LORDSHIP SALVATION

[Least]

[HR][/HR]Some definitions and links, if anyone cares to look more into these things.

SO WHAT’S IT MEAN?

‘Antinomian’ is pronounced [an-ta-nome´-ee-ann]. The word itself can be traced back to the Greek of the New Testament. It comes from putting two Greek words together: `anti (anti) and nomos (nomos). The first word “anti” taken by itself means, “over against or instead of”, and corresponds to our English word “anti”, which means “opposed to”.
The second half of the word ‘Antinomian’, which is the word “nomos”, means: (1) a law, rule, standard; (2) a rule of life or moral conduct. This is the same word that is translated “law” in “Do we then make void the law through faith? God forbid: yea, we establish the law.”-KJV. Rom. 3:31. Consequently, when these two Greek words are combined, it gives the meaning: lawlessness; without, opposed to or against laws, standards, or rules of moral conduct.
The Antinomians are Coming! | Berean Publishers

The second website actually covers several different sub-beliefs.

Question: "What is antinomianism?"

Answer: The word antinomianism comes from two Greek words, anti, meaning "against"; and nomos, meaning "law." Antinomianism means “against the law.” Theologically, antinomianism is the belief that there are no moral laws God expects Christians to obey. Antinomianism takes a biblical teaching to an unbiblical conclusion. The biblical teaching is that Christians are not required to observe the Old Testament Law as a means of salvation. When Jesus Christ died on the cross, He fulfilled the Old Testament Law (Romans 10:4; Galatians 3:23-25; Ephesians 2:15). The unbiblical conclusion is that there is no moral law God expects Christians to obey.

The apostle Paul dealt with the issue of antinomianism in Romans 6:1-2, “What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? By no means! We died to sin; how can we live in it any longer?” The most frequent attack on the doctrine of salvation by grace alone is that it encourages sin. People may wonder, “If I am saved by grace and all my sins are forgiven, why not sin all I want?” That thinking is not the result of true conversion because true conversion yields a greater desire to obey, not a lesser one. God’s desire—and our desire when we are regenerated by His Spirit—is that we strive not to sin. Out of gratitude for His grace and forgiveness, we want to please Him. God has given us His infinitely gracious gift in salvation through Jesus (John 3:16; Romans 5:8). Our response is to consecrate our lives to Him out of love, worship, and gratitude for what He has done for us (Romans 12:1-2). Antinomianism is unbiblical in that it misapplies the meaning of God’s gracious favor.

http://www.gotquestions.org/antinomianism.html

The second definition seems to tie a whole lot to hyper grace.

There are a zillion different websites where these and other terms can be researched.

I don't necessarily agree with the whole of the explanations, but to be clear on what is behind each I've posted a few explanations.

It's interesting to see what is behind different belief systems. Now I have some others to look into.

 

[PeterJens]

It strikes me those who wish to isolate an "error" they believe is being preached, exaggerate and polarise positions.
Reformed groups who hold to righteousness and good living become legalists.
Spirit lead groups who emphasis inspiration and prophecy without referring to sin, become antinomian.

It always is easier to put someone in a corner and paint them evil, or say their inspiration is not from God but another spiritual source.

So I become a legalist for saying I believe in righteousness, and a antinomian for believing in grace. And there is the problem, you have to actually believe in both to be a christian.

What struck me the other day is how slowly we can cope with change. There are always issues which we are quite legalistic about and others we have no fixed position. It always comes as a shock when the Lord points at one or the other needs changing. But that is what humbles me, He alone truly knows, and I trust I can stay within His will by His grace.

 

[Kefa54]

Would the UU Church be Hyper-Grace?
[h=3]unitarian universalist [/h]

 

[Kefa54]

Never mind I'm Good.

[HR][/HR]Some definitions and links, if anyone cares to look more into these things.



The second website actually covers several different sub-beliefs.



The second definition seems to tie a whole lot to hyper grace.

There are a zillion different websites where these and other terms can be researched.

I don't necessarily agree with the whole of the explanations, but to be clear on what is behind each I've posted a few explanations.

It's interesting to see what is behind different belief systems. Now I have some others to look into.

