1. Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Questions for the anti-Lordship Salvation people..

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by jcjordan, Aug 14, 2008.

  1. jcjordan

    jcjordan New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2007
    Messages:
    316
    Likes Received:
    0
    I never claimed anyone was "anti-lordship". I was very careful to call it "anit-lordship salvation". I've never pre-supposed that that the NLS crowd had a problem with the Lordship of Christ.
     
  2. jcjordan

    jcjordan New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2007
    Messages:
    316
    Likes Received:
    0
    O.K...just reading through this short thread, I'm realizing the Lordship Salvation debate is really a debate about when regeneration takes place. The NLS crowd claims the LS crowd requires works for salvation. However, the NLS people need to realize that us LS people believe that any good work we do is a result of the Holy Spirit regenerating us. We believe that it is totally impossible to do anything to get ourselves to heaven...God must do the work. We believe that before we can believe or have faith, God must give us a new heart. This is what we call being "born again". We believe if one is truly "born again" that there will be a change in behavior...mostly a new attitude and hatred of sin. We believe that if God regenerates someone, than His name is at stake if there is no change toward a love of righteousness. What I've not seen as being fair in this arguement is that some of those against Lordship Salvation continue to sladerously claim that the position teaches salvation based on works without stating that it is all a series of works by the Father, Son and Holy Spririt.
     
  3. Lou Martuneac

    Lou Martuneac New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Messages:
    786
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ed:

    Glad you put the Bible up. I use a Bible avatar at my blog because so many put up pictures or books by MacArthur or Hodges.

    [​IMG]

    Anyway, the "no-lordship" label is not going to go away. It is part of the political gamesmanship in the debate to demonize and paint ALL who reject LS into one extremist camp. In his books I think it is safe to say that MacArthur uses those labels and others like them hundreds of times.

    This tactic is much like how the liberal media tries to portray Bible believing fundamentalists. The media will use the term "Fundamentalist" interchangeably for Muslim extremists and Bible-believing Fundamentalists. It is a way to demonize the one by the excesses of the other. That practice is found in the LS debate.

    The reductionist Crossless gospel teaching of Zane Hodges, Bob Wilkin and the Grace Evangelical Society is heretical in its own right. Their views are legitimate targets for criticism and rebuke, but as Dr. Pickering noted, this does not give MacArthur the right to change the terms of the Gospel.

    In any event, MacArthur uses the "no-lordship" label and makes the application to any who reject LS whether it comes from the heresy of Hodges or from more biblically balanced positions.


    Lou
     
  4. Goldie

    Goldie New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Messages:
    156
    Likes Received:
    0
    Whaaaaa............t? Another LS thread? :laugh: I think I'm already all "LS'd" out. :praying:
     
  5. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    52,013
    Likes Received:
    3,649
    Faith:
    Baptist
    It appears some who support the NLS now want to be self created martyrs as well as trolling mulitple boards with this stuff. It is a shame the gospel must be cheapened in such a way.
     
  6. EdSutton

    EdSutton New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Messages:
    8,755
    Likes Received:
    0
    Totally unnesessary comment!

    With all respect, I suggest I am as strongly opposed to the teaching of Lordship salvation as any on this board, and have been thus for almost 40 years.

    That said, this 'crack' is totally uncalled for, because frankly, I see no reason for those of us who believe basically as I do, to lower ourselves to that tactic, which I have been decrying in others.

    Ed.
     
    #26 EdSutton, Aug 15, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 15, 2008
  7. Goldie

    Goldie New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Messages:
    156
    Likes Received:
    0
    I wasn't lowering myself, nor was it a "tactic" - I was joking hahaha???? If you can't laugh at a joke, please don't take your bad mood out on me. Rather ignore it, unless you want to make a big issue out of petty things. I find your lack of humour rather painful, and perhaps that's the reason why no-one listens to you. You seem to harp on the negatives and ignore the positives because it makes you feel good to pinpoint and magnify everyone else's "tactics". Perhaps you should write a book instead on "how to make friends and influence people".

    The definition of a joke: (for those who don't know)
    Something not said seriously, or not actually meant; something done in sport.

    And the truth be told - If I had any of John MacArthur's books they'd go straight into the trash can, I wouldn't waste my time burning them. And that's the truth and not a joke, so try not to get too excited about it.

    O! Hail! Caesar!
     
    #27 Goldie, Aug 15, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 15, 2008
  8. Marcia

    Marcia Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    1
    I thought that might be the case (I admit I can't always tell and often plunge in too late -ha!) but decided to answer anyway. I'm thinking, "if I answer as biblically as possible, let's see where it goes."

