"Forsake sin" FOR Salvation?

It shold be clear to all what MacArthur teachings are. Lou post other mens view while you can read MacArthur 1st hand.

This is nothing but folly for Lou to keep posting others and what they claim MacArthur says, when we can read it on our own.

Why mislead Lou?

You can say a dog's tail is a leg, but the dog will still have 4 legs not 5.

 

Jarth,

The man is obscessed! He just started yet ANOTHER thread on the same thing. lol

 

And how many of us can honestly say they have done this?

Do we really hate our parents? Wife?, children, your own life?
It says hate not "love less".

I also notice that in verse 33 Jesus did not say "you must be willing to forsake all" but that you actually must forsake all.

Who of us here has done that and if you have, how is it you have a computer?

Do you have a home? a car? a bank account, a retirement plan, Insurance policies, etc, etc, etc, here in the most affluent nation on earth?

I guess we are all doomed like the rich young ruler who balked at the Lord's requirement to forsake all.

Can we at least be men and women enough to say we haven't forsaken all? I haven't.

However, I can say this :Jesus Christ is not only my Lord, but my God, my Savior and as far as I'm concerned He is my everything.

Yes I have failed Him beyond miserably, yet I know that He loves me in spite of my sins - past present and future.​

1 John 5:13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.​

HankD

 

Hank,

I think you have misunderstood the passage in their application. But I am not going to belabor that with you.

Yes, I can say with a clear conscience I have forsaken all to follow Jesus, even while I type it out on my computer. :laugh:

 

He reminds me of a spoiled brat kid who cannot accept that he is capable of tripping, even in front of others.
That kind of kid will get up and push another kid in the crowd who had nothing at all to do with his tripping but just happened to be there.
Truth to tell, as far as I can see, his gripe is not really with the Lordship issue more than the fact that MacArthur is a Calvinist.
It is Calvinism he hates, not the Lordship of Christ, which he knows is inevitable if one is really a believer.

 

We are His "workmanship" after we are saved -- not unto salvation. Do you agree with that? Prior to that we are a) our own workmandhip, or b) Satan's (Pharisees, etal.), or c) we don't have the capacity to be anyone's workmanship (infants, mentally challenged, etc.).

So now the critical question comes, "Were we saved by our own 'workmanship?'" I believe that if we call "saving faith, repentance, commitment, and obedience" "divine works of the Spirit," we still must say that He only PERSUADES us to do them.

And if they together constitute "saving faith" (which I believe they do), then 1) to be saving eternally (justification of the soul) they must come before salvation and 2) to save temporally (sanctification of the spirit) they must come before spiritual growth can occur.

Now the objection to JM is this -- as a Calvinist, he will gladly aver that God working in us causes us to do works is required for "spiritual growth salvation" but he will "deny to the death" that God works in us in the same way (persuasion) to do works of "saving faith" unto eternal life.

I agree, James. The "saving faith" JM talks about leads to salvation of the spirit now but not to salvation of the soul and spirit (since the spirit goes with the soul) in eternity.

Here's a way to look at that last remark -- the spirit can go to heaven eternally with the saved soul because Christ died for all sin of the flesh and spirit. But the spirit cannot go to heaven with the unbelieving soul because the unbelieving soul has never reconciled its relationship to God -- been "reborn." Now this is the salvation I'm talking about ... for men to positively, of their own accord/spirit/choice, claim Christ for the ETERNAL aspect of His sacrifice and for the Lordship of His wisdom over ours in our souls/consciences is, to me, saving faith.

And so my objection to JM is that 1) like all good Calvies, he takes no account of the soul and how it "must be saved" and 2) instead concerns himself with the salvation of the spirit of man (the only aspect of man that he acknowledges) which he says MUST "work." Do you see what I'm saying? I do believe that JM has it right about works playing a part in salvation. But because he knows nothing of the soul, he assumes the "total spiritual aspect of man" to be "elect"/saved/"regenerated" without works/choice/saving faith generated within man. Indeed, it can be said that the whole crux of the falling out between free will and Calvies is this issue of "is there a distinct soul and how is it saved?"* Because 1Thes 5:23 affirms there are both soul and spirit and Heb 4:12 tells us they can be "divided asunder" by the word of God as to their "seeing" or "hearing" of the word.