 

[P1LGR1M]

John MacArthur coined the phrase and was the main proponent. Get it from the horses mouth.

Great advice, lol.

Anyone familiar with John MacArthur will know that his teachings concerning Lordship Salvation are a direct address of "easy believism," and that we are hard pressed to find a teacher who better understands Sola Fide.

"Lordship Salvation" and John MacArthur both took hits as false by those who misunderstood his teachings. In one Independent Baptist Church I was a member of, leaflets were passed around charging MacArthur with false teachings because He said "...the literal blood of Christ fell to the ground," which is true, but, not something that a hyper-literal group believes because they believe Christ took His literal blood into Heaven, and that it remains there to this day.

The term "blood" is a reference to His death, and that is precisely what He obtained eternal redemption for us through.

Just before giving up the ghost, He said...it is finished. There remained no other work necessary to create the means of Atonement. My own Pastor believes that Christ endured the Second Death in order to make Atonement, seeing this as the "payment" for our sins. I have to take issue with that, because there is nothing in Scripture that I see that demands Christ endure going to Hell. Secondly, the Second Death is by definition eternal separation in the Lake of Fire, kind of hard to squeeze that into the time in which Christ hung on the Cross. Third, we have to say that "God was eternally separated from Himself" if we take that view. And lastly, for now anyway (though it would make a great topic of discussion), we see the evidence that His physical death is in view through Communion, where we do not just remember His Blood, but, His body as well, the two comprising His death.

Christ died to save sinners, and faith in Christ is the only thing by which man can be saved. However, Scripture cautions against a nominal embrace of Christ which lacks fruit, and shows no evidence of the new creature that the New Birth always produces.

So again, great advice, I recommend to everyone that wants to know MacArthur's position on Lordship Salvation and what he means by it when he speaks about it, it is best to go straight to the source.

His site, gty.org is a valuable resource for any believer, and while I would point out that MacArthur is a great teacher, he is not infallible. We can only look to the true Source of Biblical Doctrine for such a description, and that is the Word of God.


God bless.

 

[P1LGR1M]

It strikes me those who wish to isolate an "error" they believe is being preached, exaggerate and polarise positions.
Reformed groups who hold to righteousness and good living become legalists.
Spirit lead groups who emphasis inspiration and prophecy without referring to sin, become antinomian.

It always is easier to put someone in a corner and paint them evil, or say their inspiration is not from God but another spiritual source.

So I become a legalist for saying I believe in righteousness, and a antinomian for believing in grace. And there is the problem, you have to actually believe in both to be a christian.

What struck me the other day is how slowly we can cope with change. There are always issues which we are quite legalistic about and others we have no fixed position. It always comes as a shock when the Lord points at one or the other needs changing. But that is what humbles me, He alone truly knows, and I trust I can stay within His will by His grace.

You make a great statement, my friend:

It strikes me those who wish to isolate an "error" they believe is being preached, exaggerate and polarise positions.

This is very true.

And oftentimes it is an attempt to deny one extreme view that we might be found to go to extremes ourselves.


God bless.

 

[ember]

Anyone familiar with John MacArthur will know that his teachings concerning Lordship Salvation are a direct address of "easy believism," and that we are hard pressed to find a teacher who better understands Sola Fide.

well, that is your opinion of what he teaches

I simply have to note again, that there are not different kinds of salvation and only ONE way to eternal life

he has some good things to say, but creating a term that is non-biblical is not one of them

what is not being addressed here, is that Jesus Is Lord...we do not MAKE Him Lord

HE ALREADY IS LORD!!

 

[eternally-gratefull]

well, that is your opinion of what he teaches

I simply have to note again, that there are not different kinds of salvation and only ONE way to eternal life

he has some good things to say, but creating a term that is non-biblical is not one of them

what is not being addressed here, is that Jesus Is Lord...we do not MAKE Him Lord

HE ALREADY IS LORD!!

Agree, and Again, As I think was said earlier,

We accept him as Lord and Savior if we have truly repented. Otherwise, we have not yet repented.

