|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: The Woman at the Well - 8/4/2007 4:47:28 PM
|
|
|
crankius
Posts: 4347
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Gloryandgrace
Instead of doing all that, you could just ask me how I handle new converts, backsliders, nominal professors as I see them and you can then if you see error charge me with something that is admitted and real.
Lets give that a try Graham Ok?
John
Actually, that post was me. I could ask you how you would handle new converts, etc., but you aren't the topic of the thread. The topic of the thread is Lordship Salvation.
I am sure MacArthur or anyone else in the Lordship camp would not literally think David, Peter, the prostitute, or the thief were unsaved.
However, within a church practicing Lordship Salvation, the answers I proposed were the manner in which I witnessed Lordship Salvation pastors handling sinners and converts. Lordship Salvation is about conversion/salvation, and thus, those four situations were good examples to look at.
_____________________________
Do not be overly righteous, Nor be overly wise: Why should you destroy yourself?
Ecclesiastes 7:16
He Himself is our peace! Ephesians 2:14:a
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Woman at the Well - 8/4/2007 6:18:03 PM
|
|
|
Gloryandgrace
Posts: 484
Joined: 1/15/2006
Status: offline
|
Hi Crankius:
I thought since Graham carried your quotes over to his postings it was owned by him as well. But thats ok. No foul.
Since Im the Original Poster, I have some latitude, you can ask me how I handle (according to my professed Lordship stance) New Coverts that testify of all kinds of ways they came to Christ. Backsliders and their testimonies along with those whom have fallen away completely.
The issue is "how I engage the church with my theology".
It is completely within the boundries of Lordship salvation, plus you get a real live person to question about Lordship.
John
_____________________________
Isa 42:6 I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles.....
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Woman at the Well - 8/4/2007 8:20:06 PM
|
|
|
Him4all
Posts: 423
Joined: 6/26/2007
From: Kansas
Status: online
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: crankius
Him4all,
I'm sincerely not cranky about your posts, but I wonder how they apply to our conversation about Lordship Salvation. Have you read Lordship Salvation books or sermons or articles? Do you agree or disagree with the points Lordship Salvation makes?
I have not read LS books ect. I guess I've just tried to jump in from the perspective of knowing my own belief system. Thanks for your response. Glad you aren't cranky at me too. 
GloryandGrace,
I appreciate your response in trying to 'get me up to speed' with where you guys are going. I just see things as a little more complicated, I guess. I see Lordship as a two step process in a progression of salvation from spirit to soul. I see 'forgiveness of sins' (justification) and 'taking away sin' (sanctification) as two different things also. It all fits for me in regeneration of the spirit followed by renewal of the soul, and conversion of our bodily walk (body). Maybe I should just sit back on this thread and watch for a while.
Thanks again to both of you.
DR
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Is This a "Warped Gospel?" - 8/4/2007 9:16:39 PM
|
|
|
lmartuneac
Posts: 54
Joined: 7/29/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ezra
quote:
2) Do we find salvation by the grace of God through faith in Christ (Eph. 2:8-9) anywhere in James 4:7-10?
No. MacArthur is clearly mistaken in this particular instance.
Thanks for the reply.
MacArthur is mistaken and this theme runs like a thread through his teaching on LS.
LM
_____________________________
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man," (Col. 4:6).
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Woman at the Well - 8/4/2007 9:27:46 PM
|
|
|
lmartuneac
Posts: 54
Joined: 7/29/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Aphobos
I will suggest one possible reason for not directing people to MacArthur's books on Lordship Salvation. It would become painfully clear that Lordship salvation -- as defined and defended by him -- is biblical truth.
I have no problem with anyone reading MacArthur's 4 books on LS; I have. If you want to link people in this thread to Amazon where they can buy his books, please do so.
I am not in the habit of recommending books, such as those by MacArthur on his LS message, because those books are propagating his false teaching on the Gospel. Unsuspecting readars could be drawn into the LS error and that would be tragic.
My goal is to alert people of the dangers in Lordship theology, and identify some its best known advocates such as MacArthur and Walter Chantry. This way they can read with caution and be aware that there is false teaching in these books, and be on guard against being deceived.
LM
_____________________________
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man," (Col. 4:6).
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Woman at the Well - 8/4/2007 11:33:03 PM
|
|
|
Ezra
Posts: 1781
Status: offline
|
quote:
So Ezra, I think John has good ground to use this text toward unbelievers with fair contextual grounds as justification to do so.
