MacArthur On The Dangers of Non-Lordship Doctrine

[Martin]

I think there are two different things being confused here. A Christian that lives a debauched lifestyle should not be embraced, 1 Cor 5:13 God will judge those outside. "Expel the wicked man from among you."

==Agreed, but I would point out that Paul refered to that man as a "so-called brother" (vs11). Paul was clearly leaving the man's salvation open to question. Maybe he was just a fallen brother who needed to be restored but maybe he was a unbeliever who needed to be saved. Either way I don't believe this verse should be used by anyone to attempt to prove that a person can live in sin and still rightly claim to be saved.

How do we deal with sinners who have made a confession of faith yet live a lifestyle of the world, tell them they are going to Hell unless they quit?

==First you bring the problem to their attention, if that does not work take several and confront the person, if that does not work the matter is brought to the church, if that does not work you treat the person as a unbeliever (ie...witness the Gospel to them). Matt 18:15-20.

There are instances of Christians dying because of their sins so I think it is wrong to say that someone who calls on the Name of the Lord will not be saved regardless of the way they live.

==Sorry, but I think Scripture clearly disagrees (1Jn 2:3-6, 3:9-10, etc).

This is wrong because Paul tells those homosexuals they are not homosexuals anymore because they had been washed and sanctified even though they continued in homosexual practices.

==Paul says nothing about them continuing in homosexual practices. In fact he says that those who do will not inherit the Kingdom of God. He made that remark to professing Christians.

 

[Martin]

Well it looks like you already have your mind made up despite what Scripture says. By the way none of those Scriptures prove your point. Sorry.

==I have been on both sides of the Lordship debate. Therefore I know the arguments put forward by the no-lordship folks since I myself used those very same arguments at one time.

Inheritance is something that comes at the end of a period of time.

==Been reading Joseph Dillow have we? God provides an inheritance for His children (Rev 21:7).

And this is meant as no offense as I am sure you are a very nice guy and we would get along great should we sit down for a visit. However works in a person's life are not a guarantee as you suggest.

==I agree, works are not a guarantee (Matt 7:21-23). However works are part of the bigger picture of evidence that a person is saved.

 

[Oasis]

JDale

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hope of Glory
I think part of the semantics would be "Lord of what?"

You can be saved without making him Lord of your life.

But, no matter what, one day he will be Lord.


JDale said-Indeed -- what is meant by "Lord?"

No, one CANNOT be saved without receiving Christ AS Lord -- and in fact, Jesus ALREADY IS LORD -- He's not just "going to be..."

JDale

Hi JDale,

I'm guessing that's what Hope of glory meant.
If I'm right?...then...:thumbs: to da both of ya!
"that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow,
in heaven and on earth and under the earth,
and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord,
to the glory of God the Father."-Philippians 2:9-11 NIV

 

[J. Jump]

Been reading Joseph Dillow have we?

No actually I haven't read his book. Don't even own a copy of it, although I have heard some good things about it.

God provides an inheritance for His children

You are absolutely right. However that inheritance can be forfeited/lost. Only obedient children will actually obtain the inheritance. Disobedient children will not. Nowhere does Scripture say that all of God's children will receive the inheritance.

I agree, works are not a guarantee (Matt 7:21-23).

If works are not a guarantee then how can you say a person has to prove they are saved or show they are saved or whatever you want to call it by their works? Works are not a guarantee, therefore there are going to be folks whose works don't measure up at the JSOC and will suffer loss at that time. And Scripture tells us that its actually the majority that will experience loss at the JSOC not the other way around.

 

[Oasis]

Hi Martin,

I havent' read "The Truth War" yet. Have you read "The Gospel according to Jesus" or "FAITH WORKS, The Gospel according to the Apostles"? Great reads that address this subject. I especially enjoyed "FAITH WORKS".

 

[Martin]

Hi Martin,

I havent' read "The Truth War" yet. Have you read "The Gospel according to Jesus" or "FAITH WORKS, The Gospel according to the Apostles"? Great reads that address this subject. I especially enjoyed "FAITH WORKS".

