When Lordship Advocates Define Their Terms: It Comes Up Works!

[ReformedBaptist]

I did, see above. Now consider interacting on the direct statements by MacArthur in the lead of this thread.

JM believes repentance FOR salvation is, “turning from sin...to forsake sin,” and have the “intention to obey.”


LM

How about this: "I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish." Luke 13:3

Is that evasive? Seems pretty straitforward to me.

 

[Lou Martuneac]

Thanks, I'll read tomorrow or Friday when I return. One question: Is that your definition, or is it another man's definition?

If it is not your please provide your definition of repentance in your own words so that we can interact on that.

In the meantime, JM believes repentance FOR salvation is, “turning from sin...to forsake sin,” and having the “intention to obey.”

What do you make of JM's definition of repentance?


LM

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Thanks, I'll read tomorrow or Friday when I return. One question: Is that your definition, or is it another man's definition?

If it is not your please provide your definition of repentance in your own words so that we can interact on that.

In the meantime, JM believes repentance FOR salvation is, “turning from sin...to forsake sin,” and having the “intention to obey.”

What do you make of JM's definition of repentance?


LM

What I believe is no mystery or hidden. I am in agreement with the posting on Repentance. Follow the link. Also, my public statement of faith is the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith. Let me know if you have any questions.

Chapter 15: Of Repentance Unto Life and Salvation
1._____ Such of the elect as are converted at riper years, having sometime lived in the state of nature, and therein served divers lusts and pleasures, God in their effectual calling giveth them repentance unto life. ( Titus 3:2-5 )
2._____ Whereas there is none that doth good and sinneth not, and the best of men may, through the power and deceitfulness of their corruption dwelling in them, with the prevalency of temptation, fall into great sins and provocations; God hath, in the covenant of grace, mercifully provided that believers so sinning and falling be renewed through repentance unto salvation.
( Ecclesiastes 7:20; Luke 22:31, 32 )

3._____ This saving repentance is an evangelical grace, whereby a person, being by the Holy Spirit made sensible of the manifold evils of his sin, doth, by faith in Christ, humble himself for it with godly sorrow, detestation of it, and self-abhorrency, praying for pardon and strength of grace, with a purpose and endeavour, by supplies of the Spirit, to walk before God unto all well-pleasing in all things.
( Zechariah 12:10; Acts 11:18; Ezekiel 36:31; 2 Corinthians 7:11; Psalms 119:6; Psalms 119:128 )

4._____ As repentance is to be continued through the whole course of our lives, upon the account of the body of death, and the motions thereof, so it is every man's duty to repent of his particular known sins particularly.
( Luke 19:8; 1 Timothy 1:13, 15 )

5._____ Such is the provision which God hath made through Christ in the covenant of grace for the preservation of believers unto salvation; that although there is no sin so small but it deserves damnation; yet there is no sin so great that it shall bring damnation on them that repent; which makes the constant preaching of repentance necessary.
( Romans 6:23; Isaiah 1:16-18 Isaiah 55:7 )

 

[EdSutton]

Thanks, I'll read tomorrow or Friday when I return. One question: Is that your definition, or is it another man's definition?

If it is not your please provide your definition of repentance in your own words so that we can interact on that.

In the meantime, JM believes repentance FOR salvation is, “turning from sin...to forsake sin,” and having the “intention to obey.”

What do you make of JM's definition of repentance?


LM

FTR, the cited "definition of Repentance" by ReformedBaptist is that of Chapter 33 of
The Abstract of Systematic Theology, by Rev. James Pettigrew Boyce, D.D. LL.D, (1887), the primary founder, along with Drs. John A. Broadus, Basil Manly, Jr., and William Williams, and first President of the of Southern Baptist Theological Seminary, and President of the Southern Baptist Convention for 9+ years (second only to P. H. Mell, who was SBC President for more years and Boyce and Mell, between the two of them served as the only two SBC Presidents for more than 25 years, from 1863 until the death of Boyce in 1888).

Ed

 

[Lou Martuneac]

RB;

OK, we'll have to accept your pointing to documents other than your own definition of how you define repentance. Nothing wrong with supporting your views or drawing from the work of others, but surely you can briefly articulate something in your own words.

Now back to the issue at hand. JM believes repentance FOR salvation is, “turning from sin...to forsake sin,” and having the “intention to obey.” In your previous comment were expressing agreement with these statements? Do you believe “turning from sin...to forsake sin,” and having the “intention to obey” is necessary FOR salvation, as JM defined it? Please clarify.

What is your opinion of repentance as turning from sin FOR salvation. Forget JM wrote that, forget JM believes, "salvation is for those who are wiling to forsake everything," what is your opinion of those views?


LM

 

[ReformedBaptist]

RB;

OK, we'll have to accept your pointing to documents other than your own definition of how you define repentance. Nothing wrong with supporting your views or drawing from the work of others, but surely you can briefly articulate something in your own words.

Now back to the issue at hand. JM believes repentance FOR salvation is, “turning from sin...to forsake sin,” and having the “intention to obey.” In your previous comment were expressing agreement with these statements? Do you believe “turning from sin...to forsake sin,” and having the “intention to obey” is necessary FOR salvation, as JM defined it? Please clarify.