Have a read for yourself again and tell me what you think?
John:
I have gone back to the book of James, and also consulted several conservative Christian commentators. The general consensus if that "the twleve tribes scattered abroad" (1:1) are Hebrew Christians, just a the book of Hebrews is primarily to Hebrew Christians.
There is not a single epistle that is addressed to the unsaved, and James begins with "My brethren" (1:2), then speaks of "let the brother of low degree" (1:9), "My brethren" (2:1) etc.
As I pointed out, any Christian assembly will consist of true possessors and false professors, so James 4, even though it says "cleanse your hands ye sinners" is addressing false professors, who in reality are still sinners.
"Friendship with the world" can only apply to those who claim to be Christians (1 Jn. 2:15-17), therefore I cannot agree with MacArthur that this passage may be taken as a Gospel passage. The unsaved are worldly by definition, therefore it would be pointless to talk to them about friendship with the world and enmity with God. They are automatically enemies and aliens until they are saved.
In this instance, I believe MacArthur is mistaken. The earlier quotation by Aphobos, however, is right on target.
_____________________________
And whosoever will, let him take the Water of Life freely. Revelation 22:17
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Woman at the Well - 8/5/2007 1:03:50 AM
|
|
|
Ezra
Posts: 1781
Status: offline
|
To be perfectly fair to MacArthur, I will now comment on the quotations from him provided by Crankius (in part)
quote:
there are Bible teachers and preachers in fundamental evangelicalism who do not allow for any connection necessarily between faith and works. And therefore they are forced to receive as genuine virtually every profession of faith because of there's not necessarily a correlation between faith and works, than any profession is a valid one.
Since Ephesians 2:8-10 makes a very definite correlation between saving faith and good works, MacArthur is correct in this statement.
quote:
There are those who profess the name who aren't real, but there are none who are real who don't profess the name.
Again, MacArthur is following Scripture, since there are true possessors and false professors.
quote:
It's something deeper than just believing facts, it's committing one's life, turning from sin, submitting to Christ.
Once again, MacArthur is right. Faith, by definition, includes surrender to God and His Word, or submission or obedience to Christ. See Vine's Expository Dictionary for confirmation.
quote:
I don't believe you can lose your salvation, but I believe with all my heart that if you've got it, you'll never be an unbelieving believer. And you'll never deny God.
Here I will say that you can indeed find unbelief even in believers. And there is no guarantee that a believer may not deny God.
quote:
Belief and obey used interchangeably. You believe, you obey. You don't believe, you don't obey.
I don't think we can find fault with that. This was illustrated by Abraham when he offered up Isaac.
quote:
And if you have not continued steadfastly, conversely, and if you have not continued in the faith and if you have been moved away from your hope in the gospel, you were never saved.
This is debatable. There are many genuinely saved people who do not make steady progress in the Christian lives, and may even give the appearance that they were never saved. Ideally we all should continue steadfastly, but it may not be true for some.
_____________________________
And whosoever will, let him take the Water of Life freely. Revelation 22:17
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Woman at the Well - 8/5/2007 11:40:56 AM
|
|
|
Gloryandgrace
Posts: 484
Joined: 1/15/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
I appreciate your response in trying to 'get me up to speed' with where you guys are going. I just see things as a little more complicated, I guess. I see Lordship as a two step process in a progression of salvation from spirit to soul. I see 'forgiveness of sins' (justification) and 'taking away sin' (sanctification) as two different things also. It all fits for me in regeneration of the spirit followed by renewal of the soul, and conversion of our bodily walk (body). Maybe I should just sit back on this thread and watch for a while.
Hello Him4all:
This reminds me of the 'merismos' teaching by Randy Shankle of years back. He divided the salvation of Spirit soul and body, created a teaching on it, made quite a ta-do about it. I dont know what happened to him.
anyway just and observation.
The Lordship problems we are facing here are really simple, our detractors dont like John M or others and when questioned to answer for
themselves, one guy wont answer us but spews his own rhetoric.
Graham at least has the honesty to present his own views in answer to a posted question. In the end we dont have any biblical reasoning from them, only "we dont believe it that way" so it must be false.
John
_____________________________
Isa 42:6 I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles.....