==O yes, I LOVE those two books!! If you like those works you should probably read his book "Hard To Believe". :thumbs:

 

[Martin]

No actually I haven't read his book. Don't even own a copy of it, although I have heard some good things about it.

==I read it back in the late 90s (98-99?). Putting aside the theology it is a painful read. This is because he repeats himself and at times beats a point to death. I know the Grace Evangelical Society still sells the book. Sort of like reading one of the books in NT Wright's series "Christian Origins and the Question of God".

You are absolutely right. However that inheritance can be forfeited/lost. Only obedient children will actually obtain the inheritance. Disobedient children will not. Nowhere does Scripture say that all of God's children will receive the inheritance.

==As you probably already guessed, I can't agree with that. All of God's children inherit the Kingdom and the new heavens/earth (Rev 21:7). None are left out. Now individual rewards for service is a different matter.

If works are not a guarantee then how can you say a person has to prove they are saved or show they are saved or whatever you want to call it by their works?

==I don't believe a person has to prove or show they are saved by their works (though they should be able to-Jms 2:14ff). I believe if a person is truly saved it will "naturally" show up in their daily life. Just like a apple tree grows apples. It does not do so to prove/show it is a apple tree. It grows apples because that is what apple trees "naturally" do.

 

[J. Jump]

All of God's children inherit the Kingdom and the new heavens/earth (Rev 21:7).

It doesn't surpise me that you don't agree, and what surprises me even less is you have given a Scripture that totally refutes your own theory. Revelation 21:7 says "He who overcomes . . ." it gives zero indication that "all" children overcome. There are a great many Scriptures in the Old and New Testaments alike that show us that not all children receive the inheritance.

Now individual rewards for service is a different matter.

See that's just it, rewards or loss is not a different matter at all. The JSOC is all about determining who is worthy to receive the inheritance and who fell short.

I believe if a person is truly saved it will "naturally" show up in their daily life.

Now you are contradicting yourself. Just a few posts back you said works were not guaranteed. Now you are saying that they are guaranteed. Which is it?

And by the way James is not dealing with eternal salvation, so again you point to a Scripture that doesn't back up your statements, and so we are left with just that . . . "your" statements.

 

[Martin]

It doesn't surpise me that you don't agree, and what surprises me even less is you have given a Scripture that totally refutes your own theory. Revelation 21:7 says "He who overcomes . . ." it gives zero indication that "all" children overcome. There are a great many Scriptures in the Old and New Testaments alike that show us that not all children receive the inheritance.

==According to John's theology all believers are overcomers (1Jn 5:1,4-5).

Now you are contradicting yourself. Just a few posts back you said works were not guaranteed. Now you are saying that they are guaranteed. Which is it?

==No contradiction. I said that works alone were not a guarantee that a person is saved (Matt 7:21-23). I thought I made it clear that "works are part of the bigger picture of evidence that a person is saved". I did not say that there was not a guarantee of good works because of salvation (Eph 2:10). Salvation will show up in the life of the individual.

And by the way James is not dealing with eternal salvation, so again you point to a Scripture that doesn't back up your statements, and so we are left with just that . . . "your" statements.

==I think James is talking about eternal salvation (Jms 2:14,19-23). True faith, like Abraham's, is seen in the life of the believer. Abraham was not justified because he was obedient. He was obedient because he was justified.

 

[J. Jump]

According to John's theology all believers are overcomers (1Jn 5:1,4-5).

Yes all believers are overcomers, but can you show me that John is saying that all "believers" is the same thing as all "saved" people. Contextually believers are the ones that are living by faith after eternal salvation has been taken care of. The Bible also speaks of unbelievers not in the sense of eternally damned, but unbelieving in what is supposed to be believed in after eternal salvation is spoken of.

Again contextually this passage simply isn't saying what you want it to say.

Salvation will show up in the life of the individual.

That's simply not the case. And I love it that you use passages of Scripture that refute your own theories. Ephesians 2:8-10 is a perfect passage which says that good works may or may not happen. Being saved does not guarantee you are going to live a life of good works. The Bible teaches that actually the majority of Christians will be quite opposite and will be ones that cry out Lord, Lord and then list all the "good" works they did and He will tell them to depart because they were actually working lawlessness.

