Sixth Lordship Distinctive- Reviewed

Discussion in 'Baptist Theology & Bible Study' started by Lou Martuneac, Jan 15, 2008.

  1. Lou Martuneac

    Lou Martuneac
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Messages:
    786
    Likes Received:
    0
    Dr. John MacArthur wrote a series that outlines his interpretation of the Gospel that is known as Lordship Salvation. His sixth distinctive is as follows,
    Reviewed:

    What one must understand as they read the above by JM is that he is speaking about salvation, the Gospel message that leads to and results in eternal life. So, when you read MacArthur's statement above he is stating what he believes are the necessary requirements that must be met for the reception of eternal life.

    One must also remember that JM and LS men blend and confuse the separate doctrines of salvation and discipleship. He wrote, “Surrender to Jesus’ lordship is not an addendum to the biblical terms of salvation…” This is consistent with his writing in TGATJ,
    MacArthur believes a commitment to discipleship expected of a born again believer is the (sine qua non= indispensable condition) requirement for salvation. For LS men the lost must make, as JM writes a, “whole-hearted commitment” to self-denial, cross bearing and following to receive the gift of eternal life.

    One must also remember that any responsible Bible teacher would reject the so-called “easy-believism” such as is found in the Zane Hodges, Bob Wilkin “Crossless gospel.” The answer, however, is not found in LS’s changing the terms of the Gospel to include up front surrender and commitment to the “good works” (Eph. 2:10) expected of a genuine born again believer.

    An objective read of JM’s sixth distinctive demonstrates that JM's LS message is that salvation is contingent upon “unconditional surrender” in “exchange” for the reception of “eternal life.”

    Remember, when you read JM’s #6 he is writing on what he believes are the necessary conditions for the reception of eternal life, to be born again.

    Does the Gospel of Jesus Christ require an upfront commitment of “unconditional surrender…submission” for the reception of eternal life? Must saving faith be frontloaded with a promise to live in obedience to the Lord’s commands?

    In his books on Lordship Salvation MacArthur uses the words “grace” and “faith,” but they are redefined though Calvinistic pre-suppositions and made to conform to the Lordship interpretation of the Gospel. An objective read of JM’s distinctive above is one example of how we can conclude that Lordship Salvation is a works-based, non-saving message that frustrates grace.

    I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain,” (Galatans 2:21).​


    LM
     
  2. canadyjd

    canadyjd
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    3,896
    Likes Received:
    0
    I would urge all who desire to know what John MacArthur believes concerning Lordship Salvation to visit his website at:
    http://www.gty.org/Resources/Articles/2439


    I would also like to point out a couple of things about the so-called "review" of Lou Martuneac.

    1. Please notice that Lou Martuneac does even attempt to engage the scripture MacArthur uses to support his position. Why not?

    2. Please notice that Lou Martuneac takes liberties with his "definitions" of what John MacArthur means when he uses certain words. Lou Martuneac "redefines" what MacArthur means, and then writes against his new definition. Lou Martuneac is, in effect, arguing with himself.

    3. Please notice that Lou Martuneac will not tell you that John MacArthur clearly states, in many places, that salvation is completely a work of God, and that "man" can do no work to earn that salvation.

    4. Please notice that Lou Martuneac will not tell you that John MacArthur specifically states that God requires no "prepatory work" on the part of the person in order to be saved. Therefore, Lou Martuneac's assertion that MacArthur requires "upfront commitment" to discipleship for salvation is untrue.

    5. Please notice that Lou Martuneac will not tell you that John MacArthur believes that repentance precedes faith and both are gifts of God's grace. Since God knows how to give good gifts to His children, He would not give faith that was deficient in any way. Therefore, since God requires commitment to discipleship from all believers, God will give that commitment as part of His grace.

    Consider this quote
    So when Lou Martuneac says this, he is telling you something he knows is a falsehood. John MacArthur believes God regenerates a person, by His grace, prior to faith. To be born again, is to be enabled by Almighty God to respond to the gospel. Why can't Lou Martuneac be intellectually honest (or simply honest) on this issue?

    Lou Martuneac does not have to agree with MacArthur, no one does. But, if he were intellectual honest, he would accurately tell you what MacArthur believes. He would not "redefine" MacArthur's words, but let MacArthur speak for himself.

    If he were intellectually honest, he would engage the text of scripture quoted, accurately telling you what MacArthur believes and what he believes and then explain why Lou Martuneac's interpretation is better.