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The Woman at the Well - 8/5/2007 7:43:11 PM
|
|
|
Gloryandgrace
Posts: 484
Joined: 1/15/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
PS I'm surprised you're a John M man. Aren't you one of them 'crazimatic' (sic) Christians? I thought I gathered that from another thread. We just got a second 'new Christian radio station' out here in the wilderness, and I actually heard him for the first time ever, just last night
Hello Him4all:
I am a charismatic calvinist. I am an odd one.
The Armins dont like me cause Im a calvy
The Calvy's dont like me cause Im charis-maniacal or thereabouts.
I very much love John M, but we disagree on the gifts.
John
_____________________________
Isa 42:6 I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles.....
|
|
|
|
|
The "CROSSLESS" Gospel Controversy - 8/6/2007 7:32:13 AM
|
|
|
lmartuneac
Posts: 54
Joined: 7/29/2007
Status: offline
|
To All:
This is a 180, but it is important for all to know what the position is on the opposite end of the Lordship Salvation / Easy-Believism pendulum swing.
This morning an article has been posted at my blog that addresses an important matter in the “Crossless” gospel controversy.
A man who has become a major participant in the debate over this new interpretation on the Gospel writes the article. If you have read anything about what has come to be known as the “Crossless” gospel you will have learned that this position is being taught primarily by Zane Hodges and Bob Wilkin. Bob Wilkin is the Executive Director of the Grace Evangelical Society.
Following today’s single article there will be a new series that addresses not only the Zane Hodges "Crossless" interpretation of the Gospel, but will speak to some of the false paradigms “Crossless” advocates utilize in the debate. A man who has been very involved in the discussions is developing this series.
Visit my blog In Defense of the Gospel if you have a interest in this important discussion.
I am confident these articles will help define the “Crossless” gospel debate, but also provided the biblical answers to this departure from a balanced position on the Gospel of Grace.
Yours faithfully,
Lou Martuneac
< Message edited by lmartuneac -- 8/6/2007 7:51:46 AM >
_____________________________
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man," (Col. 4:6).
|
|
|
|
|
RE: The "CROSSLESS" Gospel Controversy - 8/7/2007 12:05:06 PM
|
|
|
Gloryandgrace
Posts: 484
Joined: 1/15/2006
Status: offline
|
Middle ground. That’s the watch word for anyone that seeks to pacify a controversy who clearly wants to hold to a truth that somehow cannot be reconciled with other truths.
In our finite minds it is probable that middle ground is going to be the territory which we fight to maintain. As is seen in previous posts some extreme or the other is undesirable and unbiblical so middle ground is acceptable.
I think middle ground on a sinking ship is still a booking on the Titanic and you may fight all you want to resist running to extremes but in the end you will have to abandon your ship. There is such a thing as revealed truth that is the summit of what God intended to reveal. If there be any lessening of that truth it is not a middle ground but a compromise or a satisfaction with not attaining, not obtaining the clear revelation of what God has said in his holy Word.
I do not see any middle ground when it comes to Salvation as I have presented it on this thread. Repentance, faith, submission, believing are all facets of the one gift of grace given to those whom God has elected to salvation. But I do see a confusion being presented as a viable ‘middle ground’ in the area of salvation by grace through faith.
That presentation is the preaching of experience to form doctrine. Now it is not done on this thread in the form of “Bob just showed up and got saved so that’s all we need to do”.
In other words ‘show up’ and then build a ‘faith alone doctrine from it’. No, that is not what’s being done. I see it as much more cleaver. Using bible texts, such as the woman at the well, the woman with the alabaster box and so on, those experiences devoid of very much narration about the inner workings of the Spirit in them form the basis of ‘faith alone’. From that the doctrines of faith alone are built, disregarding the doctrinal views stated by the apostles in the epistles.
What we have is an experiential doctrine that is now biblically based but yet contradicts biblical doctrines on faith and repentance by using the bible to prove something against itself in another place. The woman with the alabaster box now dispels any notions on repentance and submission because it argues from the woman’s experience of acceptance by Jesus. In doing this kind of theology one can form any kind of doctrine he/she wants from the experiences of bible characters. The silence gives place to presumptions and assumptions. If then someone presses the issue of repentance, immediately someone else may turn to the woman in John 8 and remove that repentance by showing her experience.