I think James is talking about eternal salvation (Jms 2:14,19-23).

Well you can think that all your want to put it doesn't make it so Again no offense intended. But James is talking to "saved" individuals. He's not dealing with something that is already settled for them.

True faith, like Abraham's, is seen in the life of the believer. Abraham was not justified because he was obedient. He was obedient because he was justified.

Again thank you for proving my point once again. The faith of Abraham that Scripture speaks of is not eternally saving faith, but faith that comes after eternal salvation is already taken care of. It is a faith that works. Faith that works is not the same thing as faith in The Substitute for eternal salvation.

 

[EdSutton]

==Agreed, but I would point out that Paul refered to that man as a "so-called brother" (vs11). Paul was clearly leaving the man's salvation open to question.

I just checked twenty different versions on I cor. 5:11. Only the NASB, among more formal equivalency translations, refers to a "so-called brother". I suggest the majority of translators read this to be one named a brother, not some merely supposed one.

There are instances of Christians dying because of their sins so I think it is wrong to say that someone who calls on the Name of the Lord will not be saved regardless of the way they live.

==Sorry, but I think Scripture clearly disagrees (1Jn 2:3-6, 3:9-10, etc).

I guess you read a portion of Romans 10 in this manner, then.

6 But the righteousness of faith speaks in this way, “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’”[c] (that is, to bring Christ down from above) 7 or, “‘Who will descend into the abyss?’”[d] (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead). 8 But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart”[e](that is, the word of faith which we preach): 9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. 10 For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. 11 For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes on Him will not be put to shame.”[f] 12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him. 13 For “whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved.”[g],(provided they live the right way, by following after the Lord in everything, or at least in most things that they do!) 14 How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? 15 And how shall they preach unless they are sent? As it is written:


“ How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the gospel of peace,[h]
Who bring glad tidings of good things!”[i]
16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, “LORD, who has believed our report?”[j] 17 So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Maybe its just me, but the words that I have emboldened seem to be added to the Scripture, or at least the interpretation of the Scripture to support this doctrine known as Lordship Salvation. And adding words, and redefining words in or into Scripture is one of my pet peeves, you know like "irrestible grace", "perseverance of the saints", and "repent of your sins", and "Make Jesus Lord!" The last two are the most annoying peeves, to me. As I have already posted on another thread, Jesus is Lord, God made Him Lord and Christ, and nothing you or I did or can do has any bearing on that, whatsoever. He is King of kings and Lord of lords; He is Lord of all! Amen! and Amen!!

And I'm not even going to get into the discussiuon of why the sins of homosexuality and adultery always seem to arise in these threads about Lordship salvation? I checked the lists in Scripture, They are not on the seven thing the Lord says he hates the most, but talebearing (gossip) and a proud look sure are. Why don't they rate higher with the LS advocates??

Ed

 

[Lou Martuneac]

Lordship Salvation is as Wrong as Easy-Believism

To All:

Many of those who hold to the Lordship position employ this kind of rationale for their position, “We are trying to answer Easy-Believism.” The motive is certainly noble; few preachers care for the “1, 2, 3 pray with me” kind of evangelism. The Lordship advocates commonly refer to the Easy-Believism or Mental Assent Only positions as "no-lordship." Answering Easy-Believism and the shallow, loose living of some professing Christians does not justify or excuse taking another extreme position, namely, Lordship Salvation.

From his review of The Gospel According To Jesus, Dr. Ernest Pickering observed,

"John MacArthur is a sincere servant of the Lord, of that we have no doubt.... We believe in his advocacy of the so-called lordship salvation he is wrong. He desperately desires to see holiness, lasting fruit, and continuing faithfulness in the lives of Christian people. This reviewer and we believe all sincere church leaders desire the same.... But the remedy for this condition is not found in changing the terms of the gospel"

Dr. Charles Bing made a similar observation:

"They are motivated by the worthy desire to see those who profess Christ go on to maturity and fruitfulness. Faced with the sad realities of inconsistent behavior, “backsliding,” and outright apostasy by some professing Christians, they have proposed a gospel that demands up front an exclusive commitment to an obedient lifestyle in hopes of minimizing these problems."

