Lordship Salvation is false teaching

[crossnote]

This is the debate on 'necessity'/'required' from the Lutheran Reformation's perspective, the Reformed have a little different take.
This read is a bit obtuse for our modern standards as well, but interesting.

The Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord - Book of Concord

 

[Grace777x70]

In thinking about Lordship salvationists and "fruit inspectors" here are some thoughts...

Another aspect that goes with "fruit inspectors" is just what is fruit? And what does this fruit look like. What if as an analogy a Christian is like an orange tree?

An orange tree is still an orange tree even though it doesn't produce the fruit we want to see in the timeframe we think it should. What happens if this orange tree dies before it has had a chance to be fed properly to grow up to be able to produce the fruit of a ripe orange?

To some works-based people - you would have to display 50 oranges in order to prove you are a real orange tree ( saved ) - to others you need 100 oranges in order to be a proved orange tree. ( saved ) So, this fruit inspection thing is not viable ..that's for God to look at people to determine if they are in Christ or not.

A person could have love and kindness as a fruit in their life but be addicted to some pills or alcohol which they are continuing to struggle with in their life.

The people that don't have a struggle with alcohol ( or basically anything that they themselves don't struggle with in their flesh that others do ) will condemn the ones that do have these struggles in the flesh and declare they don't have the fruit and thus are not saved. This is Pharisee-ism at it's finest.

Does the orange tree stop being an orange tree even though it dies without having fruit that we think "proves" it was an orange tree to begin with?

What if Christians were like that? What if we fed them messages about the abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness in Christ so that they could grow? Then they would produce an abundance of fruit.

I say let's preach and teach the grace of Christ in their lives so that they have the proper nutrients to grow up in Him!

 

[valiant]

Sounds like Free grace, Hyper grace and OSAS doctrine are all basically speaking the same lies.

And don't forget Paul and Jesus.

Paul said we 'are justified freely by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus.' He says again, 'Christ justifies the ungodly' (Rom 4.5). He declares that 'while we were without strength in due time Christ died for the ungodly' (Rom5.7). And he declares, 'Being justified by His blood we shall be saved from wrath through Him.' (Rom 5.9)

All this means is that He justifies us while we are totally undeserving. And if we are justified we are right with God and are guaranteed glorification. It is not dependent on us but on Him.

 

[valiant]

Understanding the Lordship Salvation Controversy - Christian Research Institute

This article defines Lordship salvation as....

“Lordship salvation” advocates say that in order to be saved, one must not only believe and acknowledge that Christ is Lord, but also submit to His lordship. In other words, there must be — at the moment one trusts in Christ for salvation — a willingness to commit one’s life absolutely to the Lord, even though the actual practice of a committed life may not follow immediately or completely. Non-lordship proponents argue that such a pre-salvation commitment to Christ’s lordship compromises salvation by grace."

Nonsense. It is the Lord Jesus Christ Who saves. There cannot be non-lordship salvation. But it is is freely given, not earned by submission to His Lordship. He exercise His Lordship in the free gift and introduces His lordship by making us 'In Christ'.

 

[InSpiritInTruth]

The brute beast?
How is THE KINGDOM of GOD even divided sir?
It isn't...

I think your confusion is in somehow thinking that satan has some sort of power over those who are IN CHRIST JESUS?

remember, the natural man can't receive the THINGS of THE SPIRIT because they are SPIRITUALLY discerned...and now you are claiming that those IN CHRIST are children of the wrong kingdom?

GOD already did HIS WORK of transferring out of the kingdom of darkness into the KINGDOM of LIGHT in HIS SON those who belong to HIS SON...


What exactly are you implying that belial could even HAVE anything to do with CHRIST?

There was one work all who are IN CHRIST were supposed to do...and that was to grow up into THE HEAD and all knowledge so that he would NOT be swayed by every wind of manmade doctrine which sets itself up against the TRUTH of THE WORD of GOD.

You are suggesting that CHRIST can't completely save all those who come to HIM through faith in HIS COVERING...

Here's another truth...ONE BRIDEGROOM...ONE GARMENT...either one has THAT GARMENT or doesn't...and it will be found in the end if he has THE RIGHT GARMENT...

Your confusion is assuming that all who claim themselves to be "in Christ" are, but that is not true. Many may profess to be born again of God's Spirit but that doesn't make it so does it? A homosexual priest may claim to be "in Christ" but yet he is still in the flesh, his words and actions=fruit will prove he is truly reprobate. Just as all false doctrine, which abides not in the Truth is not of Christ nor of the Spirit of Truth, but is of the Devil, the father of lies.

Paul and the apostles fought with natural brute beasts who thought they were of God as well, but their lack of understanding of spiritual things, their false doctrine, their ongoing sinful behavior and hypocrisy exposed they were also reprobate, and were not of God's Spirit.

 

[InSpiritInTruth]

All this means is that He justifies us while we are totally undeserving. And if we are justified we are right with God and are guaranteed glorification. It is not dependent on us but on Him.

He calls, we are to follow. People have a hard time with that following part, but good sheep will follow in the steps of the good Shepherd. If they do not follow the good Shepherd they can get lost, and even devoured by all the wolves waiting to devour them.

 

[Stunnedbygrace]

the problem with this approach is that it strips one of assurance. There is always the lingering thought, 'have I submitted enough?', 'have I committed enough?', was it genuine enough?'. No rest in that approach.