What is your opinion of repentance as turning from sin FOR salvation. Forget JM wrote that, forget JM believes, "salvation is for those who are wiling to forsake everything," what is your opinion of those views?


LM

I can articulate it Lou, but I am being purposefully lazy in this regard. Honestly friend, the manner in which I would treat it would take some time and I am studying Systematic Theology right now.

Please provide a reference for JM's teaching as you have put it. I have on order his book "The Gospel According to Jesus" and will be able to reference that when I recieve it, or please provide an internet source showing his teaching saying what you think he is teaching.

Thanks.

 

[Lou Martuneac]

Please provide a reference for JM's teaching as you have put it. I have on order his book "The Gospel According to Jesus" and will be able to reference that when I recieve it, or please provide an internet source showing his teaching saying what you think he is teaching.

RB:

As I have put it? And you wonder why I call you for dodging (and as Ed noted canadyjd's redefining the questions) the crux of the controversy, which is how LS advocates define its requirements FOR salvation. The core of controversy for me is NOT over "those who are saved," it IS over the ones who are unsaved.

Time and again I have cited the exact in context words of and source(s) of JM's comments. His meaning and obvious implications are clear.

JM believes repentance FOR salvation is, “turning from sin...to forsake sin,” and having the “intention to obey.” In your previous comment were you expressing agreement with these statements? Do you believe “turning from sin...to forsake sin,” and having the “intention to obey” is necessary FOR salvation?

What is your opinion of repentance as turning from sin FOR salvation? Forget JM teaches that, forget JM believes, "salvation is for those who are wiling to forsake everything," forget you have never read JM's books-

What is your opinion of a message that insists "salvation is for those who forsake everything?"

 

[donnA]

Paul didn't think it was works when he called Jesus Lord. Only enemies of Christ think it's wrong to call Him Lord.
A person being saved has already submitted to Jesus as Lord, because this is what His will for them is. They don't stop and think about and consider what Lord means, what is all the theology behind it, their submission to Him is Him being their Lord.

 

[Revmitchell]

The base issue here is a definition of works. Which in many cases are inconsistent. If Christ is not Lord of your life He is not in your life at all.

 

[Lou Martuneac]

Faith, plus commitment, or as JM says a "willingness to forsake everything" for salvation is adding what man must to do to what the Lord has done.


LM

 

[Revmitchell]

Faith, plus commitment, or as JM says a "willingness to forsake everything" for salvation is adding what man must to do to what the Lord has done.


LM

Wonderful. Now back that up with scripture.

 

[Lou Martuneac]

Wonderful. Now back that up with scripture.

I wrote

Faith, plus commitment, or as JM says a "willingness to forsake everything" for salvation is adding what man must to do to what the Lord has done.

You asked me to back that up with Scripture? I'm sorry, but it is impossibe to back up MacArthur's claim that "salvation is for those who are willing to forsake everything."

It just can't be done because it is a corruption of the simplicity that is in Christ, (2 Cor. 11:3).


LM

 

[Revmitchell]

I wrote
You asked me to back that up with Scripture? I'm sorry, but it is impossibe to back up MacArthur's claim that "salvation is for those who are willing to forsake everything."

It just can't be done because it is a corruption of the simplicity that is in Christ, (2 Cor. 11:3).


LM

The word simplicity is not used in the context of a lack of complexity. It is referring to sincerity meaning not self seeking. So you have used this passage out of context. And there is no reason you cannot back up your definition of "works" with scripture is there?

 

[webdog]

The word simplicity is not used in the context of a lack of complexity. It is referring to sincerity meaning not self seeking. So you have used this passage out of context. And there is no reason you cannot back up your definition of "works" with scripture is there?

Being outside of this discussion...what is it you are looking for exactly? Works involve payment. Turning from sin for salvation would be considered a work since payment is made in exchange for turning from sin.

 

[Revmitchell]

Being outside of this discussion...what is it you are looking for exactly? Works involve payment. Turning from sin for salvation would be considered a work since payment is made in exchange for turning from sin.

I a looking for his scriptually backed definition fo works. Nothing more.

 

[webdog]

I a looking for his scriptually backed definition fo works. Nothing more.

Eph. 2:8-9 states it's opposed to faith. If faith includes "turning from sin", you have a contradiction.

 

[Revmitchell]

Eph. 2:8-9 states it's opposed to faith. If faith includes "turning from sin", you have a contradiction.

This gives no clear working definition of works. You just simply ade the statment that works is oppose to faith. Define it scriptually.

 

[webdog]

This gives no clear working definition of works. You just simply ade the statment that works is oppose to faith. Define it scriptually.

10 commandments are a start. The working of God's Law.

 

[Revmitchell]

10 commandments are a start. The working of God's Law.

See, this is a primary problem with this debate. A working definniton of works is assumed but never delineated. As a result we have a lot of talking past one another rather than addressing the core of the debate. "Works" is a core issue in the LS debate and the reformed vs. Free will debate.

 

[webdog]

See, this is a primary problem with this debate. A working definniton of works is assumed but never delineated. As a result we have a lot of talking past one another rather than addressing the core of the debate. "Works" is a core issue in the LS debate and the reformed vs. Free will debate.

Since you are implying you know...enlighten us. There is no Scripture stating "And works henceforth shalt be defined as...". It's pretty basic, and common sense.