One must always be careful not to bounce off one unbiblical teaching into another. This has sadly been the case of some people (like John MacArthur) who have, with good cause, been frustrated by those who make professions of faith in Christ, but do not live for Christ. I share the distress over those who call themselves Christians, but are weak and seem little interested in the things of the Lord. Certainly there are many Christians who do not live up to what they profess to believe. This frustration, however, does not warrant “changing the terms of the gospel,” which is what John MacArthur and the LS advocates he represents have done.

Lordship Salvation is a false gospel through the addition of conditions and calls for upfront commitments from a lost man to, as JM demands, "Full surrender...a willingness to die for Jesus' sake." These statements are from JM's The Gospel According to Jesus. Lordship Salvation is a man-centered message that frustrates the grace of God (Gal. 2:21).

Lordship Salvation tears at the very heart of the gospel; it corrupts the “simplicity that is in Christ.” (2 Corinthians 11:3) When a man teaches that one must offer anything apart from or in addition to faith, believing and repentance toward his salvation, he has adopted a “works” philosophy and has departed from the “faith which was once delivered” (Jude 3). When you hear a man make the reception of salvation contingent upon promises of cross bearing, submission and commitment, mark it down: he is teaching Lordship Salvation. Lordship Salvation is a deviation from the gospel of the Bible!

"But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ. For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him," (2 Cor. 11:3-4)

LM

Edited excerpt from- In Defense of the Gospel

 

[Hope of Glory]

You are absolutely right. However that inheritance can be forfeited/lost. Only obedient children will actually obtain the inheritance. Disobedient children will not. Nowhere does Scripture say that all of God's children will receive the inheritance.

Which is the entire point of Revelation 21:7: It's "he that overcometh"; he that conquers; (works) that shall inherit all things, and shall be a son. (A mature child; not every child is a son; son is position, not relation.)

Use the prodigal son as an example. He had an inheritance. He squandered it. Even so, he was still part of the family, and when he returned to obedience, he was welcomed back with open arms. Not with what he had before (he blew that), but with a robe, a ring, and sandals.

We're all given an inheritance in this life. What are we going to do with it? Are we going to get an increase on it or are we going to blow it?

 

[Hope of Glory]

And I'm not even going to get into the discussiuon of why the sins of homosexuality and adultery always seem to arise in these threads about Lordship salvation? I checked the lists in Scripture, They are not on the seven thing the Lord says he hates the most, but talebearing (gossip) and a proud look sure are. Why don't they rate higher with the LS advocates??

Ed

Don't forget covetousness.

One thing that I wonder is what is the magic line above which you've done enough to make him Lord and be saved, and why the Bible doesn't spell it out a little better. (OK, two things that I wonder.) Oh, and I wonder why the Bible includes that little contradiction in Acts 16:31 that simply says "believe" on the Lord Jesus and you will be saved.

 

[Allan]

McArthur has a long history of teaching so thoroughly that he teaches himself into a corner. On the other hand, he isn't the first person to note that American Evangelicalism has a decades (maybe over a century?) long history of "dividing Christ."

The first person I ever heard this from was A.W. Tozer, who in the mid-20th century preacher the sermon "I Call It Heresy!" The subtitle was "An Evangelical Heresy: A Divided Christ."

The thrust of what he identified as heresy was the concept that one could "accept Christ as Savior," but somehow put off "making Christ Lord" of their lives until some later date. Tozer condemns that kind of message as "heresy." Frankly, I concur.

I have heard this type of preaching all my life. In the SB Church I grew up in, in Durham, NC,I remember many times (I can't count them all) the invitation was given for salvation, for "rededication," and most often with these words: "Perhaps at some time in the past you've accepted Christ as Savior, but you've never made Him Lord of your life. Won't you do that now?"

I heard that message far beyond just the church I grew up in though. Churches I attended in college, and not just SBC churches, but also IFB churches and beyond.