I have not found that to be so...when I met Him, I was still very full of my self will and I seemed to have nothing but misery after misery. But when I came to be fully submitted to His will in my life every moment, (which to me means making Him Lord), I did not begin to have less assurances of His goodness, fairness and mercy. In fact, I had MORE as I saw the good He did in my soul once He was given the throne...

 

[crossnote]

He calls, we are to follow. People have a hard time with that following part, but good sheep will follow in the steps of the good Shepherd. If they do not follow the good Shepherd they can get lost, and even devoured by all the wolves waiting to devour them.

Sounds like we have an incompetent Shepherd.

 

[crossnote]

I have not found that to be so...when I met Him, I was still very full of my self will and I seemed to have nothing but misery after misery. But when I came to be fully submitted to His will in my life every moment, (which to me means making Him Lord), I did not begin to have less assurances of His goodness, fairness and mercy. In fact, I had MORE as I saw the good He did in my soul once He was given the throne...

I never made Him Lord, He already was Lord and actively and progressively taught me that through hard knocks...but I still am not 100% submitted to Him...I'd be walking perfect with Him. It is what we should aim for though...

Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect: but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am apprehended of Christ Jesus. Brethren, I count not myself to have apprehended: but this one thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching forth unto those things which are before, I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus.
(Php 3:12-14)

 

[valiant]

He calls, we are to follow. People have a hard time with that following part, but good sheep will follow in the steps of the good Shepherd. If they do not follow the good Shepherd they can get lost, and even devoured by all the wolves waiting to devour them.

They ALWAYS follow because they HEAR HIS VOICE. Not one of them will be lost. HE SAID SO.

 

[Depleted]

Understanding the Lordship Salvation Controversy - Christian Research Institute

This article defines Lordship salvation as....

“Lordship salvation” advocates say that in order to be saved, one must not only believe and acknowledge that Christ is Lord, but also submit to His lordship. In other words, there must be — at the moment one trusts in Christ for salvation — a willingness to commit one’s life absolutely to the Lord, even though the actual practice of a committed life may not follow immediately or completely. Non-lordship proponents argue that such a pre-salvation commitment to Christ’s lordship compromises salvation by grace."

You know that confusion you had at the beginning? "Read OP and can't find anything about Lordship salvation...."?

Yeah, even after reading this post, I'm afraid I still don't get what "Lordship Salvation" means.

 

[crossnote]

You know that confusion you had at the beginning? "Read OP and can't find anything about Lordship salvation...."?

Yeah, even after reading this post, I'm afraid I still don't get what "Lordship Salvation" means.

LOL, that's because it was written by a lawyuh from Philly.

 

[Depleted]

This is the debate on 'necessity'/'required' from the Lutheran Reformation's perspective, the Reformed have a little different take.
This read is a bit obtuse for our modern standards as well, but interesting.

The Solid Declaration of the Formula of Concord - Book of Concord

So, another variety of supralapsarianism versus infralapsarianism all over again, huh? Another reformed version of "which came first?"

Yeah. Honestly? Sometimes we Reformed really need to know when to let something go.

(And I'm saying we Reformed need a Jethro head slap this time. lol)

 

[Depleted]

LOL, that's because it was written by a lawyuh from Philly.

Too many short words for it to be legalese. lol

 

[InSpiritInTruth]

Sounds like we have an incompetent Shepherd.

If the misguided sheep are following a hireling perhaps, but that is not the fault of the good Shepherd, as His sheep will follow His will and do as He says, and will not listen to the hirelings trying to fleece the flock.

John 10:12-13 "But he that is an hireling, and not the shepherd, whose own the sheep are not, seeth the wolf coming, and leaveth the sheep, and fleeth: and the wolf catcheth them, and scattereth the sheep.[SUP]13 [/SUP]The hireling fleeth, because he is an hireling, and careth not for the sheep."

 

[InSpiritInTruth]

They ALWAYS follow because they HEAR HIS VOICE. Not one of them will be lost. HE SAID SO.

Matthew 22:14
For many are called, but few are chosen.

 

[crossnote]

So, another variety of supralapsarianism versus infralapsarianism all over again, huh? Another reformed version of "which came first?"

Yeah. Honestly? Sometimes we Reformed really need to know when to let something go.

(And I'm saying we Reformed need a Jethro head slap this time. lol)

If you'd read the article and the posts that lead up to it, it is nothing of the sort. I think you just like playing EmoticonWeGo.

 

[crossnote]

Too many short words for it to be legalese. lol

but it does have a few ambivalences

 

[Depleted]

If you'd read the article and the posts that lead up to it, it is nothing of the sort. I think you just like playing EmoticonWeGo.

I read the first five paragraphs of the article and it sounded a lot like "This group thinks this, that group thinks that, them-over there thinks, and then..." Somewhere along the way it was going to tell me what I should think. There is salvation. There is works. God gives salvation and the heart to want to "works." Does it need to be fine-toothed combed more than that?

 

[crossnote]

I read the first five paragraphs of the article and it sounded a lot like "This group thinks this, that group thinks that, them-over there thinks, and then..." Somewhere along the way it was going to tell me what I should think. There is salvation. There is works. God gives salvation and the heart to want to "works." Does it need to be fine-toothed combed more than that?

Are you telling me or asking me? LOL.

It was just to show the discussion about 'required/necessary good works' vs 'natural doing of good works' goes waaaaayyyy back.