tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post8084569230884500502..comments2023-12-22T08:29:29.230-08:00Comments on WHAT IS TRUTH: The Evil of Anti-Lordship TeachingKent Brandenburghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comBlogger46125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-20767610281529694182018-12-21T06:43:22.907-08:002018-12-21T06:43:22.907-08:00I agree with Terry that submission to Christ's...I agree with Terry that submission to Christ's Lordship is the result of salvation, not a requirement of salvation.Daniel Nganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18312534415005493969noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-60769612405233872412010-09-09T21:35:32.794-07:002010-09-09T21:35:32.794-07:00Everyone,
I don't see how that the yielding o...Everyone,<br /><br />I don't see how that the yielding of your will to Jesus as Lord could be confused as a work. You take the will out of it and you are left with an intellectual decision. Either that or you have rebellion against Jesus.<br /><br />When you look at the gospel Jesus and the 12 and 70 after that preached, it was the gospel of the kingdom. What is a kingdom? It's an absolute monarchy in which Jesus is King. If someone is under an absolute monarchy, he doesn't do what he wants any more. He understands that.<br /><br />Anyway, I think I've explained this as clearly as possible. What I am reading is that people want to see a "willingness to obey" actually means "obey." There is a difference. And since some make it the same, they exclude the willingness part of it too, and then it is just easy believism. We all agree that it's not salvation by works nor keeping saved by works. But it does involve the will.Kent Brandenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-77367002431160182952010-09-09T12:24:11.503-07:002010-09-09T12:24:11.503-07:00Gary,
I think we are basically in agreement, the ...Gary,<br /><br />I think we are basically in agreement, the seeming difference is just in the way things are expressed. My objection to the Lordship position as such is that it seems to add a requirement that goes beyond the Bible and tends towards a works-orientation. At least the positions could be better expressed. At worst the Lordship position finds people teetering into false teaching.<br /><br />As a result, I think one should avoid claiming the Lordship position and simply preach faith and repentance.<br /><br />Maranatha!<br />Don Johnson<br />Jer 33.3Don Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03332212749734904541noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-6573234205064289422010-09-09T05:17:14.899-07:002010-09-09T05:17:14.899-07:00Don,
Thanks for agreeing with what I have written ...Don,<br />Thanks for agreeing with what I have written in all my previous posts.<br />I have never said that they had to know everything, but I have said that someone cannot coming to Christ deliberately, willfully holding on to sin.Gary Webbnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-1348304543560255742010-09-07T22:52:19.759-07:002010-09-07T22:52:19.759-07:00Hi Gary,
Well I came to the Lord at a very early ...Hi Gary,<br /><br />Well I came to the Lord at a very early age. The issue for me was admitting I was a sinner. I think that is the essential issue for everyone.<br /><br />Yes, I have known people who came to the Lord while still holding on to sins, not really realizing, perhaps, that they were sins they must give up. But they truly came to the Lord, then as a matter of growing awareness (discipleship)gave up those sins.<br /><br />It is possible to realize you are a sinner and must repent of your sins while not entirely realizing all the ramifications of that decision.<br /><br />Maranatha!<br />Don Johnson<br />Jer 33.3Don Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03332212749734904541noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-57175048134349441092010-09-07T07:32:43.154-07:002010-09-07T07:32:43.154-07:00Don,
The Lord did not ask me to take a "vow o...Don,<br />The Lord did not ask me to take a "vow of poverty", & I don't even think He required that of the "rich young ruler." That is a Roman Catholic idea foreign to Scripture. Many have given up all, but had the Lord reward them with earthly riches later.<br />But, to deal with the ruler's sin of covetousness (idolatry & violation of the 1st commandment), Jesus required that of that man.<br />I was not living for money when the Lord convicted me of my sin. But the Lord definitely made it clear that I had to fully yield my life to Him ("die to self", "repent", whatever you want to call it). I did not at that time know all He would require, but my decision to trust Him as Lord & Savior was just that.<br />How about you? Did you come (or has anybody) come to Christ in faith while holding on to some sin that the Lord has addressed in that person's life?Gary Webbnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-32036059380120633002010-09-05T17:31:07.803-07:002010-09-05T17:31:07.803-07:00Bro Kent,
