MacArthur On The Dangers of Non-Lordship Doctrine

You know it's one thing to debate matters, but it's totally different when you purposefully misrepresent the views of others. The question is how do you think it helps misrepresenting the views of others and promoting others that do the same thing. You think that actually helps?

 

I'm not getting into this with you again. Your entire defense is "you are misreresenting my views". I supplied a link that had nothing to do with your views, nor did I state "these are JJump's views"...but the doctrine of ME.

 

Well it seems you are. Why I don't know. That's the question.

That's total nonesense, and laughable.

You clearly know that I hold to the gospel of the kingdom (which you and others call ME), so yes you were posting something about my beliefs.

 

I don't know a whole lot about Hebrew. But, ADONAI is plural. It is used in the singular to refer to people, which is, I believe, adoni. (But, don't quote me on the singular.)

That's why I said it's "interesting". It is simply translation, but based upon what? Context or other manuscripts or a combination?

Obviously, the translators of this version translated the Lord Jesus in vers 31, why did they use the plural in verse 32?

 

Hence my repeated admonitions to others that both (or in this case, all three) have part of it right, but they all also have lots of it wrong.

 

Just wanted to point out that this is where all the Lordship salvation stuff comes into play. It's after one is spiritually saved, which is based strictly upon accepting the offer that was made available by finished work of Jesus on the cross.

Lordship salvation is necessary for the salvation of the soul.

 

I noticed that even the web site posted misrepresented the views of some of those being spoken about, using a typical method of inserting words into people's mouths.

For example, one person on this board, used to say that I was talking about salvation, when I was talking about the Kingdom because he thinks the Kingdom is simply something mystical. So, I would say something about the Kingdom, he would insert salvation, and say something along the lines of, "So, you think we can become unsaved?"

By the same token, the author of the web site is substitution "second death" for "lake of fire". If I'm not mistaken, Faust does not equate those two. But, the author of the defamatory article does, inserts words into the mouths of others, and says, "See!?!"

 

Hunh? I'm not into this portion of the discussion, per se, but ask who has equated "Millenial (sp.?) Exclusion" with "gospel of the Kingdom"?

Ed

 

The gospel of the kingdom is the good news that Christ is the Annointed King and will one day rule in His Kingdom and we as saved individuals can have a part with Him in that coming day when He takes over. However not all saved individuals will take up that offer in a positive manner hence they will be excluded from ruling and reigning in the kingdom.

Scripture refers to it as the gospel of the kingdom as well as some other names, but opponents call it millennial exclusion.

Hope that helps Ed.

 

FTR, there is no such thing as "the Southern Baptist Abstract of Principles," for such a thing has never been adopted in any way, by the Southern Baptist Convention. The Abstract of Principles is a statement that is part and parcel of only the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and the Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary. It is in no way binding on, or applicable to any other Southern Baptist entity, of any sort, not even the remaining four of the six 'Southern Baptist' seminaries, in the USA.

But why let annoying things, such as facts, get in the way??

Ed

 

And I was just setting the record straight, that there is no such "Southern Baptist" document, to begin with, so your 'identifying' is, unfortunately, mistaken.

Even through the lens of "Calvinism".

Ed

 

. . . of exposing the false doctrine of Lordship Salvation? :laugh: Sorry I couldn't resist

 

sanctification

J. Jump, skypair, and any others. A comment and explanation as to what happens as we are "sealed" in. There is no way out, Praise God.

Some years ago I was shown in Pastor Sadler's book "Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians" the following, which so simplifies for our understanding. With this we can prove what we believe, when we believe, scripture being understood.

Past tense—justification from the penalty of sin.
Present tense—sanctification from the power of sin.
Future tense—glorification from the presence of sin.

The below is of my making, and I see some of the following could be in the minds of one or two here. I'm just trying to "pinpoint" each phase of our salvation in one setting with scripture for each, and can discuss further should any wish, for each brings up where, or how we fit into the "Kingdom of God".

Past tense: All have not been justified in the same manner - Romans 3:30.

Present tense: In sanctification, we are separated from the power of sin by faith in Him - Acts 26:18.

Future tense: In his glory (we will be as him) we see our presentation in Ephesians 5:27.

Whatever spin we put in our understanding on this must always come to agree that by grace we are saved, by grace we are sanctified, and by grace we in glorification will be presented before the host of heaven in honor of Him. He is going to "show us off" in front of all. It is staggering what awaits us.

I don't believe we have to understand our salvation, but when we do we see our hope in Him is real.

 

I would agree with this in that salvation is of the Lord, so any part of salvation can not fall outside of His grace.

I disagree with this as I believe we have to understand what sanctification is and the process in order to do according to what Scripture has laid out for us in that particular aspect of salvation.

As to glorification I do believe all saved folks will be glorified before we step into eternity. However I don't believe we will all be glorified at the same time as glory has to do with rulership and there will be saved folks that do not experience rulership in the coming kingdom of the Lord.

And I would agree that salvation has three part just as we are tri-part beings.

 

A rare thing, but I take a mediating view of the whole matter of "Lordship Salvation." When McArthur first published The Gospel According to Jesus, I thought it an excellent corrective to the idea that I had seen preached thoughout my entire life among Evangelical Christians. I refer to the aforementioned "heresy" of "the divided Christ" in the words of A.W. Tozer.

On the other hand, I find McArthur often trips himself up over and traps himself in his own words (another example came along about the same time as LS, and that was the controversy of McArthur's position of "The Blood of Christ as a Metontym," which is a thread topic for another day).

As a "Reformed Arminian," I would summarize my position this way:

(1) Repentance and faith are two sides of the same coin, "elementary principles of the gospel," and are thus are required for salvation;

(2) One who does not repent has not truly placed faith in Jesus Christ, and is not saved, for salvation is a change of mind and of heart that, by the power of the Holy Spirit MUST lead to a change of life;

(3) The question of whether one can accept Jesus as Savior but not Lord is moot -- Scripture allows for no such division of Christ. Christ is Savior AND Lord, and any less of a concept is scripturally and doctrinally deficient;

(4) That one accepts Christ as Savior and Lord DOES NOT imply that the saved individual does not, or cannot sin in thought, word and deed -- in fact, to claim that one (even a Christian) cannot sin is not borne out in Scripture. Because we are still in the flesh and still retain the "old nature" we are indeed "prone to wander."

(5) As the life of a Disciple of Jesus is one of spiritual growth from infancy to maturity, one yields to His "Lordship" in the sense that he yields all he is to the Sovereign Lord as a conscious act, allowing Christ to live through him/her (Again, not presupposing we ALWAYS keep this mindset, but that we mature in it, grow into it and return to it when we err).

(6) As we mature, our attitude, our "minds" are "transformed" so that we become MORE Christlike until the time of our departure from this life, when we enter into His Presence, glorified and made perfect.

(7) This concept of Lordship does NOT in any way declare that works are necessary FOR salvation, but it DOES declare with all of Scripture that if we ARE truly Disciples of Jesus, Christ has saved us for the purpose of good works, and that is inevitably a result of His supernatural work in the lives of His followers -- UNLESS one is NOT truly saved, or has forfeited faith and apostasized. This also DOES NOT create a burden on the believer, for works flow naturally FROM US as we yield TO HIM!

That's just what I believe the Scriptures teach in this regard.


JDale

 

It's hard to argue with that summary, JDale.

 

skypair

Hi skypair,

Do you mean Sproul or MacArthur?:laugh:

How are things at your congregation now?:type: