The Gospel According to Jesus

[Havensdad]

It IS the teaching of MacArthur and all men who teach and promote Lordship's peculiar interpretation of the Gospel that has introduced “divisions and offenses” into the body of Christ.

Since "your" brand of Christianity, is not the historical view, and can only be historically supported for about 50 years, wouldn't that make YOUR easy believism interpretation that is the "peculiar" one?

EVERY major Christian writer for the last 2000 years (within any semblance of orthodoxy) has again and again affirmed that those who DO NOT PRACTICE RIGHTEOUSNESS, were never saved.

"Changed life" is not optional in scripture. You always use words like "should lead to a changed life" when the Bible over and over again speaks of this as a definite. If you believe that you can be saved, and it is even POSSIBLE for you to remain unchanged, you DO NOT believe in the biblical gospel.

It is exactly the teaching of men like MacArthur that must be biblically resisted. The Bible mandates our course of action when the Gospel is under assault such as it is by the teaching of Lordship Salvation.

It is exactly the biblical teaching of John Macarthur and others like him, which MUST be embraced, or the Church in America will finish it's abhorrent fall into worldliness, sin and depravity.

Finally, I want to reiterate that MacArthur’s character is not under question, his teaching is because his teaching on the Gospel is a departure from the faith once delivered (Jude 3).


LM

His teaching on the Gospel is in line with Historic protestantism, evangelicalism, the New Testament, Church History in general, etc. Your convoluted unbiblical ideas, which have sprang up in the last 50-60 years, is a "departure from the faith once delivered". By your actions, and the actions of those like you, you give people a false sense of security, you malign the Scriptures, and you are FILLING the Churches around the world with false converts, which tear down it's structure, and spirit, bit by bit.

 

[Rippon]

Since "your" brand of Christianity, is not the historical view, and can only be historically supported for about 50 years, wouldn't that make YOUR easy believism interpretation that is the "peculiar" one?

EVERY major Christian writer for the last 2000 years (within any semblance of orthodoxy) has again and again affirmed that those who DO NOT PRACTICE RIGHTEOUSNESS, were never saved.

"Changed life" is not optional in scripture. You always use words like "should lead to a changed life" when the Bible over and over again speaks of this as a definite. If you believe that you can be saved, and it is even POSSIBLE for you to remain unchanged, you DO NOT believe in the biblical gospel.



It is exactly the biblical teaching of John Macarthur and others like him, which MUST be embraced, or the Church in America will finish it's abhorrent fall into worldliness, sin and depravity.



His teaching on the Gospel is in line with Historic protestantism, evangelicalism, the New Testament, Church History in general, etc. Your convoluted unbiblical ideas, which have sprang up in the last 50-60 years, is a "departure from the faith once delivered". By your actions, and the actions of those like you, you give people a false sense of security, you malign the Scriptures, and you are FILLING the Churches around the world with false converts, which tear down it's structure, and spirit, bit by bit.

AMEN to everything you have said HD!

 

[ReformedBaptist]

RB,

Have you read MacArthur's take on James 4:7-10? If so, Do you agree with him?

I don't think I have TC. Is it online? I now have his book on the subject we are discussing. Is it in there? I will look for it...

 

[TCGreek]

I don't think I have TC. Is it online? I now have his book on the subject we are discussing. Is it in there? I will look for it...

RB,

It's in Appendix 1.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

RB,

It's in Appendix 1.

Ok, read the text, then read JM. Then compared JM with Gill, B.H. Carroll, Henry..

I understand what he is saying. And I agree with it.

 

[canadyjd]

RB,

Have you read MacArthur's take on James 4:7-10? If so, Do you agree with him?

I noticed you have referenced the James 4 passage several times during the LS debate.

I wrote this in response to Lou Martuneac's question some time ago. I hope it helps to confirm the context of James.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=45146&page=6&highlight=honest+debate+Lordship+Salvation

Originally Posted by Lou Martuneac
I will ask just two questions for honestdebate:

1) Is the epistle of James, and this passage specifically, directed to the lost or to those who are saved already?

canadyjd said in response:
The letter of James is concerned with the relationship of faith and works. James, like other writers, identifies the intended recepients as "brethren" (v.1) That does not mean he considers everyone who reads it to be genuinely saved, but, perhaps, hopefully saved. He certainly allows for the possibility that some who hear/read the letter are not saved.

For example, he urges them in chap.1 v.21 to "recieve the word implanted which is able to save your souls." That seems to me to indicate James believes some of the recepients had not recieved the word and where not yet saved.