*Ans: Same way the spirit is saved progressively, the soul is saved instantly and eternally -- we choose God's gospel truth from among the many options available.

skypair

 

Yes brother, I suspected that you were making a case.

However, it is not clear exactly what you meant by "forsake all" and for whom it was meant, and that it could have caused confusion in the minds of others as well as me.

It's all about His love for us and not our performance.

HankD

 

Lou,

Perhaps you could learn from my post just above this one to JArthur.

The primary deficiency of LS and Calvinism is they are not concerned with the eternal salvation of the SOUL. They say they are but they don't know what the soul is. Their theology and sotierology excludes it from consideration.

The ideal thing for them to see would be that, in the same way JM says that LS "saves" them spiritually --- that is the way that God saves their souls eternally. But since the soul to them is "invisible," so is the process of its salvation such that they assume that God has somehow (they don't know how God chose them)"given" it to them to be saved in eternity as a free gift.

Instead, salvation is something that must be "found" and "chosen" in order to "have." Rev 3:18, 20 is a good example. "uy of Me gold..." means come to Christ and find wisdom. "...and white raiment,..." means receive from Christ eternal salvation in heaven. "...and eyesalve..." means now Christ will lead you into all spiritual truth. And then in verse 20 is the "invitation" -- I/Jesus am "knocking;" YOU, please "open" the "door." If YOU do have saving faith/repent/commit/obey, I/Christ will come in and "sup with YOU and YOu with Me." Same way JM and LS say we receive salvation of the spirit is how we must receive it in the SOUL.

Perhaps on that note, you could redirect your own assertions about LS and JM, eh?:jesus:

skypair

 

Sky,

What gives you the right to say Calvinist do not know what the soul is?

You need to prove your remark or recant

 

Ha, ha! :laugh: That is your response to my post??? You don't disprove my assertions in any way but instead tell me to prove my remarks when my remarks cite scriptural proof (1Thes 5:23, Heb 4:12)??

Sir, you are very much "up the proverbial creek without a paddle!" :laugh:

I notice that none of you Calvinists very much like to consider my argument that there even is a soul that "surely dies" on account of sin. I notice that none of you likes to think that the spirit of man (intellect, emotions, and will) is very much "alive" nonetheless! Y'all NEVER engage on these threads where I point out the distinction. And you know why? You have not been programmed to respond to the biblical paradigm of the human nature!

Human nature is not about TOTAL depravity -- it's not about no conditions to salvation -- it's not about grace being "irresistible" to only certain people -- and it's not about YOUR perseverance but about God's PRESERVATION of your soul!!!

[Offensive statement removed]

skypair

 

To tell you the truth Sky, I didn't even read most of your post.

Do not be so foolish to think I have nothing to say.

Will you recant or will you prove your words.

This must be addressed before we go on.

 

NO...we have been over this before. You know good well what the Bible says.

In one way. We wish to follow our will and do so. However, God is still in control and at no time does God loss control.

God gives to all just as he wills. You are not smarter, (if you are smart) on your own.God gave you your IQ and you cannot change this.

"
NO

.
Then you believe wrong.

Nothing but mans logic. I'll stick to the Bible rather then a wild idea.

No he would not. We are holy (set-apart) from the new birth on. We cannot get any more holy then we are now. However, many do not WALK in that holiness.

Please see this weeks column.
http://www.lincolnstandard.com/main.asp?SectionID=26&SubsectionID=26&ArticleID=3770&TM=69010.06


You will find this.....

This is foolish and you need to prove MacArthur does not know that a soul must be saved

You show me one place why MacArthur says we must work for salvation. If you have nothing recant.

Yes...its pure folly.

You may say this but MacArthur says we are saved by grace and grace alone. You need to read his books, not guess.



The rest is a waste of time.