Sorry it has taken me awhile to respond...Bro Kent,<br /><br />Sorry it has taken me awhile to respond. First do you believe Ananias and Sapphira overcame? How about the believers in Corinth who died because of sin? Do you believe God will kill a Christian because he does not repent from a sin? I don’t think any of these would fit Macarthur’s definition of perseverance, yet they do fit in just fine with I John 2:19 as true believers. One day you and I need to sit down and discuss this particular issue (perseverance). It is too hard in the forum. Hopefully we can before we get to heaven because by then you will see I am right already. :) To see McArthur’s true belief about perseverance you need to read his writings on the book of Hebrews. <br /><br />Once again there was much you wrote that I agree with. Parts of the statements of McArthur I agreed with. However he does not clearly separate between essence of faith, or what I would say the results of faith, and faith itself enough. I think that is dangerous. To say one must be willing to forsake everything at all cost, in order to receive eternal life is not correct. If one actually presents that when witnessing, wow, how does that not lead to a works based salvation. The person’s salvation is based on what he is willing to give up, not what Jesus did on the cross. The focus is wrong. A result of faith is a willingness to follow Christ completely, but that does mean the person must be thinking, in order to be saved I have to be ready to sell everything and live on the street. The fact is, although many saved people might say they are ready serve God regardless, they are not ready at all. I know from experience. When the Lord called me to New Guinea, I did not want to come! No kidding. I was scared to death. I always said Lord whatever you want, but when it was New Guinea, I did my best to get away from it. I wanted to remain in the ministry in states. Of course since then, God has given a love for it here even in a remote location. My point is this: God knows we are not TRULY ready to forsake all at any cost, yet he will still save us. <br />I am not sure if we differ on Luke 9:57-62 or not. When one truly sees who Jesus is and what he did, there is no looking back. There is no else to look to. <br /><br />What do you mean by one MUST lose his own soul or cannot be saved? (I know the corresponding verse)<br /><br />I did not mean to imply McArthur believed in sinless perfection. I know he does not.Terry McGovernhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07785714020219737129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-84042299686793415122010-09-05T16:16:23.061-07:002010-09-05T16:16:23.061-07:00To sum up my point Jesus was telling the young man...To sum up my point Jesus was telling the young man what he needed to "do" if he chose to follow the law in order to receive eternal life. Remember Jesus said “If THOU shalt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast..."Terry McGovernhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07785714020219737129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-34621902895534409562010-09-05T16:04:27.547-07:002010-09-05T16:04:27.547-07:00Bro Webb,
I will try and be more transparent in t...Bro Webb,<br /><br />I will try and be more transparent in the point I am trying to make. I understand the difference between placing faith upon Christ and living for Him. I am trying to point out a major inconsistency within Lordship salvation. You stated one must be willing to forsake all and follow Christ in order to BE saved. I was trying to point out examples of saved men (saved already being the key) who were not willing to forsake all. Thus I asked you to help me understand your point. A lost man must be willing to forsake everything he has in order to be saved, yet he does not have to live it out? Obviously that statement is full of problems. That was my point. So Peter at the moment of salvation has to be ready to die, but after he is saved he can forsake? I am trying to show problems with Lordship salvation, as well as pointing out that it has the potential to lead one to believe there are things besides faith he MUST do to be saved. I am fearful some in this group one day will be saying, “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?<br /><br />As far as the Rich man goes, I do believe that is very misunderstood, even the disciples were worried when they heard what Jesus said to the young man, thinking no one then can be saved. Here is what I wrote earlier on this: “…I use the rich young ruler every time I witness. His problem was one of refusing to see his own wickedness. He had the audacity to even say he has always followed the law! Not true! The first step in salvation is to see your need of Christ. Jesus trying to show him this, then pointed out how wicked he was by telling him to sell all that he had, knowing he was sinner like all of us, and he would not do it. Instead of seeing his wickedness and need of Christ and begging for mercy, he turned and walked away. He failed to see how wicked his own greed and self pleasing life was. Remember even the disciples asked after this, “who then can be saved?” Jesus let them know they CANNOT do it; it is only possible with God. The point of Jesus’ discussion with the young man was to make him see his wickedness and need of savior, which he refused to do.”<br /><br />Had he been perfect, without sin, he would have sold all and followed. His did not want to see how wicked he was. He did not want to see his need for begging for mercy because he was to prideful. He was not looking for true salvation, but an “attaboy” from Jesus. He did not get it. Remember he wanted to “do” something to get to eternal life. He did not ask to be saved. He, like many Jews, was trying to establish his own righteousness apart from Jesus Christ, thinking he could follow the law entirely. Jesus quickly showed him how short he falls by telling him to sell everything he had. He should have said “Lord help me I am wicked man and have mercy”. To prove my point on this, notice when the young man asked what he must “do”, Jesus told him to follow the law, “keep the commandments.” You and I know that is not possible. No one will be saved that way, unless one was entirely without sin. Jesus, being God, knew this man’s heart and his thoughts. He knew this man was full of self-righteousness. Jesus then, doing as he always did when witnessing, took a course of action that would show HIM how wicked he truly was.Terry McGovernhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07785714020219737129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-86198265115560991752010-09-04T11:19:18.823-07:002010-09-04T11:19:18.823-07:00Gary,
re the rich young ruler...