    The bottom line is that Lou Martuneac is intellectually dishonest on this issue. You cannot trust anything he posts to be accurate.

    peace to you all:praying:
     
    #2 canadyjd, Jan 15, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 15, 2008
  3. Lou Martuneac

    Lou Martuneac
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Messages:
    786
    Likes Received:
    0
    Let's all be reminded that a portion of what you are getting is the extra--biblical regeneration before faith mantra.

    Read the following for a complete and thorough biblical refutation of the regeneration before faith teaching that under girds LS.

    Does Regeneration Precede Faith?


    LM
     
  4. JustChristian

    JustChristian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2007
    Messages:
    3,833
    Likes Received:
    0

    CALVINISM believes that Regeneration precedes Faith as this article states. "Lordship Salvation" doesn't depend on that idea at all.
     
  5. Lou Martuneac

    Lou Martuneac
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Messages:
    786
    Likes Received:
    0
    Question on the Matter

    The Calvinistic presuppositions are not the real issue in this thread. It has to be engaged because it is interjected in mantra like fashion.

    The real issue is what John MacArthur wrote in that statement. He is describing what he believes is required from a lost man to be born again.

    With that in mind, here is a question for all to answer:

    Does the Gospel of Jesus Christ require an upfront commitment of “unconditional surrender…submission” for the reception of eternal life?​


    My answer is, “No!”

    I trust the Lordship Salvation advocates are willing to give a clear, unvarnished answer to this simple unambiguous question.


    LM
     
  6. canadyjd

    canadyjd
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    3,896
    Likes Received:
    0
    Let's be reminded of what Lou Martuneac said:
    Lou Martuneac acknowledges that John MacArthur believes and teaches that regeneration/being born again is that first step in salvation initiated by God.

    He calls it "extra-biblical" because he disagrees with MacArthur interpretation of scripture on the issue. Nothing more is necessary in Lou Martuneac's mind. If he disagrees with someone's interpretation, that makes it "extra-biblical". He does not worry about engaging scripture to support our point of view.

    Lou Martuneac then contradicts himself by saying that John MacArthur believes a person must do certain things to be "born again". When Lou Martuneac says this, he knows it is a falsehood.

    John MacArthur believes God initiates salvation by causing the person to be "born again", regenerated. Everything else that happens is a response to God's grace in regeneration.

    Lou Martuneac is intellectually dishonest on this issue. He cannot be trusted to be accurate and truthful about what John MacArthur believes and teaches.

    peace to you all:praying:
     
    #6 canadyjd, Jan 15, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 15, 2008
  7. canadyjd

    canadyjd
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    3,896
    Likes Received:
    0
    Just for fun, let's look at the context of Galatans (Galatians)2:21. Gal. 2:20 "I have been crucified with Christ, and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me, and delivered Himself up for me. (21) I do not nulify the grace of God; for if righteousness comes through the Law, then Christ died needlessly."


    Paul is speaking of those who are attempting to keep the Old Testament Jewish Laws. Lou Martuneac hasn't shown John MacArthur supports keeping the Old Testament Jewish Laws, has he? Then the passage doesn't apply.​


    But rather, Paul speaks of living his life for Christ. Indeed, Paul is saying he lives his life as if Christ were the only thing worth living for. Jesus is Lord of Paul's life.

    The verses of scripture Lou Martuneac uses in his smear of John MacArthur support MacArthur's position on Lordship Salvation.​

    How embarrassing for Lou Martuneac​

    peace to you all:praying: ​


     
    #7 canadyjd, Jan 15, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 15, 2008
  8. Lou Martuneac

    Lou Martuneac
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

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

    In his 6th distinctive John MacArthur is describing what he believes is required from a lost man to be born again. With that in mind, here is the question to you:

    Does the Gospel of Jesus Christ require an upfront commitment of “unconditional surrender…submission” for the reception of eternal life?

    My answer is, “No!”

    Will you give a clear, unvarnished answer to this simple unambiguous question?

    I trust you are not going to dodge this question the same way you did last week; are you jd?


    LM
     
  9. canadyjd

    canadyjd
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    3,896
    Likes Received:
    0
    "With that in mind"? You have misrepresented what John MacArthur believes, and now you are asking me to comment on your misrepresentation?:rolleyes: I already exposed the untruthfulness of this statement in the very first response. Don't you read the responses in your own thread?

    You should know that John MacArthur believes God regenerates (causes to be born again) the person first. Everything else is a response to the grace of God that has been poured out on that person in regeneration.