Often disagreements about "Lordship Salvation" are a matter of how one defines "Lordship," and of semantics. IF one teaches that Christ can be Savior but NOT Lord, indeed Tozer and McArthur is right -- that's heresy. If one teaches that Lordship means one will not sin (or not sin in a certain way -- which I've heard even on this forum) then that too is an aberration from Biblical truth. If one teaches that Lordship is maintaining a faithful, obedient, humble and GROWING relationship to God in Christ Jesus, THEN we are talking Biblically.

For one to claim that they are "saved" and yet live in continual sin is nonsensical. For one to claim salvation and yet bear no fruit, experience no growth, exemplify no change spiritually in their lives -- that too is foolishness.

Given the tendency of McArthur to trap himself in his own words, I can understand why some eye his views with suspicion. On the other hand, to say that "repentance in unnecessary for salvation," or that "Christians need not bear fruit," or that "requiring one accept Jesus as Lord for salvation is works" as some opponents of "Lordship Salvation" charge is both patently unbiblical and defies logic and common sense.

JDale

Well said.

 

[Martin]

Yes all believers are overcomers, but can you show me that John is saying that all "believers" is the same thing as all "saved" people.

==I'm not sure I understand your question since a saved person believes. If a person believes they are an overcomer.

Contextually believers are the ones that are living by faith after eternal salvation has been taken care of. The Bible also speaks of unbelievers not in the sense of eternally damned, but unbelieving in what is supposed to be believed in after eternal salvation is spoken of.

==Again, I'm not clear on what you are trying to say. The Bible warns about those who turn back (Heb 10:39).

Ephesians 2:8-10 is a perfect passage which says that good works may or may not happen.

==Well we are certainly reading that verse very differently.

Paul said:

"For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them" -Eph 2:10

The good works spoken of by Paul in this passage were "prepared beforehand" by God Himself. This is one the purposes of salvation. Believers walk in the good works God planned out in eternity past.

"Like salvation, a believer's sanctification and good works were ordained before time began" -MacArthur

Even Charles Ryrie, hardly a Lordship advocate, states that "good works always accompany salvation". (From the NASB Ryrie Study Bible, Note Eph 2:8). Ryrie also points to James 2:17.

Being saved does not guarantee you are going to live a life of good works. The Bible teaches that actually the majority of Christians will be quite opposite and will be ones that cry out Lord, Lord and then list all the "good" works they did and He will tell them to depart because they were actually working lawlessness.

==Are you saying that Matthew 7:21-23 is refering to believers? Just making sure I am reading you correctly before I comment.

But James is talking to "saved" individuals. He's not dealing with something that is already settled for them.

==Just because James is writing to saved people does not mean that he can't talk about how true faith results in works. He gave Abraham as an example of someone who had justifying faith in God and how his faith was seen by his works.

The faith of Abraham that Scripture speaks of is not eternally saving faith

==Abraham had justifying faith in God (see Gen 15:6, Rom 4:3, etc) and his faith was "fulfilled" in his works (Jms 2:21-24). It was because Abraham had faith in God that he was willing to do whatever God asked of him. His faith was seen in his works.

 

[Martin]

I just checked twenty different versions on I cor. 5:11. Only the NASB, among more formal equivalency translations, refers to a "so-called brother". I suggest the majority of translators read this to be one named a brother, not some merely supposed one.

==I am very familiar with the various ways that verse is translated. Even if the phrase is translated "named a brother" that does not change anything I said. This is a person who is called "brother" because they claim to be a Christian. Paul wants that person out of the church because of the damage his sin is doing. Paul does not say that the man is saved or that the man is not saved. Paul was clearly leaving the man's salvation open to question.

I guess you read a portion of Romans 10 in this manner, then. Maybe its just me, but the words that I have emboldened seem to be added to the Scripture, or at least the interpretation of the Scripture to support this doctrine known as Lordship Salvation.

==My comments were refering to John's teaching in his letter we know as 1John. Paul says nothing that contradicts John. So I have to wonder why, instead of looking at what John said, you choose to jump to Romans.