(1 v. 22) "Prove yourselves doers of the word and not merely hearers who delude themselves." This indicates James believes some of the recepients have deluded themselves concerning salvation.

(1 v.26) "If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man's religion is worthless"
Again, James speaks of someone who has deceived themselves and has a worthless religion. If it is worthless, I don't believe it can be called salvific.

In chp. 2 he goes on to make comparisons between those who have genuine faith, and those who do not.

In v. 14 "What use is it, my brethren, if a man says he has faith, but he has no works? Can that faith save him? The expected answer is NO, that faith cannot save him. He goes on to say that "faith without works is dead."(v.26)

Concerning the specific passage you have quoted (4:7-10), James begins chap. 4 by scolding the recepients concerning their behavior. He calls them "adultresses" and warns them that if they are friends with the world, then they are enemies of God. (I don't believe an ememy of God is a saved person, since Jesus reconciled believers to God).

So, to answer your first question directly; Even though James initially addresses the recepients of his letter as "brethren" it is clear from the mentioned verses that he allows for the possibility/probability that some are not saved.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Lou Martuneac
2) Where in James 4:7-10 do we find salvation by grace through faith (Eph. 2:8-9)?

To answer your second question directly, it is not plainly stated in those verses.

However, Chap. 4 v.5 speaks of "the Spirit He has made to dwell in us.." being jealously desired by God. And v. 6 says "But He gives a greater grace." and "God is opposed to the proud, but gives grace to the humble." So an understanding of salvific grace is not absent from the context.

Given the overall theme of James; the relationship between faith and works; and v.5 and 6 of chp. 4 speaking of the indwelling Holy Spirit and of "grace" being given by God, I can understand that J. Mac sees verses 7-10 as describing what a response to God's grace with saving faith should look like.

I agree he overstates his case here, but I wouldn't label him as a false teacher for doing so. There is some merit to what he is saying, even though you really have to take the whole book in context to get there.

peace to you raying:

 

[JustChristian]

Since "your" brand of Christianity, is not the historical view, and can only be historically supported for about 50 years, wouldn't that make YOUR easy believism interpretation that is the "peculiar" one?

EVERY major Christian writer for the last 2000 years (within any semblance of orthodoxy) has again and again affirmed that those who DO NOT PRACTICE RIGHTEOUSNESS, were never saved.

"Changed life" is not optional in scripture. You always use words like "should lead to a changed life" when the Bible over and over again speaks of this as a definite. If you believe that you can be saved, and it is even POSSIBLE for you to remain unchanged, you DO NOT believe in the biblical gospel.



It is exactly the biblical teaching of John Macarthur and others like him, which MUST be embraced, or the Church in America will finish it's abhorrent fall into worldliness, sin and depravity.



His teaching on the Gospel is in line with Historic protestantism, evangelicalism, the New Testament, Church History in general, etc. Your convoluted unbiblical ideas, which have sprang up in the last 50-60 years, is a "departure from the faith once delivered". By your actions, and the actions of those like you, you give people a false sense of security, you malign the Scriptures, and you are FILLING the Churches around the world with false converts, which tear down it's structure, and spirit, bit by bit.

Exactly. I completely agree with you. It's my view that there are a lot of professing christians in the U.S. that think of their religion more like belonging to a social club which gives them acceptable standing in the community (almost 80% of America claims to be a Christian) and a warm and fuzzy feeling but doesn't require any real devotion or sacrifice. Many feel that being active in the Republican party is a good substitute for following Christ.

 

[Lou Martuneac]

Tragedy of Lordship Salvation

BB Readers:

Reformed Baptist (RB) has said he read MacArthur’s teaching on James 4 and agrees with it. He does not identify what that teaching is so what is it that RB says he agrees with? I will provide MacArthur’s teaching on James 4:7-10 from the book and this we way will know what it is that RB agrees with.

In each of the three editions of Dr. John MacArthur’s The Gospel According to Jesus there is a single page that summarizes one of the most egregious errors of the Lordship Salvation interpretation of the Gospel.

The page I refer to appears in the original and revised versions (pp. 218 and 252 respectively). In the 20th Anniversary edition, you will turn to page 250 and read,

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

This is the passage Dr. MacArthur refers to as an “invitation to salvation.”

“Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hands, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded. Be afflicted, and mourn, and weep: let your laughter be turned to mourning, and your joy to heaviness. Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up,” (James 4:7-10).

At this point I want to remind my readers that the crux of the Lordship Salvation controversy is with the requirement for salvation, NOT what should be the natural results of a genuine conversion. In this section on the James passage MacArthur is making his application to, “those who are not saved.”