    John MacArthur believes salvation is a work of God from start to finish. Everything we do in salvation is a response to God's grace (unmerited favor).

    I see no reason to comment on your falsehood, other than to point out that you are, once again, being untruthful and intellectually dishonest.

    peace to you:praying:
     
    #9 canadyjd, Jan 16, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 16, 2008
  10. skypair

    skypair
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2006
    Messages:
    4,657
    Likes Received:
    0
    canadyjd,

    Would you admit that JM's idea of "Lordship" ("unconditional surrender ... submission") is a "condition" on something? He seems to say it is on "salvation," right? If you saying that God will save without the "condition," what is the condition required for?

    skypair
     
  11. Lou Martuneac

    Lou Martuneac
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Messages:
    786
    Likes Received:
    0
    Why Are You Dodging...?

    jd:

    In his 6th distinctive John MacArthur is describing what he believes is required from a lost man to be born again. That is abundantly clear in his 6th distinctive. Why are you ducking this question?

    Will you give a clear, unvarnished answer to this simple unambiguous question?

    Are you afraid to give an answer to this question because you never read MacArthur's books on LS? Are you beginning to realize that in your zeal to make this a personality clash you have been mistakenly defending that which you did not at first understand JM is teaching?

    Is it possible that something is beginning to become more clear to you now, and you have decided to avoid the obvious implications of what JM wrote in this 6th distinctive?

    It is hard to figure exactly why are you afraid to give a "Yes" or "No" answer, and go on record about what MacArthur wrote in his 6th distinctive?

    I trust you are not going to dodging this question the same way you did last week; are you jd?

    MacArthur wrote,
    jd: Does the Gospel of Jesus Christ require an upfront commitment of “unconditional surrender…submission” (JM's words) for the reception of eternal life?


    LM

    Maybe you could begin by answering SkyPair's question to you. Surely you won't dodge his question too, which was,
     
    #11 Lou Martuneac, Jan 16, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 16, 2008
  12. canadyjd

    canadyjd
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    3,896
    Likes Received:
    0
    Again, Lou Martuneac, your statement is a falsehood. John MacArthur believes to be "born again", or regenerated, occurs prior to faith. It is an act of God's grace. Anything that follows, including the "reception of eternal life" occurs as a response to that act of Grace by Almighty God.

    Consider the quote from MacArthur:
    Are you saying that Christ will bestow eternal life on those whose hearts remain set against Him? You must believe that, since you are reject what MacArthur has said. James 4:5-6 "Or do you think that the Scripture speaks to no purpose: 'He jealously desires the Spirit which He has made to dwell in us'? (6) But He gives a greater grace. Therefore it says, 'God is opposed to the proud, but gives grace to the humble.'"

    God jealously desires the "Spirit" which He "made to dwell in us". He gives "grace" to insure that outcome occurs. He humbles us (conviction of sin), and He opposes those that are "proud". They haven't been humbled. They don't have the Spirit of God working in their lives.

    In MacArthur's teaching, the "faith" that involves "unconditional surrender" is also a gift of God's grace.

    Since it is a gift of God's grace, and God requires unconditional surrender, God will not give the gift of faith that is deficient of unconditional surrender. Since God has regenerated someone by His Grace, and regeneration always results in a person's heart being turned toward Christ, we may conclude that those whose hearts remain set against Him are not regenerated.

    Your continuing inability to accurately state John MacArthur's position simply demonstrates your intellectual dishonesty on this issue.

    My question to you is, why don't you engage the passages to scripture that MacArthur uses to support his statements and explain why he is wrong?

    peace to you:praying:
     
  13. Lou Martuneac

    Lou Martuneac
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

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

    We are discussing JM’s 6th distinctive on his interpretation of the “Lordship” interpretation of the Gospel. You have posted a series of his LS distinctives as if they are the proof texts for Lordship Salvation.

    I can appreciate why you keep reverting back to the extra-biblical regeneration before faith position. It is the way LS advocates try to remove the stigma of what is the works based message of LS. Saved already, before faith in Christ, so calls for “commitment and unconditional surrender” are being made to a man that is born again already. This has been refuted by Zeller in his article, Does Regeneration Precede Faith? (Lurkers, be sure to read Zeller's article. It disarms jd's attempt to rationalize LS.)

    That said, It is beyond any doubt to any objective reader that you are dodging and evading the issue with MacArthur’s 6th distinctive. Why are you afraid to give an answer?

    IMO, because, as you admitted, you never read JM’s books on LS you are now seeing for the first time that he has made some statements that show he demands from lost men an up-front decision for, as he writes, “commitment and unconditional surrender,” as requirements for the reception of eternal life.