Instead of forming the doctrines of salvation from the clear teachings of the apostles, then allowing the teachings of the apostles to interpret the experiences of scripture narrative, we have reversed the process and now pass it off as viable biblical theology called ‘free-grace’. A womans tears, alabaster box, silence and a ‘forgiveness’ statement from Jesus now replaces the doctrines found in Romans, Galatians, Ephesians and so on.
One such example used in a previous post was the text
“Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue: For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God,” (John 12:42-43). The Bible says they were not open about, and would not confess a “change of allegiance.” Did they biblically repent; were they believers?
I posted the above twice to Nathan’s attention at Pulpit Magazine, but he never replied to it. It is a question Lordship advocates cannot answer!
I will not now re-answer the question, but I will say that brother lmartuneac uses the ‘believing’ pharasees as proof that a believer can deny Christ and be a believer. Or so I suppose from the question that he framed from it. Here is an example of the experience of some pharasees being called ‘believers’ but keeping silent about Christ. The implication is ‘free grace’ allows such a believer.
But again instead of allowing experience and narrative to define doctrine let us see what Jesus said directly to such ‘believing’. John 5:44
How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?
Jesus calls into question the believing of such a person whom want mens honor instead of God’s. So it is with those in John 12 : For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God,”
Should we interpret them to be true believers or should we consider them not yet born again? The scriptures lead us to believe they are false to their profession.
As a Lordship advocate I present these texts in rebuttal to lmartuneac and those like him who cleaverly present scripture but link it to false conclusions and then attempt to form doctrines of salvation upon them. This kind of hermeneutical error is the plain foundation upon which the doctrines of ‘free-grace’ as presented by him are now to be understood as Middle ground.
John
_____________________________
Isa 42:6 I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles.....
|
|
|
|
|
Colossians 4:6 - 8/7/2007 10:06:42 PM
|
|
|
lmartuneac
Posts: 54
Joined: 7/29/2007
Status: offline
|
G/G:
You wrote, quote:
"...I will say that brother lmartuneac uses the ‘believing’ pharasees (sic) as proof that a believer can deny Christ and be a believer."
Attributing reckless statements like that to me is why I have no intention of interacting with you.
You need to document anything you claim another man has said. Have I stated in the thread or anywhere in print that my position is, "a believer can deny Christ and be a believer."?
I think it has been at least five times this year that men have attributed statements, motives, etc. to me and have had to retract them and apologize. I take it all in stride, but it does not serve the cause of Christ for Brothers in Christ to let their passions and emotions guide their words and writing.
I mean this sincerely, and as kindly as I can say it: You need to take Col. 4:6 meditate on it and take it to heart before you post comments.
“Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man.”
LM
< Message edited by lmartuneac -- 8/8/2007 9:05:36 AM >
_____________________________
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man," (Col. 4:6).
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Colossians 4:6 - 8/8/2007 12:50:10 AM
|
|
|
growingseed
Posts: 157
Joined: 5/24/2005
Status: offline
|
Salvation is what it is and that a gift sent down from heaven in the name of Jesus, but our works will determine our rewards. Because Jesus lay the only foundation in which to build on. 1 Cor 3:11-15 - "For no one can lay any other foundation than the one we already have-Jesus Christ. Now anyone who builds on that foundation may use gold, silver, jewels, wood, hay, straw. But there is going to come a time of testing at the judgment day to see what kind of work each builder has done. Everyone's work will be put through the fire to see whether or not it keeps its value. If the work survives the fire, that builder will receive a reward. But if the work is burned up, the builder will suffer great loss. The builders themselves will be saved, but like someone escaping through a wall of flames." NLT
We are the servants of Christ being set free from bondage. To serve his will who in turn will show us the fathers will in our lives. 1 Cor 7:22 - "And remember, if you were a slave when the Lord called you, the Lord has now set you free from the awful power of sin. And if you were free when the Lord called you, you are now a slave of Christ." NLT These are not options, but a way of life for those who chose to follow through the narrow gate.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Colossians 4:6 - 8/8/2007 11:55:22 AM
|
|
|
Gloryandgrace
Posts: 484
Joined: 1/15/2006
Status: offline
|
Lmartuneac:
I take it in stride too that you attack LS without proving your case.
I am patient when you only respond if someone mis-states you and then you finally say something.
I dont get angry with you because you are hovering over the thread making comments but wont prove them when questioned or show scripture basis for your reasonings.
When you lurk over the thread and never interact with me, its natural to be mis-stated. I do not intentionally mis-state you nor am I trying to malign your person. I do believe you are unable to prove your case when you are challenged.
