Lordship salvation vs Easy believism

Do we have any examples (like from MacArthur) that take it too far? I have the commentary on James from MacArthur and he makes it clear that it doesn't mean we have to live a perfect life. On page 122 he says, " It will not be perfect obedience and repentance, but good works will be present." Would you consider that taking it too far, or are there other places where he(or others, just using him as an example) has taken it too far.

 

See my post on the last page.

 

I do not spend much time reading what other think any more but rather studying scripture. Seems like years ago he said something like that a Christian makes Christ Lord of his life or he is not a Christian. That is simplistic thinking and it sure fits those who believe you can lose your salvation. That fits America well not Hebrews and the problems that are dealt with in the book.

 

Thanks, I guess I should have opened my eyes. I'll take a look at it. thanks!

Yes, I believe he would say that. I guess it would depend on what he meant by that. I would agree with it to a point. (Romans 10:9)
I do agree with you on studying Scripture. I do find it useful to see what others say so I can respond when people ask about a certain person's view.

 

What is the alternative to Lordship in the minds of these who deny its necessity?

Be the master of your own life, do that which pleases only you and you are still a Christian and still have heaven to look forward to??

That is utterly preposterous.

The word "lord" means "supreme ruler". It is the most common title for God in the Bible.

Confessing Christ as Lord is necessary for salvation.

"That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the LORD Jesus Christ... thou shalt be saved."

 

Think about the historical context of naming Christ as Lord in scripture. It meant they could have lost their life and been executed. When Peter denied Jesus three times was he a Christian? Was Jesus His Lord?

 

You ignored the verse. It either means what it says or it means something else. What is your position on the verse? Does it demand that you confess Jesus as the Supreme Ruler or not?

I'll address your question, but we need to do this in an orderly fashion. Tell me what you think then ask me a question and I'll tell you what I think ans ask you a question. Sound fair?

 

I must have missed something. What verse are you talking about?

 

I think he is referring to romans 10:9

Yes. Peter denied because of his circumstances, but that doesn't mean he wasn't saved. (I know you know this...) It doesn't mean that Jesus wasn't his Lord either in the same way. Deap down, I would think that Peter knew he was wrong and that Jesus was really Lord when he lied to the people under the pressure.

 

I addressed that in post #166

 

The verse is describing who He is, nothing more.

Is one saved by realizing Christ is the "supreme ruler", or by putting their faith in His death, burial and resurrection and His propitiation for our sin?

 

Part of the problem with this discussion is that there are various views on what Lordship Salvation means. To me, it means to make some sort of bargain or deal with Jesus, that if he will save you, then you promise never to sin again. That writer that Webdog posted said this:

To me, this equals works salvation, Jesus will not save you unless you take the action of turning from your sins. If you do not make this commitment, then he will not save you. This is not salvation as a free gift, but an earned reward.

There is no need to make a commitment like this, because if you truly trust Jesus Christ you receive the Holy Spirit and the Holy Spirit himself will work in you to turn you from sin.

1 John 3:9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

This does not say a person born of God will not sin, it says cannot. No person who truly trusts in Christ and receives the Spirit can live in continuous sin. Not because of some commitment to turn from sin, but because the Holy Spirit is working in that person.

 

You are correct in your assessment of what Lordship Salvation is. The main tenant is turning from your sins to Christ for salvation. While that sounds biblical on the surface, like you said, it's nothing more than front loaded works salvation. A gift is not a gift if you have to make any kind of commitment associated with the gift accept just accepting it.

 

Other than Goodman, has anybody else ever said something like that. Do we have any quotes from MacArthur? From what I have read from MacArthur, he would say that is a result, not cause of salvation to not make a practice of sinning. Also "turn from your sins" to me means a change of mind that results in an action. It's not saying you must stop sinning BEFORE you can be saved. (that would be works).

Also, does anybody have any information on Goodman? I found his name to be Heath C. Goodman from Alarm Ministries in Lindale, TX 75771. However, the ONLY places I see his name even mentioned is the anti repentance sites (like jesus-is-lord.com)- which is ironic noting the topic Does anybody else any any info on him?

 

That is bologna...good thing I never said any of that. I never once said "just say a prayer". Debate what I say, not what you want to hear.

 

I got saved when I was a boy, and nobody mentioned that I had to make a commitment to stop sinning. I sincerely prayed and asked Jesus to forgive all my sins. Now, when I did that, I understood Jesus as forgiving all my sins, past, present, and future.

Did I want Jesus as my Lord? Yes, and still do. But if I had to promise to quit sinning I don't know what I would have done. You are going to find yourself to be a big liar if you make a commitment like that, because we all sin many times even after receiving Jesus as Saviour.

So, go ahead and promise Jesus you are going to quit sinning, and then see if you keep your promise.