    I like the idea of LS and non-LS camps about as much as I like Calvinist/non-Calivinst camps. This is my view: :BangHead:

    I am not putting myself into a LS or non-LS camp because it seems there is still disagreement as to what a LS view is.
     
  9. jcjordan

    jcjordan New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2007
    Messages:
    316
    Likes Received:
    0
    Marcia, I wasn't baiting you. There are no traps.
     
  10. Marcia

    Marcia Active Member

    Joined:
    May 12, 2004
    Messages:
    11,139
    Likes Received:
    1
    Okay! That's good to know!
     
  11. swaimj

    swaimj <img src=/swaimj.gif>

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2000
    Messages:
    3,426
    Likes Received:
    0
    So far, three NLSers have actually responded with substance to the questions posted on this thread. However, no one on the LS side has responded to the things of substance that have been said. Instead we have pictures of Bibles and pictures of John MacArthur. Typical and very telling!
     
  12. Rippon

    Rippon Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2005
    Messages:
    19,715
    Likes Received:
    585
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Change Your Attitude

    It wasn't that long ago that I welcomed you as a new member of the BB.

    But these kinds of 'jokes' are very distasteful.Wait a minute.It's a joke,but it's not a joke at the same time. That's nonsensical.

    Do you read books by any Christian author?Since John MacArthur has written rather extensively on so many biblical subjects -- I really don't understand your venom.His book Charismatic Chaos did not deal with LS for instance.Most of his material may prove to be beneficial to your spiritual growth.He is a brother in the Lord despite what Lou says.
     
  13. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    52,013
    Likes Received:
    3,649
    Faith:
    Baptist
    This is an inappropriate attack. The op addressed a specific set of people:

    Substance has been hashed out on numerous threads trolling this board and at least one other.

    Your accusation is misleading, unfounded, and ridiculous.
     
  14. swaimj

    swaimj <img src=/swaimj.gif>

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2000
    Messages:
    3,426
    Likes Received:
    0
    I said there has been no substantive response on this thread. That statement is accurate and now encompasses your response.:flower:
     
  15. jcjordan

    jcjordan New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2007
    Messages:
    316
    Likes Received:
    0
    Upon starting this thread, I had no intention to debate any of the answers, only to ask for clarification on a few issues. I just wanted to know what these non-LS people thought. Now I'm being told that my questions were "entrapment" and that all John MacArthur books belong either on the bbq or in the trash can. I really didn't think my questions would bring about such reactions.
     
  16. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell Well-Known Member
    Site Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    52,013
    Likes Received:
    3,649
    Faith:
    Baptist

    Yea I addressed that. Since this thread was addressed to NLS your attack is inappropriate.
     
  17. swaimj

    swaimj <img src=/swaimj.gif>

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2000
    Messages:
    3,426
    Likes Received:
    0
    There are all kinds of people on the BB, so you get various reactions and responses. However, you got some very thoughtful answers from NLSers. Little that is thoughtful has been stated in response to those answers.

    I pointed out that one of your questions assumed an answer that no one who is NLS would give. Perhaps you could rephrase that one and someone will address it.
     
  18. swaimj

    swaimj <img src=/swaimj.gif>

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2000
    Messages:
    3,426
    Likes Received:
    0
    It is not inappropriate. LSers DID respond on this thread even though it was addressed to NLSers. None of them interacted with the serious answers that were put forth by three (I presume) NLSers. Rather they responded with pictures of John MacArthur and pictures of Bibles. Actually, I guess I should be impressed with their response. At least they didn't post pictures of JM drawn with crayons! :laugh:
     
  19. Havensdad

    Havensdad New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2007
    Messages:
    3,382
    Likes Received:
    0
    I find your comments offensive. Most of us "LS" individuals are well educated, and very much able to articulate a blistering biblical defense against any charges you might level. However, since this thread is addressed to "Anti" Lordship people, I did not respond.

    If you will kindly restate the responses in an appropriate thread, I will be more than happy to rip them to pieces.

    Thank you,

    Signed,
    A "stupid individual, who believes in the Lordship of Christ"
     
  20. swaimj

    swaimj <img src=/swaimj.gif>

    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2000
    Messages:
    3,426
    Likes Received:
    0
    Chill out, dude! LSers responded on this thread with humorous pictures of JM and the Bible. I tweaked them with a little humor of my own. No harm done. No offense intended.

    NLSers are about done with anwering the questions, it appears. I don't think anybody will be bothered if LSers respond to the NLSers' comments, so, give us all the intellectual fire-power you can muster, my friend, but keep that Texas temper under control
     
Loading...