this clip of Paul Washer saying this exactly, almost word for word, he calls it "preposterous" in fact. Again, you seem to be misunderstanding what these men believe because you are arguing against it, but at the same time saying everything they say!

And in his last statement he says "he demands each one of you to repent of your sins and believe the gospel."
That is not biblical; it is a works gospel.
No man can repent of his sins. No person can even remember all of his sins much less repent of them. Nowhere in the NT does the Bible command the unbeliever to repent of their sins in order to be saved. That is a false gospel. It is heresy. It is a works salvation. The gospel is by grace through faith; not of works--repentance of sins.
--He has a wrong view of repentance.

I agree with you 100%. I admit I snagged that from another site and read the beginning and end and missed that part until it was too late to edit. My bad. But yes I agree that God never promises to keep us safe. There is actually a really popular Christian song out right now with that as one of the lines and it makes me cringe every time I hear it...

Anyway, if you agree with the rest of the statement, then congratulations, you believe in the perseverance of the saints.

I will reserve my judgment. It may be close. I believe in eternal security but I do not believe in the Calvinist view the perseverance of the saints. However, let's save that for another thread.

 

[Yeshua1]

This is a red herring.
Let's look at the differences:
1. We don't live in an "age of miracles," that is, the spiritual gifts have ceased.
2. Jesus is not here in the flesh performing miracles in front of us, miracles in which he did to demonstrate his deity that not even the apostles could replicate. (Thus they followed him for his miracles).
3. No one is following you or me for the miracles that we perform.
4. It is speaking of Jesus, in the flesh, who could read the hearts of men, something we cannot do. This is one of the faults of LS along with Calvinism, an assumption that they can read the hearts of men--only God has this ability.
Jesus is delineating between the saved and the unsaved. It has nothing to do with LS.

Think that those advocating LS need to really explain just what we are to do to make jesus "Lord of All", as isn't he already installed as such by God once we get saved by Him?

And isn't the command after that, to rely upon the Holy spirit, and its HIS work that makes us to become more like Christ?

And how long must we be obedient, and in how much, in order to KNOW that we are indeed even saved?

That is why it seems right, but also seems to have within it a mixing of the Law and grace!