That solves the easy believism debate (then again James and Jude settled it, It takes faith to saved, not mental agreement)

 

[ember]

I think some of that may be based on Jesus saying 'you call me Lord but don't do what I say'

46“Why do you call me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ and do not do what I say?47As for everyone who comes to me and hears my words and puts them into practice, I will show you what they are like.

48They are like a man building a house, who dug down deep and laid the foundation on rock. When a flood came, the torrent struck that house but could not shake it, because it was well built.49But the one who hears my words and does not put them into practice is like a man who built a house on the ground without a foundation. The moment the torrent struck that house, it collapsed and its destruction was complete.” Luke 6

However, that was prior to the Holy Spirit descending and indwelling believers...if we walk in the light now, we DO put into practice the words of Jesus

I think I am seeing more and more, compliments of this forum, that confusion comes when people misapply verses, take them out of context and forget to whom and when they were written

yes...ALL of the Bible is valid...BUT...we do not need an intermediary human being and we have salvation only by ONE name and that has nothing to do with what we do

It seems some folks get an idea in their head and then look for verses or passages to back it up...it should be the other way round..we get the verses in our head FIRST...then re-arrange how we think

THAT, is renewing our mind

We agree with scripture...we don't try to make scripture agree with us!

 

[jaybird88]

i have never been familiar with it. they dont teach it in any of my study groups. i know little of it. i couldnt find a clear explanation of it in the thread. i googled it and it was a can of worms. my conclusion is its just a law of man and i think we have more than enough of them already.

 

[ladylynn]

Basically it was a teaching that was against those that claimed "when I got saved, Jesus was my Savior not necessarily my Lord". Either way it is a strawman argument, because Jesus comes as awhole, ...when He saves He saves as Lord and Savior, you can't cut Him in half. Some only want Him as Savior, not as Lord...a pipe dream.

Isn't it interesting how we humans always want to have some sort of "safe guard" from our side of things?? People get saved at a Billy Graham crusade for instance... wow, amazing and wonderful. The angels are singing and the Spirit moves and another soul is added to the number, all are rejoicing!!!

Then human's with our need to find a problem we can control and fix.,we attempt to complicate the pure Gospel in it's simplicity. The receiving as a child this awesome and actually very intricately planned out from ages past, powerful and priceless gift of salvation that Jesus secured for us., we think aahhaaa, we found a flaw!!! These newbies don't get teaching right away so we better FIX THIS before it's too late and they go to hell!

There is not a problem in the way God has planned out Redemption. He started it and He will complete it the same way. Human pride just seeps into everything. Nothing seems to be off limits to human reason.

 

[P1LGR1M]

well, that is your opinion of what he teaches

It's not an opinion, it is just the facts.

Why do you think MacArthur consistently refuses to sign documents that unite Protestant and Catholics together?

Because our views are contrary one to the other.

Like I said, you are going to be hard pressed to find a better teacher concerning Sola Fide than MacArthur. While he is basically a Reformed Theologian, his teachings are not obscure as some Reformed Theologians are. I love R.C. Sproul to death, but, Sproul can at times be found to get a little unclear in regards to salvation by Faith Alone.

My guess is that you have never actually heard any of MacArthur's teachings. I recommend "The Gospel According to Jesus" to anyone.

Recently, MacArthur came under fire yet again for refusing to sign The Manhattan Declaration.

Here are a few quotes from a response he did in explaining why he refused to sign:


• Instead of acknowledging the true depth of our differences, the implicit assumption (from the start of the document until its final paragraph) is that Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Protestant Evangelicals and others all share a common faith in and a common commitment to the gospel’s essential claims. The document repeatedly employs expressions like “we [and] our fellow believers”; “As Christians, we . . .”; and “we claim the heritage of . . . Christians.” That seriously muddles the lines of demarcation between authentic biblical Christianity and various apostate traditions.


In short, support for The Manhattan Declaration would not only contradict the stance I have taken since long before the original “Evangelicals and Catholics Together” document was issued; it would also tacitly relegate the very essence of gospel truth to the level of a secondary issue. That is the wrong way—perhaps the very worst way—for evangelicals to address the moral and political crises of our time. Anything that silences, sidelines, or relegates the gospel to secondary status is antithetical to the principles we affirm when we call ourselves evangelicals.