Is the epistle of James, “directed at those who are not saved?” The epistle begins, “James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greetings. My brethren, count it all joy…,” (James 1:1-2). “Brethren” appears approximately 190 times in the New Testament, and when does appear it is used almost exclusively in reference to born again Christians.

MacArthur views the carnality that James addresses as though it proves these “brethren,” were never saved in the first place. He views them as “sinners…unregenerate…in desperate need of God’s (saving) grace.” MacArthur’s answer to the problem is that they need to be born again. He goes on to delineate what he believes are the ten “imperatives” for the reception of eternal life. The saving message to “sinners,” the “unregenerate,” according to MacArthur is,
“...submit yourself to God (salvation); resist the devil (transferring allegiance); draw near to God (intimacy of relationship); cleanse your hands (repentance); purify your hearts (confession); be miserable, mourn, weep and let your laughter and joy be turned to gloom (sorrow). The final imperative summarizes the mentality of those who are converted: ‘Humble yourselves in the presence of the Lord’.”

If MacArthur’s statement were shared as instruction to Christians on how they should live wisely as born again disciples of Jesus Christ that would be a fair application of what he wrote. He is, however, stating what he believes are the necessary conditions of saving faith that results in a lost man becoming a Christian.

What we have in this single page (250) of The Gospel According to Jesus is the Lordship’s classic error of failing to distinguish between the doctrines of salvation and discipleship. Lordship Salvation frontloads faith with commitment to the “good works” (Eph. 2:10) one would expect of a mature born again Christian.

Do we find salvation by the grace of God through faith in Christ (Eph. 2:8-9) anywhere in James 4:7-10? No, we do not, because James is addressing “brethren” some of whom behaved as “carnal” Christians.

The example from page 250 of The Gospel According to Jesus typifies and exemplifies the error of Lordship Salvation. The crux of the Lordship controversy is contained in the three paragraphs of that single page. That one page is all one needs to know about John MacArthur’s Lordship Salvation to realize he has changed the terms of the Gospel into a non-saving, man-centered message that frustrates the grace of God.

“I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain,” (Galatians 2:21).

We can therefore, sadly conclude that Reformed Baptist, who by his own admission agrees with MacArthur’s gross misinterpretation of James 4:7-10 has adopted Lordship’s false interpretation the Gospel. This is a genuine tragedy of Lordship Salvation and typifies its devastating effect in evangelical circles.

LS, as defined by John MacArthur, conditions salvation on the lost man’s commitment to works.


LM

 

[Lou Martuneac]

Another LS sympathizer, who never read MacArthur until a few days ago, wrote,

“I agree he overstates his case here, but I wouldn't label him as a false teacher for doing so. There is some merit to what he is saying, even though you really have to take the whole book in context to get there.”

It is commonplace for LS sympathizers to dismiss the most egregious errors in JM's teaching by calling them an “overstatement.”

These alleged “overstatements” appear over-and-over in all of MacArthur’s major LS works. He not only reiterates them, he reinforces them.

There is no merit to JM's interpreting James 4:7-10 as an “invitation to salvation.” His interpretation of James 4:7-10 affirms that he is teaching a false gospel. It is a radical departure from the Gospel grace. JM redefines the Gospel into a message of commitment to works to be born again. JM is teaching a false, works-based, Gospel.

If MacArthur "overstates his case" On James 4:7-10, why hasn't this teaching been edited or eliminated? This teaching on page 250 of the third (20th Anniversary) edition of TGATJ appears in both prior editions in the exact same form. For 20 years this "overstatement" on James 4:7-10 has been unaltered. Why is that? Simple: He is not overstating his case, it is his psoition and he is articuating it in clear, unvarnished terms.

Behavior is LS’s key to salvation. Believe if you will, but you had better be committed to behavior expected of a Christian to become a Christian, to be born again.


LM

 

[Jarthur001]

Another LS sympathizer, who never read MacArthur until a few days ago, wrote,
It is commonplace for LS sympathizers to dismiss the most egregious errors in JM's teaching by calling them an “overstatement.”



LM

To be fair, many who had never read John MacArthur before, now find his writings enjoyable and even find themself agreeing with MacArthur, because they have seen the misquotes and slander on this board, by one man on a mission. When the BB reader reads an attack that is issued toward MacArthur rather then just take one mans word on it, they check what John Mac really says on a google search, have been drawn to his books, for they find the attacks are unjust. The so called LS sympathizers (labeled by one man) only become LS sympathizers because of one mans unjust attacks on John Mac, that have been proven to be misleading by countless people. When error of the attacks is pointed out, the answer is to start a new thread, or change subjects or maybe act as if nothing was said.