And adding words, and redefining words in or into Scripture is one of my pet peeves, you know like "irrestible grace",

==Irresistible grace is not a term found in Scripture. Like the term "trinity" it describes a teaching of Scripture (Jn 6:37).

"perseverance of the saints", and "repent of your sins", and "Make Jesus Lord!"

==Scripture commands people to repent (Acts 17:30-31, 26:16-20). Perseverance, like Irresistible grace, is the name of a doctrine that is taught in Scripture (Heb 3:14). We don't make Jesus Lord of our lives, we confess Him as our Lord. By confessing Him as Lord we are agreeing that He is Lord. If we agree that He is Lord, and if we call Him our Lord, then we will do what He says (Lk 6:46).

And I'm not even going to get into the discussiuon of why the sins of homosexuality and adultery always seem to arise in these threads about Lordship salvation?

==Because Paul lists those sins in 1Cor 6:9-10 and Gal 5:19-21. John lists some as well in Rev 21:8.

I checked the lists in Scripture, They are not on the seven thing the Lord says he hates the most, but talebearing (gossip) and a proud look sure are. Why don't they rate higher with the LS advocates??

==Well I have pointed to Prov 6 on more than one occasion. I have also openly called gossip an abomination. So I don't know where you get the idea that Lordship advocates ignore that point. Some may, but not all.

 

[Martin]

Answering Easy-Believism and the shallow, loose living of some professing Christians does not justify or excuse taking another extreme position, namely, Lordship Salvation.

==Lordship salvation is an "extreme position"? So you are claiming that men such as Charles Spurgeon and Jonathan Edwards held an extreme position? It seems to me that Lordship Salvation, as it is called, is the normative position of many major teachers/preachers all throughout church history. O, and yes, there is a reason for that: Scripture.

Dr. Charles Bing made a similar observation

==Charles Bing is an active member of the Grace Evangelical Society and good friends with Bob Wilkin, Zane Hodges, Tony Evans, and Joseph Dillow. He is very much a part of the no-Lordship, antinomian, camp. While he seems like a perfectly nice guy, his teachings on this are leading many people astray.

"they have proposed a gospel that demands up front an exclusive commitment to an obedient lifestyle in hopes of minimizing these problems."

==Christ calls for an "exclusive commitment" to Him (Matt 10:34-39). Does that mean obeying Him? Yes! After all Christ was clear on the fact that His sheep follow Him and nobody/nothing else (Jn 10:5,27). If a person confesses Jesus as their Lord then they should obey Him.

I don't understand why so many Christians want to make excuses for those "professing Christians" who refuse to obey Christ. We are not talking about people who are struggling against sin. We are talking about people who want their "get out of hell free card" and then to live like the world. Why do some Christians rush to give these people assurance and to defend their assurance? I honestly don't understand the reasoning (even though I was once a non-Lordship advocate).

Lordship Salvation is a false gospel through the addition of conditions and calls for upfront commitments from a lost man to, as JM demands, "Full surrender...a willingness to die for Jesus' sake." These statements are from JM's The Gospel According to Jesus. Lordship Salvation is a man-centered message that frustrates the grace of God (Gal. 2:21).

==That statement is amazing only because how misleading it is. Lordship salvation calls people to take the focus off themselves and put it on Christ, to deny self and to follow Christ, etc. That is hardly a man-centered message.

When a man teaches that one must offer anything apart from or in addition to faith, believing and repentance toward his salvation, he has adopted a “works” philosophy and has departed from the “faith which was once delivered” (Jude 3).

==Since Lordship Salvation advocates do not believe in a works-based salvation that accusation is totally false. We do not believe that any good works a person can/may perform aides in their salvation in anyway. Salvation is 100% a work of God. Man cannot take any credit, whatsoever, for his salvation. That is the position of all Lordship advocates.

When you hear a man make the reception of salvation contingent upon promises of cross bearing, submission and commitment, mark it down: he is teaching Lordship Salvation. Lordship Salvation is a deviation from the gospel of the Bible!

==So you are claiming that men like Charles Spurgeon, John Wesley, Jonathan Edwards, and Arthur Pink were guilty of pushing a false gospel and have therefore perished in the fires of hell? That is the conclusion your statement leads to.