Now, understand that MacArthur's primary issue with Catholic teaching is on the point of Sola Fide. You would do well to familiarize yourself with the issues before discouraging anyone with false charges. I am sure it is inadvertent, though if you feel you can point out where MacArthur is teaching a works-based salvation...feel free to post what it is you find that in.

I simply have to note again, that there are not different kinds of salvation and only ONE way to eternal life

And I doubt very much that you are going to teach on that...better than MacArthur.

he has some good things to say, but creating a term that is non-biblical is not one of them

Some people say that about the term Trinity.

And Pre-Tribulation Rapture.

And Communion.

MacArthur didn't really create the term himself, but used that term to respond to critics that charged him with teaching a works-based salvation.

You are doing exactly what caused the need for this issue to be addressed, you are falsely charging him with something that nobody familiar with his teaching can reasonably claim.

what is not being addressed here, is that Jesus Is Lord...we do not MAKE Him Lord

HE ALREADY IS LORD!!

This is true. However, there are many that run under a false sense of security who not only do not have a Lord...they do not in truth have a Savior. There are many who are perfectly willing to submit to a baby in a manger, but have not submitted to God. The have created a Christ of their own making, and when we understand salvation, we understand that there are evidences of genuine conversion. People that say they are "saved" yet live unchanged lives would do well to study MacArthur's teachings on Lordship salvation.

John does a little Lordship Salvation teaching here:


1 John 1:6-7

King James Version (KJV)
[SUP]6 [/SUP]If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:

[SUP]7 [/SUP]But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.


Here is a little Lordship Salvation taught by Christ:


Luke 6:46

King James Version (KJV)

[SUP]46 [/SUP]And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?


As one member pointed our, we don't go to extremes and neglect how one is saved. That is not what is in view. What is in view is the genuine nature of salvation and whether one has been saved, or whether one is like unto those who seemed to be doing things in the Name of the Lord...


Matthew 7:22-23

King James Version (KJV)


[SUP]22 [/SUP]Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

[SUP]23 [/SUP]And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.



...yet they were not in relationship with the Lord through salvation, thus whether He is Lord and SAvior is a moot issue.


God bless.

 

[P1LGR1M]

I think some of that may be based on Jesus saying 'you call me Lord but don't do what I say'

46“Why do you call me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ and do not do what I say?47As for everyone who comes to me and hears my words and puts them into practice, I will show you what they are like.

48They are like a man building a house, who dug down deep and laid the foundation on rock. When a flood came, the torrent struck that house but could not shake it, because it was well built.49But the one who hears my words and does not put them into practice is like a man who built a house on the ground without a foundation. The moment the torrent struck that house, it collapsed and its destruction was complete.” Luke 6

However, that was prior to the Holy Spirit descending and indwelling believers...if we walk in the light now, we DO put into practice the words of Jesus

I think I am seeing more and more, compliments of this forum, that confusion comes when people misapply verses, take them out of context and forget to whom and when they were written

yes...ALL of the Bible is valid...BUT...we do not need an intermediary human being and we have salvation only by ONE name and that has nothing to do with what we do

It seems some folks get an idea in their head and then look for verses or passages to back it up...it should be the other way round..we get the verses in our head FIRST...then re-arrange how we think

THAT, is renewing our mind

We agree with scripture...we don't try to make scripture agree with us!

There is no change of God's demand of obedience to His will in any Age.

The Promise of the Spirit is an especially poor excuse to promote what some call "Greasy Grace," lol:

Consider:


Ezekiel 36:27

King James Version (KJV)
[SUP]27 [/SUP]And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.


It is because of the eternal indwelling of God that we are able to be in obedience to God. While we all start out as babes and our level of obedience grows as we do, that is not what the Lord is teaching in the text above. In view are those who are contrary to the will of God, and refuse to come under obedience to Christ.

yes...ALL of the Bible is valid...BUT...we do not need an intermediary human being and we have salvation only by ONE name and that has nothing to do with what we do

Should have stopped at "Yes...all of the Bible is valid."