 

Let me once again remind Lou what MacArthur is saying. Easy-believe systems centers around being saved from hell. It is asked who would like to be saved from going to hell. We are saved from sin that places us in hell. MacArthur is saying that when we are saved out goal is to be saved from sin...to forsake sin. He never..Never..NEVER says one must stop sinning to be saved. NEVER. He never says one must work their way to salvation. NEVER!!!

Others please forgive me as I post this once again, but Lou does not seem to get it. ..

MacArthur says...

Paul says we are to walk in the gospel...

Galatians 2:14
But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?

He also says we WILL bring forth fruit
Col 1:5-6
For the hope which is laid up for you in heaven, whereof ye heard before in the word of the truth of the gospel; Which is come unto you, as it is in all the world; and bringeth forth fruit, as it doth also in you, since the day ye heard of it, and knew the grace of God in truth:

 

Luk 18:28 Then Peter said, Lo, we have left all, and followed thee.


Luk 18:29 And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, There is no man that hath left house, or parents, or brethren, or wife, or children, for the kingdom of God's sake,


Luk 18:30 Who shall not receive manifold more in this present time, and in the world to come life everlasting.

"According to this passage of scripture, Jesus told His disciples that they would be rewarded for "forsaking" their own lives, to follow Him. We have to drop everything, if we are to be saved." Quotation marks my emphasis.


Luk 13:1 ¶ There were present at that season some that told him of the Galilaeans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices.


Luk 13:2 And Jesus answering said unto them, Suppose ye that these Galilaeans were sinners above all the Galilaeans, because they suffered such things?


Luk 13:3 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.


Luk 13:4 Or those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and slew them, think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem?


Luk 13:5 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.

"You have to REPENT of your sins to be saved!! If you repent of your sins, don't you have to "forsake" them? "

Mar 2:17 When Jesus heard [it], he saith unto them, They that are whole have no need of the physician, but they that are sick: I came not to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

Luk 24:47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

2Cr 7:9 Now 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.
2Cr 7:10 For godly sorrow worketh repentance to salvation not to be repented of: but the sorrow of the world worketh death.

2Pe 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.


Willis

 

I would say it like this...

We must have the desire to leave all, including our sin, behind us as we ask God to save us from our sin.

Now, somethings we may not even know is sin at the time of our salvation. But with this desire to be free from sin, as God works in us and shows us sins we need to remove, we act on those

Indeed you are right.

 

Very true. And this is the impression so far I have from the so-called No Lord camp. They are stripping repentance from the Gospel, setting up a different Gospel, which is not another, but it is perverted, and subsequently setting up a strawman "Lordship Salvation" and defeating it.

Just my impression so far...

 

"Well, ya got me there, pardna," cause how does one make an argument where Calvinism is SILENT??

skypair

 

Wow!! A man who doesn't believe in spiritual growth!! in Eph 4:14-16!!

We are "indwelt" by the Holy Spirit from the new birth is, I think, what you meant to say. And, yeah, we can't get any more of Him than we do at the new birth. But sanctification is actually progressively setting apart the flesh to God and we can always "do" more of that.

How do I prove something about JM when JM is silent about it? Does silence convince you of his ignorance? How about that if he mentions the word "soul," he shows no knowledge of what the soul is? what it function is?

Thank you for "wasting your time," then. It wouldn't be a waste of time if you realized that it is your soul in jeopardy.

skypair

 

For whomever made or copied this quote:

FTR, to my knowledge, there is no 'theologian' named RC Ryle. The only person by that name I found with a quick search, possibly may have authored one book titled Home Truths, and even this is questionable, IMO. (No James Ryle, either, although I saw that misidentification on the Internet, as well.)

I suspect the 'source' of the quote meant the late English Bishop John Charles (J.C.) Ryle, who was a well known theologian of the last part of the 19th Century. I strongly suspect this is also the individual who authored Home Truths, as well. The quote is likely from Ryle's well known work titled Holiness, from which it seems consistent, as well.

It's R. C. Sproul but J. C. Ryle for today's wannabe' theologians.

Ed

P.S. Yes, I 'quibble' over names, for I think if one intends to cite them, one should at least, get them right!