 

[J. Jump]

I'm not sure I understand your question since a saved person believes. If a person believes they are an overcomer.

Well it has to do with semantics. Semantics are extremely important, because God chose exactly the words that He wanted to use and He wanted us to understand. Unfortunately those words have been drastically redefined by man and has caused mass confusion these days. Well should I say initiated by the enemy and man was the instrument.

You say all saved folks are believers and that all believers are overcomers. If that is a true statement can you show in Scripture where that connection is made and how that corresponds with the very text that you used in Revelation, which in no way says that all are overcomers. The verse in Revelation is a conditional statement. If this then that. The if is not a guarantee as you suggest.

Well we are certainly reading that verse very differently.

There is only one way to read the verse. The verse says we would or should (depending on which translation you are using). But the Greek tense of the word is such that it's not a certainty but a possibility. Should is actually a better translation of the Greek. We SHOULD walk in the good works, but that doesn't mean we WILL walk in them. You are saying we WILL, but that's not what the verse says. Again there is only one way to read it and that's the way it is written.

Even Charles Ryrie, hardly a Lordship advocate, states that "good works always accompany salvation". (From the NASB Ryrie Study Bible, Note Eph 2:8). Ryrie also points to James 2:17.

Well if John Mac and Charles Ryrie say it is must be true then huh? Sorry just because mans says something doesn't make it so. Good works SHOULD accompany salvation, but there is a chance they won't. Doesn't have anything to do with one's salvation. It has to do with obedience. Obedience is not part of salvation, or it is no longer by grace, but by our works. It's just that plain and simple.

Are you saying that Matthew 7:21-23 is refering to believers? Just making sure I am reading you correctly before I comment.

Those that cried Lord, Lord and then listed all their "good" works expecting to be praised by the Lord were indeed saved. There's no way to explain them as unsaved folks. The text just doesn't allow it, nor does context.

Just because James is writing to saved people does not mean that he can't talk about how true faith results in works. He gave Abraham as an example of someone who had justifying faith in God and how his faith was seen by his works.

I didn't say James couldn't talk about how faith results in works. By the way there isn't a true faith and a false faith. There is just faith and no faith. Well I guess there is three. There is a faith that works. A dead faith and then no faith.

But James is speaking about faith in the present, not in the past. Eternal salvation is a past matter. If he was talking about eternal salvation he would have used past tenses as Paul did in Ephesians 2:8-9.

Again we must let the text tell us what is being talked about not the other way around.

Abraham had justifying faith in God (see Gen 15:6, Rom 4:3, etc) and his faith was "fulfilled" in his works (Jms 2:21-24). It was because Abraham had faith in God that he was willing to do whatever God asked of him. His faith was seen in his works.

I agree with you. You just haven't shown where Scripture says that this faith was eternally saving faith. Scripture doesn't make that connection. If Scripture doesn't connect those dots, then we must leave them unconnected and only connect the dots that Scripture does.

 

[skypair]

martin,

It's hard to catch up on this thread but I'm trying. :laugh:

OP: ""No-lordship doctrine rose to popularity in the mid-twentieth century and was almost unchallenged as the dominant system of theology in American evangelicalism for several decades. The no-lordship message has filled the church with people lacking spiritual fruit and absent every other vital evidence of living faith - who nonetheless are convinced they are authentic Christians.
In fact, according to no-lordship doctrine, someone who lives an utterly debauched lifestyle should nevertheless be embraced as a true Christian if he or she ever once professed faith in Christ. These so-called "carnal Christians" are regularly given strong reassurances that their salvation is secure no matter how long or how egregiously they rebel against Christ's authority." -pg153 [/quote]

There are soooo many problems here:

1) we church are supposed to separate ourselves from BELIEVERS living in sin IAW 1Cor 5:11.

2) The scripture does NOT tell us to teach "Lordship Salvation" as a doctrine to combat "easy believism."

3) the is NO "no-lordship doctrine."

What is allowed is to draw them through repentance back to communion.

Basically, JM is establishing his doctrine on extrabiblical grounds.

skypair