So you are sayi...Gary,<br /><br />re the rich young ruler...<br /><br />So you are saying that you have taken the vow of poverty? You have no earthly possessions?<br /><br />Is the rich young ruler a normative mandate or an example of the Lord pointing out a particular man's idolatry?<br /><br />Maranatha!<br />Don Johnson<br />Jer 33.3Don Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03332212749734904541noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-30741909919714277112010-09-04T03:30:59.553-07:002010-09-04T03:30:59.553-07:00Terry,
I do not believe there is ANYTHING in my po...Terry,<br />I do not believe there is ANYTHING in my post that is of this nature: "they do not have to live it out when the going gets tough/every day life." <br />I believe that God demands of us that we obey every command - no matter how tough it is. However, He does not demand it for us to STAY SAVED. We are kept by the power of God.<br />You do not seem to be able to separate the issue of believing upon Christ for salvation (a faith that is unreserved, though not fully knowledgeable of all the Bible teaches) from living for Christ (a faith that is imperfect in its obedience). I am not trying to attack you in that statement, but that seems to the problem.<br />Did Christ tell the "rich young ruler" to sell all & follow Him? What did that mean? Was Jesus joking when He made that demand?Gary Webbnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-34803370984919348782010-09-03T21:07:16.506-07:002010-09-03T21:07:16.506-07:00Bro Webb,
I am aware Peter was already saved. Th...Bro Webb,<br /><br />I am aware Peter was already saved. That was not my point. If you notice I pointed out John Mark as well who was already saved. My point was he was a Christian who was not willing to forsake all, and yet he was saved. <br /><br />Let me understand your point. A person must be willing to forsake everything at any cost at the time they get saved or they CANNOT be saved, but they do not have to live it out when the going gets tough/every day life. Is that a fair statment of what you believe? (I am not trying to be sarcastic. Sometimes you can tell in this forum.)<br /><br /><br />It is not enough to see yourself wicked before a Holy God and knowing He is going to judge you; your only escape is though the righteouness of Christ which was made possible by his death and ressurection, and that if you one through repantce and faith truns to Christ he will save you? That is the gospel I see through out scripture.Terry McGovernhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07785714020219737129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-86013107333078344192010-09-03T05:50:21.919-07:002010-09-03T05:50:21.919-07:00Terry,
In Luke 22 Peter was not making a salvation...Terry,<br />In Luke 22 Peter was not making a salvation decision. He was already saved & possessed Eternal Life. You do not get saved or stay saved by always making the right choice. But, when you come to Christ for salvation, you cannot come without "forsaking all." This is a very important point. We must not confuse trusting Christ with true repentance with the issue of Christian living ... in which we all fall short.Gary Webbnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-45933126243442966052010-09-02T19:43:17.706-07:002010-09-02T19:43:17.706-07:00John Gardner,
"That" and "gift&quo...John Gardner,<br /><br />"That" and "gift" agree in gender, and the far demonstrative pronoun, "that" refers to "salvation," it seems, in light of the feminine "grace" and "faith." That's why I don't think Eph 2:8-9 prove that faith is a gift. Good example with 1 Cor 6:6.<br /><br />Phil,<br /><br />Yes to first question. I think there is a so-called age of accountability.Kent Brandenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-34365061462487397922010-09-02T19:40:24.188-07:002010-09-02T19:40:24.188-07:00Terry,
I am in an inenviable position of defendin...Terry,<br /><br />I am in an inenviable position of defending MacArthur when I would rather just defend what I mean by "Lordship salvation" versus "no-Lordship salvation."<br /><br />First, the book is Gospel According to Jesus. He did refer to Matthew in there.<br /><br />I'm not assuming you would attempt to cherry-pick. I don't believe MacArthur thinks salvation requires any works. I think his doctrine of perseverance, albeit Calvinism to him, is about what one would expect of someone genuinely converted (cf. 1 John 2:19). He will overcome. Overcoming doesn't save, but someone who doesn't overcome should examine himself whether he be in the faith. See Rev 2 & 3.