    Because you never read his books you are coming to grips with the fact that JM is speaking in terms of the requirements for the reception of eternal life. His words are, “commitment and unconditional surrender.” You, therefore, are now faced with the fact that he is conditioning salvation on man’s promise to do the “good works” (Eph. 2:10) expected of a born again disciple.

    Why are you afraid to give a clear, unvarnished answer to this simple unambiguous question? You didn’t read his books, but you started posting his distinctives without understanding what he is teaching. Did you actually think you could fully understand JM’s LS and defend LS by reading those snippets? You tried to defend what you did not understand. Now, you are looking for a back door, a way out, trying to hide and hope you do not have to answer either way.

    I understand your dilemma: If you answer, “Yes,” then you agree with a “commitment and unconditional surrender” for salvation message. If you say, “No,” then you have acknowledged that you defended something you now do not agree with.

    Any reader can see exactly why are you afraid to give a “Yes” or “No” answer, and go on record about what MacArthur wrote in his 6th distinctive? You did not understand what you were trying to defend, now you just want it to go way so you don’t have to deal with it. Is that the honest way to deal with a discussion of Lordship Salvation or any doctrine?

    It appears you are going to dodge, not just my question, but SkyPair’s question as well. SkyPair asked you,
    That is a harmless question. Are you going to claim Sky is twisting JM’s words? Why must also dodge SkyPair’s simple question to you?

    John MacArthur wrote,
    Why are you afraid to answer this question:
    We can’t move on until you show some willingness to engage the meaning of JM’s 6th distinctive with an answer to the simple, unambiguous questions about JM’s 6th distinctive.


    LM

    PS to Readers: It is clear jd wants nothing to do with what he has found to be a problem with JM’s 6th LS distinctive. I am using this as an opportunity for those of you who lurk to gain an understanding how the LS advocates seek to defend, or in this case, seek to avoid, the polarizing statements coming from men like JM.
     
    #13 Lou Martuneac, Jan 18, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 18, 2008
  14. Lou Martuneac

    Lou Martuneac
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Messages:
    786
    Likes Received:
    0
    To All:

    Note the use of passages from the Book of James in JM’s statement and jd’s comments. Here is sample of JM’s interpretation of the plan of salvation.

    Here is the passage Dr. MacArthur refers to as an “invitation to salvation.”

    #1 JM says this passage is directed to those who are not saved. He says this is the invitation to salvation. The passage opens with, “Submit yourselves…” JM, therefore, is conditioning salvation on “submission,” just as he does in his 6th LS distinctive. It is irrefutable that JM is conditioning the reception of salvation on man’s submission.

    jd, reverting to the extra-biblical regeneration before faith position, will say, “'the most comprehensive invitation to salvation...at those who are not saved', have been saved already because they were regenerated before faith and repentance.” So, then we have to conclude that JM has either misunderstood James or JM is preaching salvation to the redeemed. [Are you beginning to see the circle-logic?]

    #2 Is the Epistle of James written to the lost or the saved? MacArthur says to, “those who are not saved.” What does the Bible say, “James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting. My brethren” (James 1:1-2).

    Is the Epistle of James written to the lost or the saved? Not a difficult question; is it?

    #3 Do we find salvation by the grace of God through faith in Christ (Eph. 2:8-9) anywhere in James 4:7-10?


    LM
     
    #14 Lou Martuneac, Jan 18, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Jan 18, 2008
  15. canadyjd

    canadyjd
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    3,896
    Likes Received:
    0
    First of all, I have never said I agree totally with MacArthur. In fact, I have clearly stated some misgivings I have with some of the things that have been said.

    What I am discussing is your complete inability to either (1) understand what MacArthur is teaching, or (2) accurately state what he believes though you understand it.
    I have answered you 4 or 5 times, Lou Martuneac. You simply don't like the answer.

    What is clear to anyone who can still stomach to read anything we say to each other on this issue, is that I have not only stated that your premise is false, but I have explained in detail why it is false.

    Not to be deterred by the truth, you simply keep repeating the falsehood, and asking me to comment on it.
    Once again, we see the pattern of Lou Martuneac. I have explained in detail why his statement is false. He acts as if I have not.

    I have encouraged him to engage scripture on the issue. I qouted one of the verses MacArthur uses to support his position in the 6th distinctive. Lou Martuneac ignores scripture (calling everything he disagrees with "extra-biblical" without ever showing "why") and then continues to smear MacArthur, and now me.