Ive given you plenty of insight into my thinking, I have yet to hear one defense of anything directed to me. I only get complaints about misrepresentation. But at the same time I didnt go to your website and call your doctrine twisted, man-centered, false, etc. You never respond to any of your detractors, you wont even quote your own book.
Message boards are liable to have misunderstandings and mis-statements. I will be happy to retract any statement I have made with and open apology. But I also ask of you to stop playing the offended damsel and let your book and your doctrines come under scrutiny.
The purpose of the topic is to let LS stand the test of scrutiny from others. When you attack like a mosquito and explain nothing, what kind of 'teaching' or love or submission to the rest of the believers is that showing?
lmartuneac if you disagree then fine, but come up to the front lines and be accountable as I have been.
John
_____________________________
Isa 42:6 I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles.....
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Colossians 4:6 - 8/8/2007 9:39:27 PM
|
|
|
lmartuneac
Posts: 54
Joined: 7/29/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Gloryandgrace
You never respond to any of your detractors, you wont even quote your own book.
G/G:
You are giving me all the more reason not to discuss the LS issue with you. Furthermore, I am under no obligation to interact with you.
Once again you are talking out-of-turn. I "NEVER respond to detractors? Are you sure you want to stand by that statement?
If you are aware of anything about my book and the reaction to it you would know that I have been more public in my interaction with detractors (in on line discussions) than to my knowledge any published advocate of LS.
At my site alone you can read dozens of posts from detractors that I have replied to. At Sharper Iron during the review of my book and my reply to the review I interacted with many detractors. At Pulpit Magazine I spent about 7 weeks interact with Nathan Busenitz (MacArthur's personal assistant) and numerous other pro-LS men, including Phil Johnson (MacArthur's senior editor). There are other sites where I have made myself available to any and all. If I were to count how many responses I have posted to my detractors alone, which is the vast majority, the total would be nearly 1,000+.
BTW, Nathan told me that Dr. MacArthur never makes himself available for any sort of discussions like these.
Next: You wrote I, “won’t even quote my own book." Did you miss the Lordship Legalism article above? That is right out of my book.
Sorry, I have to blunt again, but you are reckless in your comments, you have harshness about you, and I am not going to invest valuable time trying to reason with you.
LM
_____________________________
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man," (Col. 4:6).
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Colossians 4:6 - 8/8/2007 10:23:52 PM
|
|
|
Gloryandgrace
Posts: 484
Joined: 1/15/2006
Status: offline
|
Lmartuneac:
I was trying to draw you out of the comfort of your own turf. Im surprised with all that posting you just didnt cut to the chase and give me your answers.
Even now I am still dealing with 'how you feel' when posting to me.
Its true you came in the thread with some 'authorship' credibilty seeing you must have done some study to write your book. But when challenged you fold up or get hurt or something.
I thought at first I have someone who might actually present some real theological challenges or some presuppositional insights and further challenge me to think. Instead I got a pot-shotter who seemed to think I needed to go to his website for answers. When given scripture to interpret I got more website referals and an ignoring of my challenges to you.
In effect you were not able to engage me because I was too harsh for you.
Its true I dont pull my punches well, I figured you were the big leagues when you came on
quote:
Lordship Salvation is man-centered, works based message, that frustrates the grace of God (Gal. 2:21).
and again
quote:
LS's repentance (and other misinterpretations of Scripture), turn the Gospel of Deliverance from sin into a message of bondage. I encourage readers/lurkers to read:
and again
quote:
The remedy for the loose living of professing Christians, the hope of making that problem go away, is NOT found in changing the terms of the Gospel, which is what Lordship Salvation does.
LS is a man-centered ("forsake unholiness," etc) works based message that frustrates grace (Gal 2:21).
So excuse me if I take you to task to prove your position, whatever accusations you make in this thread is due a fair explanation for that accusation.
But when I called upon you to "prove it" you turned and ran.
You said LS repentance is a misrepresentation of scripture. Well, I told you what I thought repentance was to me an LS advocate, I understood you to detract from repentance in the preaching of the gospel, but you then claimed to agree with me but were insulted by my statement as though you were above anyone else that makes a claim with no substantiation
Sorry I just didnt buy the "I wrote about it, read it in my book" if you want an answer attitude.
