Lordship salvation

On the contrary, perhaps it only appears that way to you because your concept of saving faith may be somewhat deficient. Christ said if we want to come after Him we have to deny ourselves, take up our cross, and follow Him (Luke 9:23). As MacArthur pointed out, Christ also said we have to count the cost (Luke 14:28) if we are going to follow Him. He also said that we must (gasp!) "strive to enter through the narrow gate for many, I say to you will seek to enter but will not be able.(Luke 13:24)"

So the question is do we interpret Paul in a way that explains away the hard sayings of Christ, or do we use the teachings of Christ to interpret Paul correctly? </font>[/QUOTE]The real question my friend, is whether we interpret the hard sayings of Christ in light of the clearer teachings of Paul. Or do we explain away Paul's clear message of Salvation by grace through faith alone and not by works with some of the hard sayings of Jesus?

There really are only two methods of interpretation here we interpret the hard sayings and warnings with the promise passages or we interpret the promise passaages with the hard sayings and warning passages.

Lordship and Means adovocates take the warning passages and hard sayings of Christ and make those the core of there salvation theology. Then they explain away the promise passages with those passages.

The other problem,is that you dwell on one aspect of our salvation discipleship, and neglect all the other aspects of our salvation such as sonship.

Lets take your "strive passage" as an example.

Luke 13:24(NIV)
"Make every effort to enter through the narrow door, because many, I tell you, will try to enter and will not be able to."

Romans 9:16(NIV)
"It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy."

So in Luke Christ seems to be saying we need to strive to get into heaven. We need to get our salvation.

Yet in Romans 9:16, Paul tells us that salvation does not depend on our desire or effort, but on God's mercy. So which is it?

Well here is the easy answer for you. We would all agree that scripture interprets scripture. But where we do not agree is what scriptures interpret what scriptures.

You will say Paul did'nt mean we don't need to maintain our salvation, just that we don't merit the "intial" salvation.

I will say that Christ was not saying that we need to work for our salvation, but that we should all try to enter the strait gate or live righteously. But that living righteously does not save us or maintain our salvation - it brings glory to God.

You see we have calls toward toward righteous living repeated throughout the Gospels and Epistles. No one could argue at that point.

But where the argument comes it this, does our righteous living keep and maintain our salvation?
Lordship advocates and means advocates must say yes.

When Christ told us how to follow after him, how to behave and act and live as he did was he saying this was how we would be saved?

Or Did he tell us that trusting in him would save us?

Living for him and becoming conformed to his image glorifies God, but is that what saves us?

And if that is the case, tell me one human being who has ever lived up to the standard of Christ?

Mark 9:31-32(NIV)
"31because he was teaching his disciples. He said to them, "The Son of Man is going to be betrayed into the hands of men. They will kill him, and after three days he will rise." 32But they did not understand what he meant and were afraid to ask him about it.


But here is the kicker, where is the Gospel more developed? In the Epistles or the Gospels? Was the Gospel fully developed while Christ walked the earth, or did his Apostles such as Paul and Peter develop it in much more detail after he died and rose again?

In the Old Testament we see a shadow of the Gospel, in the Gospels we it begins to become more clear, and in the epistles it is finally and most clearly revealed.

We see statements throughout the Gospels that Disciples(and many others) did not understand what Jesus was saying. It was not until after he died and rose again that they saw most clearly what the Gospel was.

Ephesians 3:4-5
"4In reading this, then, you will be able to understand my insight into the mystery of Christ, 5which was not made known to men in other generations as it has now been revealed by the Spirit to God's holy apostles and prophets."

Another issue that Lordship advocates and Means advocates cannot skirt around it the clear fact that salvation is presented as a free gift(this is consistant throughout the Gospels as well as the epistles). The very nature of it being called that is a mountain of theology.

If it is a gift, but I must work to keep that gift, it is no longer a gift but an obligation. Paul is very clear on that in Romans 4.

So that clearly tells me that my works in this body are for something else and have nothing to do with my salvation - could it be just simply to glorify God? And may be rewards?