    Lou Martuneac, you are swimming in an ocean of intellectual dishonesty. The good news is, the is a light shining on a very distant shore.

    Can you see it, Lou Martuneac? It is the light of the truth of the gospel.

    I know you have a lot invested in the falsehood. If your published work is anything like your posts here, then you've written a book and numerous blogs based on a falsehood.

    For you to admit that you're perpetuating a falsehood, all of those things will fade. And so, you keep swimming in the intellectualy dishonesty that is your own mind, completely unwilling to admit what everyone else can clearly see. You have been exposed by the truth.

    peace to you:praying:
     
  16. canadyjd

    canadyjd
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    3,896
    Likes Received:
    0
    To all:

    Early on in this "conversation", I took the time to study the book of James, anwering every quetion of Lou Martuneac.

    I demonstrated to him, without question, that the book of James was written both to believers and unbelievers, based on several passages in James where he speaks to them as if they are unbelievers.

    Lou Martuneac promised to answer in depth, but never did. The reason, apparantly, is that Lou Martuneac cannot engage scripture beyond a very shallow understanding, and will not even attempt to do so.

    And not to be deterred by the truth, Lou Martuneac makes the same accusations again, even though they have been demonstrated to be untrue. That seems to be a pattern with Lou Martuneac.

    At least Lou Martuneac knows his own limitations, even if he is blinded to his own intellectual dishonesty.

    peace to you all:praying:
     
  17. Amy.G

    Amy.G
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2006
    Messages:
    13,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have seen Lou do nothing other than post links to his website.

    Canadyjd, you have done a wonderful job of proving that John MacArthur does not teach a works based salvation.


    :thumbs:
     
  18. canadyjd

    canadyjd
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2005
    Messages:
    3,896
    Likes Received:
    0
    Thank you, Amy. It is nice to see that someone understands what is going on here.

    peace to you:praying:
     
  19. Lou Martuneac

    Lou Martuneac
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Messages:
    786
    Likes Received:
    0
    Another Approach

    jd:

    I can appreciate how frustrated you must be. You never read John MacArthur’s books on Lordship Salvation (LS). You were, therefore, trying to defend JM’s interpretation of the Gospel without knowing fully what his position was. Then you got wrapped in a personality contest.

    So, now you’ve reduced yourself to political gamesmanship as you try to dodge a simple unambiguous question about his view of the Gospel. We see this all the time on the political talk shows. Ask a liberal democrat a question, and instead of an answer, they fire back with a question or smear tactic so they do not have to give a clear, unvarnished answer to a simple, unambiguous question.

    So, let’s make this easier for you.

    Let’s pretend we never heard of John MacArthur. Let’s pretend neither one of ever read a book by him, which would make us even since you never read his LS books. Let’s pretend we never visited his web site. So, now you and I know nothing of a John MacArthur or anything about his personal position on any doctrine.

    With that scenario in mind let’s pretend you and I met at a Baptist fellowship or Bible Conference. At lunch, men are informally discussing some doctrines. You and I never met, I asked the table, and you specifically, this question:

    What would your answer be?


    LM
     
  20. Lou Martuneac

    Lou Martuneac
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

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

    1) The Epistle to James. You have your answer, you misinterpreted the issue. But let’s look at t again. Here is the passage Dr. MacArthur refers to as an “invitation to salvation.”

    JM says this passage is directed to those who are not saved. He says this is the invitation to salvation. The passage opens with, “Submit yourselves…” very similar to JM's 6th distinctive.

    So, you say, with JM, that some of James is for the unsaved. OK, let’s agree for the sake of discussion. We, therefore, have JM stating that James 4:7-10is the most comprehensive invitation to salvation in (all) the epistles…

    Taking JM’s interpretation of James 4:7-10 at face value he, therefore, conditions salvation on “submission, resisting the Devil, purifying one self, and humbling.”

    2) For you to keep chanting the mantra that I never engage LS from the Scriptures is a falsehood and you know it. I have told you that my book (296) pages is cover-to-cover a review and refutation of LS from a biblical perspective. The subtitle is: Biblical Answers to Lordship Salvation.

    At my blog and others both for and against LS I have posted numerous discussions of it from a biblical perspective. You have not read JM's books on LS, and not read mine either.

    If I send you a free copy of my book, will you read it (cover-to-cover) and come back to BB with an honest review of it and an answer as to whether or not I engaged LS from the Scriptures?


    LM
     

Share This Page

Loading...