Since you came here to make your claims you must prove them here as well not just on your own website. I read many of your comments on your website, I was not impressed with them there either.
Thanks for the badmitton lmartuneac but I cannot seriously consider you to have any credibility. I realize now that your sensitivities were harmed by my responsed to you.
John
_____________________________
Isa 42:6 I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles.....
|
|
|
|
|
Is Christ truly Lord? - 8/8/2007 11:07:43 PM
|
|
|
Ezra
Posts: 1781
Status: offline
|
OK. We seem to be getting off-track here and focusing on personalities (including MacArthur, Hodges, etc.) rather than Gospel principles, so let's get back to the heart of the issue:
1. Did Peter preach Jesus as BOTH Lord and Christ on the Day of Pentecost and thereafter? And was there a Divine necessity that he do so?
2. Does that not mean that the Gospel must present Him as the sinner's Lord and Savior, and unless the sinner repents and makes Him Lord, while receiving Him as Savior, he cannot truly be saved?
3. Is it enough to pay lip service to the truth that Christ Jesus is Lord, or is it a Gospel imperative to preach as Paul did: "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved"?
4. Is it time for Christians to stop referring to the Savior as simply "Jesus" and calling Him by His rightful and proper name --"the Lord Jesus Christ"?
It is evident that evangelicals are being confused as to what the Gospel really is. But there is no need for confusion since Paul taught both Jew and Gentile "Repentance toward God, and faith toward our LORD Jesus Christ" (Acts 20:21).
In the end it does not really matter what a particular preacher says or does not say. All that matters is "What saith the Lord?"
_____________________________
And whosoever will, let him take the Water of Life freely. Revelation 22:17
|
|
|
|
|
How Does the Lordship Advocate Define Repentance? - 8/9/2007 7:49:54 AM
|
|
|
lmartuneac
Posts: 54
Joined: 7/29/2007
Status: offline
|
See this article for a defintion of:
How Does the Lordship Advocate Define Repentance?
LM
_____________________________
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man," (Col. 4:6).
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How Does the Lordship Advocate Define Repentance? - 8/10/2007 10:09:42 AM
|
|
|
Gloryandgrace
Posts: 484
Joined: 1/15/2006
Status: offline
|
2 Cor 7:8For though I made you sorry with a letter, I do not repent, though I did repent: for I perceive that the same epistle hath made you sorry, though it were but for a season.
9Now I rejoice, not that ye were made sorry, but that ye sorrowed to repentance: for ye were made sorry after a godly manner, that ye might receive damage by us in nothing.
10For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death.
11For behold this selfsame thing, that ye sorrowed after a godly sort, what carefulness it wrought in you, yea, what clearing of yourselves, yea, what indignation, yea, what fear, yea, what vehement desire, yea, what zeal, yea, what revenge! In all things ye have approved yourselves to be clear in this matter.
Repentance. The changing of a mind. So that is the definition.
But the bible expands upon repentance going beyond the definition of a greek word.
Here we have repentance in all its fruits.
"Sorrowed to repentance"
"Godly sorrow worketh repentance" "....to salvation"
The sorrow that is understood to be "made sorry after a godly manner"
works a kind of repentance that we dont repent from.
Then look at what sorrowing to repentance...to salvation reveals.
"carefulness it wrought in you, yea, what clearing of yourselves, yea, what indignation, yea, what fear, yea, what vehement desire, yea, what zeal, yea, what revenge!"
Genuine repentance has its birthing in godly sorrow, its results in indignation against sin, zeal to serve God, a clearing of the conscience
a new-born fear of God even a revenge toward living in unrighteousness.
The bible attaches this kind of fruit to godly sorrow that works repentance, a repentance that results in salvation not to be repented of.
Lordship salvation is all about this kind of repentance.
John
_____________________________
Isa 42:6 I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles.....
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How Does the Lordship Advocate Define Repentance? - 8/10/2007 8:47:12 PM
|
|
|
Ezra
Posts: 1781
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: lmartuneac
See this article for a defintion of:
How Does the Lordship Advocate Define Repentance?
LM
There is nothing in this article that proves that the definition or application of the doctrine of repentance is unscriptural as understood by "Lordship advocates".
However, your attempt to limit the meaning of repentance to merely a change of mind is unscriptural. Lexicons do not establish the scriptural usage of any word. Scripture establishes scriptural usage.