I would ask you to show one teaching that associates an "Intermediary Human Being."

And to think that salvation has nothing to do "with what we do" isn't reflected in Christ's teachings. When the Disciples were commissioned to go out and preach the Gospel of Christ they were told...


Matthew 28:18-20

King James Version (KJV)
[SUP]18 [/SUP]And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.

[SUP]19 [/SUP]Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

[SUP]20 [/SUP]Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.


While we learn how to come under obedience to the teachings of Christ (which basically encompasses all teachings of Scripture) that doesn't mean that we will not. And some "believers" never come under obedience to Christ.

We can question the genuine nature of their profession of faith. And we should definitely question our own profession if we see no growth.


God bless.

 

[ladylynn]

without even going into the ins and outs of lordship salvation, I take a look at what the name states and recognize a two tier system of salvation

that immediately sends out red flags

salvation does not have classes of Christians

Aint it the truth!!!?? Again, the human reason and pride has come to make classes and levels of 'important' vs 'less important' and all that is in between.

Amen ember., salvation does not have classes of Christians!! We are the sheep, Jesus is the Good Shepherd..., we just follow and quit trying to run a head of Him and maybe try and suggest who goes where and who doesn't get to go.

 

[P1LGR1M]

Aint it the truth!!!?? Again, the human reason and pride has come to make classes and levels of 'important' vs 'less important' and all that is in between.

Amen ember., salvation does not have classes of Christians!! We are the sheep, Jesus is the Good Shepherd..., we just follow and quit trying to run a head of Him and maybe try and suggest who goes where and who doesn't get to go.

I don't see "classes of Christians" as being the case in the issue of the debate about Lordship Salvation, it revolves more around whether one can be saved yet maintain an un-Christian lifestyle.

The two classes in this discussion would be more good trees as opposed to evil, wheat versus Chaff, and wheat versus tares.

We understand that the Lord taught that there would be those who, like darnel, would look identical in appearance to wheat. In other words, those who profess to be believers who are indistinguishable from true believers.

While we have to be careful about trying to go around judging people, we can certainly judge ourselves, which I believe is the primary intent of the teachings that cause one to question their salvation. Most believers benefit from the fact that they are babes in understanding when first saved, because that questioning should result in a more fervent examination of the teachings of Scripture, that we might better be able to gauge our own profession with what Scripture presents as representative of belief. This involves both Doctrine and Practice.

When we can sin and there is no conviction that we are not sinning, we do well to question the validity of our profession:


2 Corinthians 13:5

King James Version (KJV)
[SUP]5 [/SUP]Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?


2 Peter 1:10

King James Version (KJV)

[SUP]10 [/SUP]Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:



God bless.

 

[ladylynn]

It's not an opinion, it is just the facts.

Why do you think MacArthur consistently refuses to sign documents that unite Protestant and Catholics together?

Because our views are contrary one to the other.

Like I said, you are going to be hard pressed to find a better teacher concerning Sola Fide than MacArthur. While he is basically a Reformed Theologian, his teachings are not obscure as some Reformed Theologians are. I love R.C. Sproul to death, but, Sproul can at times be found to get a little unclear in regards to salvation by Faith Alone.

My guess is that you have never actually heard any of MacArthur's teachings. I recommend "The Gospel According to Jesus" to anyone.

Recently, MacArthur came under fire yet again for refusing to sign The Manhattan Declaration.

Here are a few quotes from a response he did in explaining why he refused to sign:


• Instead of acknowledging the true depth of our differences, the implicit assumption (from the start of the document until its final paragraph) is that Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Protestant Evangelicals and others all share a common faith in and a common commitment to the gospel’s essential claims. The document repeatedly employs expressions like “we [and] our fellow believers”; “As Christians, we . . .”; and “we claim the heritage of . . . Christians.” That seriously muddles the lines of demarcation between authentic biblical Christianity and various apostate traditions.