<br /><br />Regarding the first statement, that is pulled from his description of the return of the prodigal son, which I believe is a fitting place to look for soteriology---a fuller context reads: "He had made a complete turn-around. His demeanor was one of unconditional surrender, a complete resignation of self, and absolute submission to His father. That is the essence of saving faith." When you pull out of its context, it does look rather different. Notice he says "essence" of saving faith. I use the word "essence" when I'm explaining the gist of something. MacArthur is saying that this is what faith looks like.<br /><br />As far as salvation being for those willing to forsake everything, I believe that too is a scriptural understanding. You must lose your soul or your life to gain eternal life. Paul counted all things as loss that he might win Christ. And I think MacArthur is being careful in this instance by saying "willing." Not forsake everything, but willing to forsake everything. Man's volition must be involved. MacArthur however was using that in the context of what happened with the rich young ruler.<br /><br />Here is the last statement of MacArthur in its context: <br /><br />"Salvation is by grace through faith (Eph. 2:8). That is the consistent and unambiguous teaching of Scripture. But people with genuine faith do not refuse to acknowledge their sinfulness. They sense that they have offended the holiness of God, and do not reject the lordship of Christ. They do not cling to the things of the world. Real faith lacks none of these attributes. Saving faith is a commitment to leave sin and follow Jesus Christ at all costs. Jesus takes no one unwilling to come on those terms."<br /><br />For the last statement, consider the end of Luke 9---vv. 57-62. It is a salvation context. Look at what he says in v. 62 to show that this is the case. I would say that this simply describes repentance, which again, is not a work.<br /><br />Notice also MacArthur says "unwilling." He doesn't say will not do that, which is a work, but someone "unwilling." We're again talking about something volitional. I think of the pearl of great price. How does one get it? I'm asking.<br /><br />Regarding Peter, I don't believe MacArthur would see Peter like you are describing. He's not talking about specific acts of rebellion, but someone who will relinquish his will, which Peter did. I think Peter was willing to follow the Lord, but he failed. Same with John Mark.<br /><br />MacArthur doesn't advocate sinless perfection. I believe that the conviction of the Holy Spirit and the work of the gospel results in the alteration of a man's will. He turns from himself to God. I believe MacArthur would be the same on this.<br /><br />I've found that when I'm evangelizing people understand the concept of Lordship and turning over one's life. I haven't found anyone confusing that with sinless perfection or having to clean up your life before God will save him.<br /><br />I'm not really too concerned if someone understands all of MacArthur. I never mentioned him in the post I wrote. However, I think I should defend him if I think he isn't being represented properly, especially when I go after him when I believe what He says or does is unscriptural.<br /><br />Thanks Terry.Kent Brandenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-78574804528716026612010-09-02T18:39:04.969-07:002010-09-02T18:39:04.969-07:00Bro Kent,
I have not read the David Cloud Article...Bro Kent,<br /><br />I have not read the David Cloud Article but I will. I am primarily referring to Macarthur’s book "The Gospel According to Matthew” He makes statements in there that I do not believe can be justified in any context. IMO, his belief is based on his view of Calvinism, and the need to persevere in order to be saved. A complete falsehood. I truly believe this is more than semantics. I do agree with you that McArthur would agree with my statement, but he takes it much farther. I will post some comments from his book. This might be cherry picking, but I can’t see how anyone can make such statements regardless of context.<br /><br />D4,<br /><br />I use the law every time I witness, literally. To show exactly what you said. However, my understating of Lordship salvation (based on McArthur) goes much farther than you pointed out. If that was all Lordship salvation was saying, then I would agree with the teaching.<br /><br />I could not find quotes I had, so I had to google these quickly.