So in the end, the mission of one has cause others to be drawn to John MacArthur, only because is is seen by all that the attacks are unjust.

For this reason I feel we must think this one man that has caused others to read MacArthur.

Thanks Lou

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Reformed Baptist (RB) has said he read MacArthur’s teaching on James 4 and agrees with it. He does not identify what that teaching is so what is it that RB says he agrees with?

My response was directed to TC and not the board. I will type out the section later so that the BB can read the text in full.

 

[FERRON BRIMSTONE]

If MacArthur "overstates his case" On James 4:7-10, why hasn't this teaching been edited or eliminated? This teaching on page 250 of the third (20th Anniversary) edition of TGATJ appears in both prior editions in the exact same form. For 20 years this "overstatement" on James 4:7-10 has been unaltered. Why is that? Simple: He is not overstating his case, it is his psoition and he is articuating it in clear, unvarnished terms.

Behavior is LS’s key to salvation. Believe if you will, but you had better be committed to behavior expected of a Christian to become a Christian, to be born again.


LM

First, behavior is NOT the key to LS, who is in charge of your life is. Are you willing to "forsake all and follow me".

Second, Is James directing 4:7-10 at saved or unsaved people? verse 4 states that they are friends of the world and enemies of God. He also refers to them as adulterers and adulteresses which indicate false believers.


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

 

[Lou Martuneac]

First, behavior is NOT the key to LS, who is in charge of your life is. Are you willing to "forsake all and follow me".

If you speak in terms of the born again disciple of Christ forsaking and following they are commands he must respond to. I fully agree that the Lord must and should be responded to by those who are born again (Rom. 12:1-2).

LS, however, takes those things to the lost as evangelistic appeals that must be agreed to in advance, agree to perform FOR the reception of eternal life, to be born again. LS calls on lost men for a promise to perform works to become a Christian.

LS is a promise for a promise transaction. The lost man must promise to perform as a fully surrendered disciple of Christ in exchange for the promise of eternal life. WORKS!

Second, Is James directing 4:7-10 at saved or unsaved people? verse 4 states that they are friends of the world and enemies of God. He also refers to them as adulterers and adulteresses which indicate false believers. James 2:17 "So also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead."

Is the epistle of James, “directed at those who are not saved?” The epistle begins, “James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greetings. My brethren, count it all joy…,” (James 1:1-2). “Brethren” appears approximately 190 times in the New Testament, and when does appear it is used almost exclusively in reference to born again Christians.

MacArthur views the carnality that James addresses as though it proves these “brethren,” were never saved in the first place. He views them as “sinners…unregenerate…in desperate need of God’s (saving) grace.” MacArthur’s answer to the problem is that they need to be born again. He goes on to delineate what he believes are the ten “imperatives” for the reception of eternal life.

The saving message to “sinners,” the “unregenerate,” according to MacArthur is, “...submit yourself to God (salvation); resist the devil (transferring allegiance); draw near to God (intimacy of relationship); cleanse your hands (repentance); purify your hearts (confession); be miserable, mourn, weep and let your laughter and joy be turned to gloom (sorrow). The final imperative summarizes the mentality of those who are converted: ‘Humble yourselves in the presence of the Lord’.”

If MacArthur’s statement were shared as instruction to Christians on how they should live wisely as born again disciples of Jesus Christ that would be a fair application of what he wrote. He is, however, stating what he believes are the necessary conditions of saving faith that results in a lost man becoming a Christian.

The example from page 250 of The Gospel According to Jesus typifies and exemplifies the error of Lordship Salvation. The crux of the Lordship controversy is contained in the three paragraphs of that single page. That one page is all one needs to know about John MacArthur’s Lordship Salvation to realize he has changed the terms of the Gospel into a non-saving, man-centered message that frustrates the grace of God.


LM

 

[FERRON BRIMSTONE]

Lou,

"forsake all and follow me" is a call to salvation using different terms than "repent and believe" but encompasses the idea.

How can you say that James 4:7-10 is aimed at believers when verse 4 says they are enemies of God?

James 4:4 "You adulterous people! Do you not know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God. 5 Or do you suppose it is to no purpose that the Scripture says, “He yearns jealously over the spirit that he has made to dwell in us”? 6 But he gives more grace. Therefore it says, “God opposes the proud, but gives grace to the humble.” 7 Submit yourselves therefore to God. Resist the devil, and he will flee from you. 8 Draw near to God, and he will draw near to you. Cleanse your hands, you sinners, and purify your hearts, you double-minded. 9 Be wretched and mourn and weep. Let your laughter be turned to mourning and your joy to gloom. 10 Humble yourselves before the Lord, and he will exalt you."