In short, support for The Manhattan Declaration would not only contradict the stance I have taken since long before the original “Evangelicals and Catholics Together” document was issued; it would also tacitly relegate the very essence of gospel truth to the level of a secondary issue. That is the wrong way—perhaps the very worst way—for evangelicals to address the moral and political crises of our time. Anything that silences, sidelines, or relegates the gospel to secondary status is antithetical to the principles we affirm when we call ourselves evangelicals.


Now, understand that MacArthur's primary issue with Catholic teaching is on the point of Sola Fide. You would do well to familiarize yourself with the issues before discouraging anyone with false charges. I am sure it is inadvertent, though if you feel you can point out where MacArthur is teaching a works-based salvation...feel free to post what it is you find that in.




And I doubt very much that you are going to teach on that...better than MacArthur.






Some people say that about the term Trinity.

And Pre-Tribulation Rapture.

And Communion.

MacArthur didn't really create the term himself, but used that term to respond to critics that charged him with teaching a works-based salvation.

You are doing exactly what caused the need for this issue to be addressed, you are falsely charging him with something that nobody familiar with his teaching can reasonably claim.




This is true. However, there are many that run under a false sense of security who not only do not have a Lord...they do not in truth have a Savior. There are many who are perfectly willing to submit to a baby in a manger, but have not submitted to God. The have created a Christ of their own making, and when we understand salvation, we understand that there are evidences of genuine conversion. People that say they are "saved" yet live unchanged lives would do well to study MacArthur's teachings on Lordship salvation.

John does a little Lordship Salvation teaching here:


1 John 1:6-7

King James Version (KJV)
[SUP]6 [/SUP]If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:

[SUP]7 [/SUP]But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.


Here is a little Lordship Salvation taught by Christ:


Luke 6:46

King James Version (KJV)

[SUP]46 [/SUP]And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things which I say?


As one member pointed our, we don't go to extremes and neglect how one is saved. That is not what is in view. What is in view is the genuine nature of salvation and whether one has been saved, or whether one is like unto those who seemed to be doing things in the Name of the Lord...


Matthew 7:22-23

King James Version (KJV)


[SUP]22 [/SUP]Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

[SUP]23 [/SUP]And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity.



...yet they were not in relationship with the Lord through salvation, thus whether He is Lord and SAvior is a moot issue.


God bless.

Oh dear I am not a big fan of John M. Although I was raised on him and heard some very good doctrine that agreed with the Bible Baptist church we were members of. But we as a family could not live up to their level of being a good Christian. And my personal- take issue attitude with calling other believers heretics for seeing a Bible truth differently than they do. I believe Christians are called to much higher ground than that. Shooting the brethren NEVER works.

Our church had us separate from so many other believers that we were an island to ourselves. We had it down pat what each Christians sect believed and convinced ourselves that we were the faithful 'remnant'

It's sort of like the zeal of well meaning Christians who go over board and blow up abortion clinics. Yes, they are killing little infants in there, yes it drives us to have to do something over the top because what is being done in there IS over the top as those little babies are being murdered only a few feet away from us.,,, but we cannot blow up the clinic.

Evil cannot overcome evil. Only good can overcome evil.

 

[Gr8grace]

I don't see "classes of Christians" as being the case in the issue of the debate about Lordship Salvation, it revolves more around whether one can be saved yet maintain an un-Christian lifestyle.

The two classes in this discussion would be more good trees as opposed to evil, wheat versus Chaff, and wheat versus tares.

We understand that the Lord taught that there would be those who, like darnel, would look identical in appearance to wheat. In other words, those who profess to be believers who are indistinguishable from true believers.

While we have to be careful about trying to go around judging people, we can certainly judge ourselves, which I believe is the primary intent of the teachings that cause one to question their salvation. Most believers benefit from the fact that they are babes in understanding when first saved, because that questioning should result in a more fervent examination of the teachings of Scripture, that we might better be able to gauge our own profession with what Scripture presents as representative of belief. This involves both Doctrine and Practice.

When we can sin and there is no conviction that we are not sinning, we do well to question the validity of our profession:


2 Corinthians 13:5

King James Version (KJV)
[SUP]5 [/SUP]Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?


2 Peter 1:10

King James Version (KJV)

[SUP]10 [/SUP]Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:



God bless.

