Lou has caused a good bit of attention to be brought to this subject. He claims, and I think in the integrity of his heart, to be writing for the "lurkers" out there to warn them of this doctrine. He also claims that LS is a works-based Gospel that requires some sort of action/work/commitment of the sinner prior to their salvation. Lou, have I got the gist of your criticism? This is the impression I have so far of your polemic. Whenever I choose to form an opinion on a subject I do not (intentionally) form my opinion based on critics. Let's go to the source. I do not have with me MacArthur's books on the subject. However, JM has given a "primer" as it were to distinguish what LS is as defined by himself. Let the man speak for himself and define his terms and meaning. So here we go... Link: http://www.gty.org/Resources/Articles/2439 This portion of the article must be taken as JM's position on fundamental articles of faith. Do you notice what I notice? Namely: 1. Salvation is proclaimed by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. I expected to hear this from JM. 2. Sinners cannot earn Divine favor and God requires NO prepatory works or pre-salvation reformation. And, that believers are saved BEFORE their faith produces any righteous works. This seems, and I direct this to you Lou, quite contrary to what you have been trying to prove to this board that JM is teaching. JM then asks the question "What, then, are the distinctives of lordship salvation?" Good question. From my reading of Lou's criticism I thought the distinctives of LS were what JM denied in his primer. So what are the disctinctives as defined by JM himself. He outlines them: I made bold the ones that in my view seem to be the hot buttons touched on in the BB discussions. Perhaps they are all "hot buttons" to some. Concerning the first point, JM writes: I agree. True repentance, biblical repentance, produces fruit. Repentance that does not produce fruit is false and hypocritical. "But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:" Matthew 3:7-8 On #6 JM writes: He references here James 4:6 concerning God's resistance of the proud and His giving of grace to the humble. The chapter itself is a rebuke of contention and strife and warnings against intemperance and indulgence of the flesh. The friend of the world is the enemy of God. But He gives abundant grace to us, not to the proud, but to the humble. What I see JM saying here is that easy-believism would suggest that God gives His grace, salvation, to those who yet remain proud in heart. Truly, prior to our salvation, we are all proud in our hearts. But the work of God in salvation humbles us. We become sensible to our sin and wickedness. We acknowledge it before Him. Which of you teaches contrary to this? Which of you says to the sinner that he does not have to admit he is a sinner? Which of you in your teaching of the Gospel does not teach that a sinner must forsake even his own righteousness and submit to the righteousness of God as the Scripture also teaches? As it is written of unbelieving Jews: "For they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God." Romans 10:3 So far I see nothing in JM's summary that is contrary to the Scriptures. I see that it brings to bear in our days the same subject that James in Holy Scripture brings to bear: the nature of true faith. Faith without works is dead. This controversy is not about works-based salvation. It is about true salvation vs. the easy-believism of modern evangelicalism and the false teaching of what has been called decisional regeneration. JM's closing remarks are very appropriate: Amen.