<br />Here are some quotes:<br /><br />Saving faith is "unconditional surrender, a complete resignation of self and absolute submission" <br /><br />“Salvation is for those who are willing to forsake everything" <br /><br />"Saving faith is a commitment to leave sin and follow Jesus Christ at all costs. Jesus takes no one unwilling to come on those terms"<br /><br />(By the way I use the rich young ruler every time I witness. His problem was one of refusing to see his own wickedness. He had the audacity to even say he has always followed the law! Not true! The first step in salvation is to see your need of Christ. Jesus trying to show him this, then pointed out how wicked he was by telling him to sell all that he had, knowing he was sinner like all of us, and he would not do it. Instead of seeing his wickedness and need of Christ and begging for mercy, he turned and walked away. He failed to see how wicked his own greed and self pleasing life was. Remember even the disciples asked after this, “who then can be saved?” Jesus let them know they CANNOT do it, It is only possible with God. The point of Jesus’ discussion with the young man was to make him see his wickedness and need of savior, which he refused to do. <br /><br />Bro Kent,<br /><br />Would agree with McArthur statements written above?<br />If so, was Peter willing to follow Christ at all cost in Luke 22? He was not <br />Was John Mark willing to follow at all cost in Acts 13? He was not<br /><br /><br />The Lord had to change them and do a work in their lives, which He did. This happened after salvation not before. McArthur says it comes before.<br /><br /><br />I think if he uses wording like the above when witnessing, the person hearing could easily start believing the only reason God will save him is if he works for it though a submitted life. That the key to his salvation is that in itself, not what Jesus did on the cross and through his resurrection. Much like easy prayerism focuses on the prayer instead of the gospel, which sinners do pray, Lordship salvation focuses on the fruit of salvation instead of the gospel. Both are dangerous. <br /><br />Romans 1:16 proclaimes the power is in the gospel itself, and I belvie both detract from the gospel.Terry McGovernhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07785714020219737129noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-48383187826654252302010-09-02T18:16:52.544-07:002010-09-02T18:16:52.544-07:00"God's revelation gives this gift culmina..."God's revelation gives this gift culminating in the gospel for someone who keeps receiving the revelation God gives."<br /><br />Thanks, I think you answered my question.<br /><br />So everyone who is unsaved is a vessel of wrath and supresses the truth right? Do you think there is a certain age God reveals himself to a person(the so called age of accouttability)?philnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-34471079661203691142010-09-02T17:59:23.523-07:002010-09-02T17:59:23.523-07:00I mentioned earlier I believe "that" in ...I mentioned earlier I believe "that" in Eph. 2:8 refers to our salvation. <br /><br />Paul uses similar language in 1 Cor. 6:6. <br /><br />1Cor 6:6 But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers.<br />What does "that" stand for? <br /><br /> <br /><br />Blessings.<br /><br />John GardnerAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-56278413700328637372010-09-02T13:10:36.608-07:002010-09-02T13:10:36.608-07:00Terry McGovern wrote: When a person realizes how w...<b>Terry McGovern wrote:</b> <i>When a person realizes how wicked they are before God...</i><br /><br />Brother McGovern, I read this statement as entirely consistent with Lordship salvation. Our guilt before a holy God is demonstrated in our violation of His authority. This is why we use the commandments when sharing the gospel. The show us two things. 1: That we fall short of God's glorious holiness. 2: We do so because we are in rebellion against him, both natively and volitionally. I think it is consistent with Scripture that people must have at least a basic grasp on this before they can truly repent. Otherwise they don't know what to repent of. <br /><br />To go just a little farther, 1 above confirms that we need to be saved. 2 shows us we can't save ourselves. <br /><br />These kind of discussions are why I still think some of this Lordship "controversy" is just semantics.d4v34xhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07346680257860879900noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-88439497218759745672010-09-02T09:27:00.631-07:002010-09-02T09:27:00.631-07:00Fair enough. Thank you.Fair enough. Thank you.Bill Hardeckerhttp://www.bhardecker.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-48096749207298789472010-09-02T09:18:40.028-07:002010-09-02T09:18:40.028-07:00Charles,
I think I missed your comment. Thanks t...Charles,<br /><br />I think I missed your comment. Thanks though.<br /><br />Billy,<br /><br />You sound like you've read on this issue with your names and terminology. My opinion is that someone can be saved with a Ryrie or Hutson type of presentation, but some people won't because of what they leave out or change.<br /><br />Your question is a tough, that is how are we to judge the actual men. All the guys listed are people I wouldn't fellowship with anyway, because of what I believe Scripture teaches on separation. I can't judge who is a believer and who is not, but with the doctrine they teach, I personally treat it as a false gospel.<br /><br />Terry,<br /><br />Even when we teach a true gospel with the right presentation of repentance, Jesus gave at least a 25% result in the parable of the soils. I wanted to add that.Kent Brandenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-67842204661600062612010-09-02T05:21:50.114-07:002010-09-02T05:21:50.114-07:00Pastor Brandenburg,