2 Corinthians 13:5

King James Version (KJV)
[SUP]5 [/SUP]Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates?

This is the subtleties of the false teaching of lordship salvation.

They will put the emphasis on "examine YOURSELF" and forget about "whether you be in the FAITH"

being in the faith is standing directly in front of that Cross and knowing that we are hopelessly lost in our sinful state and trusting completely in Christ's grace sacrifice for our sins.

Lordship salvation will say examine YOURSELF to see if you have evidence of a new life. Examining ourselves will only lead to hopelessness, guilt,loss.

We examine ourselves to see if we are in the FAITH..........at the foot of the cross and trusting completely in HIS finished work.

We make our calling and election SURE by believing wholly in the finished work of Christ on the cross.

We start "examining ourselves" its never pretty.


load of skubala (lordship salvation) is the counterfeit that reigns in todays world. Its sooooooooo close to the truth.

 

[Jimbone]

The Philippian jailer never got the LS memo...

Acts 16:30-31 KJVS
[30] And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? [31] And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

You know what I've realized since my salvation and regeneration? Exactly how big a word "believing" truly is in this context, especially these days. I thought I was a Christian for about 5 years before I truly was ready to submit, and I had to lose the use of my dominate arm to even get there. I was raised in and of this world, and was 100% of it no doubt. I really loved the "idea" of Jesus, but I had bills to pay and "real life" to deal with. We are programmed from birth to think if we can't see, taste, feel, smell, or hear it, it's not real and it's drilled into our heads from school, movies, games, music, books, and every other distraction this world throws at us.

It took seeing my first son born before I would even consider there was more to life than what we see, but coming to a place where we truly believe in Jesus in a world where we are bombarded by fantasy from every conceivable outlet and told it's all make believe and the bible is just another "fantasy book", though it is simple, it is anything but easy. I feel God blessed me with a strait up "road to Damascus" experience, and I find it hard to convey that when witnessing "good enough". Don't get me wrong I understand I do nothing and it's all His work through the Holy Spirit, but my point is that just "believing" sounds so easy sometimes yet is anything but. Simple yes, easy not in my experience.

Your comment just brought that to mind and I wanted to share, I was in no way trying to correct, teach, or say there was anything wrong with your comment at all, just kind of adding my point of view to it. Thanks and have a great day.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

I don't see "classes of Christians" as being the case in the issue of the debate about Lordship Salvation, it revolves more around whether one can be saved yet maintain an un-Christian lifestyle.

One does not need to teach 'lordship" Salvation to teach this.

Again, If one reads scripture, and has faith in the true gospel of Christ, and truly repents. The things of God will be evident in a changed life.

Adding a doctrine to the word of God to prevent something which may be or is bad does not help the doctrine any, It just is another cause for division.

and can actually be taken to the extreme the other way..

You would think we would listen and learn from the mistakes of the jews and catholics. But we keep making the same mistakes.. and add words to scripture or books or doctrines, which are not there.

Even if a man of God who got every doctrine right and led many people to God did this, it does not make what he did right. He did not trust God in this area.

 

[Willie-T]

Oh dear I am not a big fan of John M. Although I was raised on him and heard some very good doctrine that agreed with the Bible Baptist church we were members of. But we as a family could not live up to their level of being a good Christian. And my personal- take issue attitude with calling other believers heretics for seeing a Bible truth differently than they do. I believe Christians are called to much higher ground than that. Shooting the brethren NEVER works.

Our church had us separate from so many other believers that we were an island to ourselves. We had it down pat what each Christians sect believed and convinced ourselves that we were the faithful 'remnant'

It's sort of like the zeal of well meaning Christians who go over board and blow up abortion clinics. Yes, they are killing little infants in there, yes it drives us to have to do something over the top because what is being done in there IS over the top as those little babies are being murdered only a few feet away from us.,,, but we cannot blow up the clinic.

Evil cannot overcome evil. Only good can overcome evil.

Probably one of the toughest things for us to learn.... and most of us never will. (Won't even ever grasp the concept Jesus demonstrated with His very life.) And, "Yes", I am talking about myself, too.