Repentance is a change of heart, mind, will, direction, life, and destiny. It is a turning from sins and idols to the living God and the Lord Jesus Christ. And it is a necessity for genuine salvation.
_____________________________
And whosoever will, let him take the Water of Life freely. Revelation 22:17
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How Does the Lordship Advocate Define Repentance? - 8/11/2007 12:12:48 AM
|
|
|
lmartuneac
Posts: 54
Joined: 7/29/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ezra
quote:
ORIGINAL: See this article for a definition of:
How Does the Lordship Advocate Define Repentance?
LM
Ezra:
quote:
There is nothing in this article that proves that the definition or application of the doctrine of repentance is unscriptural as understood by "Lordship advocates".
Lordship advocates misinterpret the biblical definition of repentance to suit the commitment and surrender in "exchange" for salvation message. LS advocates have changed the terms of the Gospel. LS advocates, therefore, do not find their definition of repentance unscriptural.
quote:
However, your attempt to limit the meaning of repentance to merely a change of mind is unscriptural.
The purpose of the article at my blog is to demonstrate from a Lordship advocate how repentance is misinterpreted and thereby corrupts the simplicity that is in Christ (2 Cor. 11:3).
If you were to read my book there are 13 pages on repentance and there I do not limit it to "change of mind." Nor do I corrupt its meaning by saying it is as you define a "change of life."
quote:
Repentance is a change of heart, mind, will, direction, life, and destiny. It is a turning from sins and idols to the living God and the Lord Jesus Christ.
That is Lordship's change of behavior repentance for salvation. Genuine repentance should result in a change of behavior. Lordship Salvation, however, demands a commitment and promise to change life/behavior and without such upfront commitment to change their behavior, and "turn from sin," there is no reception of eternal life.
Telling a lost man he must turn from sin to be saved is changing the Gospel from a message of deliverance from sin to a message of bondage. A lost man cannot turn from sin, he cannot change his life, and the Lord does not bestow his saving grace on any man who is trying to receive it with promises of a change in his behavior. That is works and it is a false gospel.
This is one of the aspects of the LS message that frustrates grace (Gal. 2:21).
LM
_____________________________
"Let your speech be always with grace, seasoned with salt, that ye may know how ye ought to answer every man," (Col. 4:6).
|
|
|
|
|
RE: How Does the Lordship Advocate Define Repentance? - 8/11/2007 2:46:59 PM
|
|
|
Gloryandgrace
Posts: 484
Joined: 1/15/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
Telling a lost man he must turn from sin to be saved is changing the Gospel from a message of deliverance from sin to a message of bondage. A lost man cannot turn from sin, he cannot change his life, and the Lord does not bestow his saving grace on any man who is trying to receive it with promises of a change in his behavior. That is works and it is a false gospel.
This is one of the aspects of the LS message that frustrates grace (Gal. 2:21).
As long as lmartuneac stays away from scripture and presents his own conclusions with an ending scripture reference all is supposedly sound.
Nonsense.
In 2cor 7 I quoted what repentance looked like and the resultant outcome from such godly repentance.
What was the sorrowing after a godly manner refering to? Was it sorrow over sin and its effects in ones life or was it something else?
When the law is presented, and when a sinner understands his actions to be the very thing that brought him into such a dangerous spiritual and actual condition is this a 'works' that the sinner is doing to secure that God is going to accept him? Does admitting his sin free him from the power and penalty of sin? When a person sees their own sinfulness in the light of God's law and the fearfulness of upcoming punishments is this now a 'work' that is being done to gain God's approval to secure salvation?
No, its not a work nor is it even a human effort mentally. God is revealing and convicting by the Spirit sin, righteousness and judgment. It is this very revelation that the sinner flees from, he does not want to see himself as God sees him nor does he really want to appear 'naked' before God because of his actions. So this knowledge of sin and the exposure to wrath and damnation doesnt foster self-righteous
"look what Im doing for you God", it fosters a complete emptying and humilation before God. It has the opposite effect.
When a man is willing to flee from judgment, flee from the penalty of sin, that is not a 'work' to obtain a good standing with God, but a God-given desire to preserve ones life.
Lmartuneac again not only comes against scripture but seeks to undo the evangelistic message.
When the gospel message is given afte | | |
Forum Tools
Printable Version
I thought I gathered that from another thread. We just got a second 'new Christian radio station' out here in the wilderness, and I actually heard him for the first time ever, just last night. 