When men like Zane Hodges and ...Pastor Brandenburg,<br />When men like Zane Hodges and Charles Ryrie teach wrong doctrine about the repentance, grace and works, faith and fruits, regeneration vs. carnal Christians, how much damage is done to the nature of the Gospel itself? Are they erring brethren or are they false teachers (blind leading the blind)? In your mind did they "redefine" repentance and reduced it to a work (like penance) or did they totally reject the Biblical position on repentance? If so, what does that say about their faith? How far does bad doctrine go?<br />I have read others that seem to follow along with Hodges and Ryrie - - Curtis Hutson and Dwight Pentecost seems to have reduced repentance into something like "works" or "penance," and I can see where they are coming from. I don't agree with them, but I understand how one can make a gross mistake in doctrine. <br />BTW, I am in agreement with your article here, I am just curious about the consequences of Free Grace theology.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11879718171217215602noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-15916922215063735692010-09-01T21:44:15.322-07:002010-09-01T21:44:15.322-07:00Phil,
I'm not quite sure what your question i...Phil,<br /><br />I'm not quite sure what your question is, but I think that repentance and faith are both a gift. God's revelation gives this gift culminating in the gospel for someone who keeps receiving the revelation God gives.Kent Brandenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-33231968168002406932010-09-01T21:41:57.288-07:002010-09-01T21:41:57.288-07:00Robert,
I mention Rom 10:17 in a comment above. ...Robert,<br /><br />I mention Rom 10:17 in a comment above. We're on the same page on that.<br /><br />Terry,<br /><br />Thanks for dropping by again. I can't really critique what you think Lordship salvation is, because you seem to say the MacArthur version of it, but I don't know what you think the MacArthur version is. Of course, we don't want works frontloaded. However, a Ryrie and a Hodges, evangelicals and fundamentalists, have pushed an intellectual, non-volitional repentance. They see something volitional as works. Losing your life isn't a work---it is believing in Christ.<br /><br />I think someone can cherry pick MacArthur's material on salvation and come up with works, but I think if he's taken in context, he isn't saying that. I've not had anyone show me statements that have convinced me of that. David Cloud has an article against Lordship Salvation, but when I read his presentation of Lordship salvation, he doesn't quote anyone who believes it, and then presents a strawman of it. I'm against his strawman, like anyone should be. MacArthur would be against Cloud's strawman of him.<br /><br />What you read above in my post is my understanding of salvation. Not all of it, but this aspect of it. You said you agreed. I think this is also what MacArthur would say. Love rejoiceth in the truth. Evangelicals and fundamentalists are not generally the same. They generally rejoice in the truth told or held by the theologically or politically correct person.<br /><br />I think that when the terminology "Lordship salvation" came out, it was promoted by the cheap grace evangelicals and the easy-prayerism fundamentalists. Nobody wanted to believe their fake version of it, so the terminology "Lordship salvation" became anathema. I see that when I read David Cloud.<br /><br />I'm not saying that's the case with you, but if you really do agree with my post, then we are preaching the same gospel.Kent Brandenburghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13419354741455959191noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20213892.post-39713451003272560812010-09-01T20:23:57.097-07:002010-09-01T20:23:57.097-07:00Pastor Brandenburg,
On Sovereignty over Sovereign...Pastor Brandenburg,<br />On Sovereignty over Sovereignty: you aswere a question I asked about how faith can be a gift by basically saying that faith is given through revelation(Rom 1:18-21)and just like you said here(Rom10:17). I asked this in response:"So that faith that is given has to be turned to Jesus upon hearing the gospel or rather repentance and faith?" Faith has to be turned to the word of God the gospel would that be correct?philnoreply@blogger.com