Define Lordship Salvation: Your Opportunity

To Lordship Salvation Advocates:

You may be aware I am speaking at the Grace Conference on Thursday & Friday of this week. I will be teaching two workshops on Lordship Salvation. I will define and discuss some of the chief components of the Lordship interpretation of the Gospel.

This is really short notice, but I was thinking this evening that it might be helpful to let you, the Lordship advocate, define Lordship Salvation in a way you believe is fair and accurate. I have numerous citations from the well-known advocates of Lordship Salvation. You, however, may have a preferred way of expressing your position, and this is your opportunity.

You are invited to visit my site and post a brief definition of Lordship Salvation. One or two brief sentences are sufficient.

I would like to take your definitions, put them on a transparency and show them in my opening workshop. I will not release your name should you choose to use it here. (You can post anonymously) I will not use your definition as a target to mock or ridicule in the workshop. I will simply show the attendees how you, the Lordship advocate, defines his position.

Sorry to rush you on this, but I just got the idea to ask for your input. This is not meant to be a minefield or a chance to play gotcha with anyone.

Please go to In Defense of the Gospel, and define Lordship Salvation in your own words. The article and comment thread is the lead piece at my site.

If you prefer, leave the definition here.

Thanks,


Lou Martuneac

 

One More Example

No problem, that is just one in a long series of Rick Warren's abuses of the Bible.

If you want a more complete listing of Warren's egregious philosophy and methods go to my site for the Short Series on Rick Warren.

Be sure note how one John Brown, former Saddleback staff member and self-styled Rick Warren apologist, tries to defend the indefensible.


LM

 

Please define

Lordship Advocates:

I would really appreciate your input, please consider and provide a brief definition that you believe accurately defines the Lordship interpretation of the Gospel.

:type: Post it at In Your Words...

Thanks,


LM

 

I have. In my book I have demonstrated from JM's books, in his own words that he has adopted a works based interpretation of the gospel.


LM

 

It is probably hard for most to define LS in a brief statement. It is not easy.

Some other LS advocates do not want to be to open and upfront about it. Meaning: They prefer introducing their LS position through subtlety and over time. They employ the false dilemma and other means to demonize any position that falls short of their LS interpretation. This paves the way for an easier sell of LS.

Not all are like that, but some are and I have dealt with that personally.


LM

 

Martin:

What MacArthur teaches is that salvation can only be achieved by an upfront promise/commitment to the works of a mature disciple of Christ. No upfront commitments to deny-self, bear the cross, and follow Him no salvation. MacArthur demands a commitment to do the "good works" and without such he cannot be saved. That is a man-centered message that frustrates grace. I have this thoroughly documented in my book and at my blog site. See, for example, John MacArthur's Costly Salvation & John MacArthur's Discipleship Gospel.

As for Hodges: I am glad noted my attention to this strange, unorthodox teaching on a “crossless gospel.” No, not surprised. I’m not going to attempt to guide Dr. Ryrie on this, I’m sure he is handling it in a way he feels honors the Lord.

Universalism? Maybe. This I do know, once men start down a path into extremes they usually keep going into deeper error. Hodges and Wilkin have certainly been sliding for some time.

Keeping checking my site. Two men are going to contribute new articles on the “Crossless gospel.” The first will be mid-next week.


LM

 

Already did

Done that, and 13 pages in my book are on that single verse.

One irrefutible result is that Rom. 10:9 does NOT support the Lordship interpretation of the Gospel, as defined by men like Dr. MacArthur.

LM

 

Thanks for posting this.


LM

 

Its Right There

You can hear the same on the radio, but very rarely. Plus he revises the way he states some of the things in his books. No as easily caught unless you know what to listen for.

In his books many miss the things you read at my site because they are not expecting him to be unorthodox, and so they do not read carefully with discernment.

Most of what is in JM's pro-Lordship books is sound. If, however, you read carefully, the false teaching of LS is right there.

Dr. Ernest Pickering was very balanced. He was a close personal acquaintance while I was a missionary.

Now, if you like, read Is Lordship Salvation An "Exchange?"


LM

 

Hi:

The quotes are exact, accurate and in context. No misrepresentation, no Straw Man. MacArthur believes and teaches exaclty what you read in the articles at my blog.

LS, as defined by MacArthur, is a false gospel, no question about it.

For many LS is a reaction to the errors in Easy-Believism. The exposure of the latest version of EB, known as the "Crossless" gospel (popularized by Zane Hodges) will bring the LS response back to the forefront.

LS is an extreme, and out of balance with the biblical plan of salvation.

Have to go to the Grace Conference, back late tonight.


LM