Wasn't Christ's Atoning Work Enough?

[Lou Martuneac]

In the meantime...

Since Christ's atoning work satisfied God, why does LS call on the lost for a promise to perform the God ordained "good works" (Eph. 2:10) that should be the natural result of salvation?

 

[ReformedBaptist]

RB:

IMO, you are letting your personal affinity for MacArthur get in the way again, even without ever having read any of his major LS books. You should try to rein in your emotions, at least take a cooling off period before you react to any legitimate criticism of MacArthur's Lordship interpretation of the Gospel.

Anyway, you asked if I consider MacArthur unsaved? Ironically, I just addressed that question yesterday at my blog. You'll have to do the reading. Go to Lordship's "Turn From Sin" For Salvation.

See my comment on 8/11/08 @ 10:44pm.


LM

"Hobby-Horse?" Among MacArthur's five his major books on Lordship Salvation, one has been released three times. Not to mention the many, many articles and sermons in print.

IMO, can you please answer the question directly in this thread that you started. What you wrote raises serious questions. You claim that the LS teaching misleads, distorts, and is a non-saving Gospel. So please just answer the question concerning what you wrote and leave the personal comments about me out of the discussion.

 

[Revmitchell]

As soon as you can acknowledge that repentance for salvation is NEVER about turning from sin...forsaking sin, the resolve to stop committing sin, and implying the intention to start obeying.

When you drop that teaching from biblical repentance because it is not there.


LM

I have clearly shown it is.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

In the meantime...

Since Christ's atoning work satisfied God, why does LS call on the lost for a promise to perform the God ordained "good works" (Eph. 2:10) that should be the natural result of salvation?

It doesn't. It only does in your mind.

 

[webdog]

I am not going to let this one pass on unanswered. Are you teaching that JM is not saved? Are you also by implication telling the BB that those who agree with JM's explaination of salvation are not saved?

You have considered me an LS apologist. Are you saying I am not saved?

I don't recall Lou saying anything of the sort. John Mac is not named Lorship Salvation. This is a non sequitur.

 

[webdog]

No matter how many threads are started, no matter how many times this folly is debunked, some people live for a mission to mislead others. It is their life.

The misleading factor is stating "this folly is debunked".

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Lordship Salvation is a man-centered, non-saving message that is antithetical to the biblical plan of salvation. Lordship Salvation frustrates grace

Does any advocate of this position have the courage to answer this question: Are those who then teach the LS position or have believed in God through the message are themsleves not saved? I will take by your silence the answer is yes but are either afraid or unwilling to admit it.

 

[Revmitchell]

Does any advocate of this position have the courage to answer this question: Are those who then teach the LS position or have believed in God through the message are themsleves not saved? I will take by your silence the answer is yes but are either afraid or unwilling to admit it.

The silence is "Thundering" as has been said. :laugh:

 

[TCGreek]

Neither have I ever, in 20 years, questioned his salvation. At times I have defended him from those who insist he is unsaved.

His salvation is not the subject of this thread. Those who do not want to deal squarely with the crux of the LS controversy seem to feel this is another opportunity to redirect the discussion. However...


Lou

Lou, thanks for the clarification. I always thought that you were objecting to his LS works and not his salvation.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Lou, thanks for the clarification. I always thought that you were objecting to his LS works and not his salvation.

Lordship Salvation is a man-centered, non-saving message that is antithetical to the biblical plan of salvation. Lordship Salvation frustrates grace

What is one to think when reading this then?

 

[TCGreek]

What is one to think when reading this then?

RB, Are you saying then that Lou has questioned the salvation of John MacArthur?

 

[ReformedBaptist]

RB, Are you saying then that Lou has questioned the salvation of John MacArthur?

I am saying that that is the implication. So I asked for clarification.

 

[TCGreek]

I am saying that that is the implication. So I asked for clarification.

Fair enough.

 

[Rippon]

Although you finally said that MacArthur is a saved man you raised questions about the honesty of that claim.

Earlier someone in the comment section said that he/she "doubt[ed] his [JM's]salvation". This person then compared MacArthur's latest book to Richard Dawkin's book :"The God Delusion". In response to that post you said "I agree with all you wrote." Which is it Lou? Do you agree with your commentator or not?[/quote]

Lou,please respond.

 

[Lou Martuneac]

Rippon:

Which part of my clarifying note did you not understand? Or are you trying to create another personality clash?

I am moving back to the subject.


LM

 

[Lou Martuneac]

What I am dealing with is why, is Jesus paid it all, does LS call on the lost for commitment to the God ordained "good works" (Eph. 2:10) expected of a mature disciple of Christ FOR salvation, to become a Christian?

Why is Lordship’s “salvation (only) for those who are willing to forsake everything?” Why must the lost come to Christ for salvation with a whole-hearted commitment to deny-self, bear the cross and follow Christ to death if necessary?

Is God not satisfied with the finished work of Jesus Christ? Is God not satisfied with His Son’s propitiation for the sins of the whole world? Is God is not satisfied with Christ’s atoning work?

Of course God is satisfied. So, why does LS add what man must bring to God for salvation when Jesus paid it all?

Lordship Salvation is a corruption of “the simplicity that is in Christ.” Lordship Salvation is a man-centered, non-saving message that is antithetical to the biblical plan of salvation. Lordship Salvation frustrates grace (Gal. 2:21).

2 Cor. 11:3-4 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.

LM

 

[ReformedBaptist]

What I am dealing with is why, is Jesus paid it all, does LS call on the lost for commitment to the God ordained "good works" (Eph. 2:10) expected of a mature disciple of Christ FOR salvation, to become a Christian?

Why is Lordship’s “salvation (only) for those who are willing to forsake everything?” Why must the lost come to Christ for salvation with a whole-hearted commitment to deny-self, bear the cross and follow Christ to death if necessary?

Is God not satisfied with the finished work of Jesus Christ? Is God not satisfied with His Son’s propitiation for the sins of the whole world? Is God is not satisfied with Christ’s atoning work?

Of course God is satisfied. So, why does LS add what man must bring to God for salvation when Jesus paid it all?

Lordship Salvation is a corruption of “the simplicity that is in Christ.” Lordship Salvation is a man-centered, non-saving message that is antithetical to the biblical plan of salvation. Lordship Salvation frustrates grace (Gal. 2:21).



LM

Lou,

Why are you ignoring my replies to you? My understanding is that the BB is a discussion forum. If you have a reason for ignoring, so be it. Otherwise, what your doing looks like your proselytizing.

 

[Lou Martuneac]

Lou, thanks for the clarification. I always thought that you were objecting to his LS works and not his salvation.

Thanks, what LS men are teaching has always and ONLY been my concern. I will continue to defend what I believe is JM being a geuine, born again Christian. He has simply lost his balance on the theology of the Gospel. A serious loss of balance.


LM

 

[Lou Martuneac]

Lou,

Why are you ignoring my replies to you? My understanding is that the BB is a discussion forum. If you have a reason for ignoring, so be it. Otherwise, what your doing looks like your proselytizing.

When you or any man dodges the obvious meaning and intent of questions I put to them, they, in this case, you lose the privilege to expect me to interact with you on your terms.


LM

 

[ReformedBaptist]

When you or any man dodges the obvious meaning and intent of questions I put to them, they, in this case, you lose the privilege to expect me to interact with you on your terms.


LM

I beg your pardon sir, but I answered your question pointedly and directly. Perhaps you didn't like the response or it wasn't to your liking, but I re-phrased your question (making it personal to me), gave it a straightforward answer, and then added some comment. You insist on this false accusation, which I call you out publically on. You have sinned against me in this manner.