You cannot go back to chapter 1 when he tells you in chapter 4 who chapter 4 is talking to.

Are you saying "enemies of God" are saved people?

 

[Lou Martuneac]

Ferron:

I appreciate your concern, but you are misinterpreting the book and passage. You must read in context.

Before I address that please understand that when you look at verses 7-10 remember that MacArthur interprets those as an evangelistic appeal to the lost. Is salvation, being born again received by the lost man's commitment to or actual performance of these things?

I have to leave for work. I’ll direct you to The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Vol. 12, p. 193-ff. for further study. (The commentary is with the NIV.)

Here is a brief excerpt and I am gone for the day.

Having identified the source of the bitter fighting as being the desire for pleasure (4:1-3), James next rebukes his readers for spiritual unfaithfulness (4:4-6). The noun translated “adulterous people” feminine, meaning “adulteresses.” The people of God in the OT are considered the wife of the Lord (Jer. 31:32), and in the NT, the bride of Christ (Eph. 5:23-32). It is reasonable, therefore, to understand “adulteress” as a figure of speech for spiritual unfaithfulness. It is a blunt and shocking word, intended to jar the reader and awaken him to his true spiritual condition.

James’ readers are believers. James is addressing believers in the church and the worldliness of some of the believers in the church.


LM

 

[Havensdad]

James’ readers are believers. James is addressing believers in the church and the worldliness of some of the believers in the church.


LM

The book of James is addressed to the twelve tribes. Jews, not Christians, necessarily. James is a Jew, and so it is perfectly normal for him to call other Jews "brothers".

Secondly, it is a HUGE mistake, to place different qualifications on writings than those which would be placed today. What do I mean?

Well, if I preach at my Church, I am very well aware that some there are probably not saved. So I include evangelistic material and an invitation. But according to YOU, Lou, such things are IMPOSSIBLE for more ancient writers.

Moreover> the commands given to Christians, throughout the NT, are the same as those given to those who are unbelievers. For instance, believers are told to have faith, and unbelievers are told to have faith. Believers are commanded to repent, and unbelievers are commanded to repent. Believers are told to "Deny yourself, pick up your cross, and follow me", and the crowds in general are also told such.

You divide such things to your own error. It affects your hermeneutic, and it is why you continually lead people astray with your false gospel of intellectual assent.

 

[webdog]

That's the first I have ever heard someone say the book of James is for jews and not believers.

 

[Havensdad]

That's the first I have ever heard someone say the book of James is for jews and not believers.

Bro,

Where does the Book of James say it is to believers? I DO believe it is a letter, which was circulated to various congregations/groups. However, NOTHING in the text, would lead one to assume, that it was written to Christians exclusively. In fact, the ONLY specific group which is addressed, is Jews. As anyone that is the least familiar with Scripture will tell you, the "Twelve tribes" (which this letter is addressed to), refers to the twelve tribes of Israel, not Christians.

Also, words such as "Enemies of God" (which is never used to describe Christians!), would lead one to conclude that it IS addressed in part to unconverted Jews/Judaizers, who were within the local assemblies, gathering with the believers.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Bro,

Where does the Book of James say it is to believers? I DO believe it is a letter, which was circulated to various congregations/groups. However, NOTHING in the text, would lead one to assume, that it was written to Christians exclusively. In fact, the ONLY specific group which is addressed, is Jews. As anyone that is the least familiar with Scripture will tell you, the "Twelve tribes" (which this letter is addressed to), refers to the twelve tribes of Israel, not Christians.

Also, words such as "Enemies of God" (which is never used to describe Christians!), would lead one to conclude that it IS addressed in part to unconverted Jews/Judaizers, who were within the local assemblies, gathering with the believers.

I agree that the 12 tribes must refer to Jews unless interpreted allegorically. Also, I too think James was preaching in his letter with both saved AND unsaved readers in mind.

 

[JustChristian]

Ferron:

I appreciate your concern, but you are misinterpreting the book and passage. You must read in context.

Before I address that please understand that when you look at verses 7-10 remember that MacArthur interprets those as an evangelistic appeal to the lost. Is salvation, being born again received by the lost man's commitment to or actual performance of these things?

I have to leave for work. I’ll direct you to The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, Vol. 12, p. 193-ff. for further study. (The commentary is with the NIV.)

Here is a brief excerpt and I am gone for the day.

James’ readers are believers. James is addressing believers in the church and the worldliness of some of the believers in the church.


LM

Let me ask you a direct question. Is Jesus the Lord of YOUR life? If not, who or what is?