IFBReformer

 

I want revisit something I said in the last response:

"I will say that Christ was not saying that we need to work for our salvation, but that we should all try to enter the strait gate or live righteously. But that living righteously does not save us or maintain our salvation - it brings glory to God."

I was in a rush when I wrote this statement and I want correct my own mistatement:

I believe "the strait gate" whenever it is mentioned in the Gospels refers to Salvation. It is clear from the context.

Having said that why would he say to strive to enter it but some will not be able to even to enter?

Was he saying "strive to be saved(enter the strait gate)?

I think this is more in reference to the soveringty of God in Salvation. Many men "strive" to be saved. But they don't want to accept the way and path God has layed out.

And if we are not regenerated by God, we can "strive" all we want, but we will never enter that straight gate. Also we are shown many times that we cannot be righteous enough - that was the point of Christ's ministry - to show us our utter inability to live up to God's standards.

That we need him and his righteousness and holiness, that is the only we can enter the straight gate.

IFBReformer

 

IfbReformer,
Okay, let me address some of your points...

Sure it helps. I'm aware that Jesus is specifically referring to false prophets, but the passage has wider application than that. If we can know true or false prophets by their fruits why can't we know other people (non-prophets) as well? After all, the point still remains: "A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit". Are prophets the only ones we can apply the tree/fruit analogy? I don't think so. Paul gives us two distinct lists in Galatians 5 and doesn't restrict these qualities to one class of people such as prophets. In verses 19-21 he lists the "works of the flesh", which is analogous to "bad fruit" (which can be seen when this list is contrasted to the "good fruit", the "fruit of the Spirit" which I'll address later). At the end of verse 21 Paul states: "Those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God." In other words, based on this verse, we can be sure that those who practice those awful things will not be saved unless they repent.

Does this mean we are to go around judging fellow believers? Well it depends. Obviously, we cannot make infallible pontifications about one's eternal state based on the small glimpses we may have of that believer's life. (At this point it may be admitted that identifying the "fruit", good or bad, of teachers/prophets may be somewhat easier as they occupy a more public role.) Plus, before we point out the speck in our brother's eye we better make sure we've got the beam out of our own! We all stumble in many ways which is why we all have to continually confess and repent. On the other hand, James gives us the charge to correct an erring brother: "Brethren (ie, "Christians"), if anyone among you (Christians) wanders from the truth, and someone turns him back, let him know that he who turns a sinner from the error of his way will save a soul from death and cover a multitude of sins (James 5:19-20)." And obviously the church has the authority to discipline sinning believers and even consider the unrepetent ones as "heathen and tax collectors" (Matt 18:15-18).

Yeah, I'm with you so far...

Why? That last verse you quoted basically says it all. It's not "two fruits or three", its "some a hundredfold, some sixty, some tthirty." On the other hand, backing up in the "Parable of the Sower" passage, those devoid of any fruit whatsoever shouldn't even kid themselves that they are "saved". Sadly, there are many people sitting in our pews who believe that since they've said the "sinner's prayer" and believe certain facts about Jesus dying on the cross for them, that they are saved despite having little to no interest in following Christ on a daily basis. You see, they're trusting facts about Christ, and not relying on the living Person. This is a danger that we all need to make sure that we avoid...
"Examine yourselves as to whether you in the faith. Test yourselves. Do you not know yourselves, that Jesus Christ is in you?-unless indeed you are disqualified." (2 Cor 13:5)

Again, you're quoting some good verses.

All very good questions...

I'd say ALL of them, because the Spirit is ONE. We don't have separate "spirits" for love, self-control, goodness, etc. Now, this doesn't mean that some of us struggle with certain of these characteristics more than others. However, if we are in fact being transformed into the image of Lord by the Spirit of the Lord (2 Cor 3:18), then we will have all of these "fruits". The key to this transformation, of course, is abiding in Christ, knowing that apart from Him we can do nothing.

It seems those questions you are asking reveals a minimalist approach to salvation. You are asking for some minimal requirement of fruit one must have and keep to be saved, are you not? I believe that is the wrong question. Sure, we are to "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ" to be saved, but modern theology tends to woefully misunderstand what "believing on Christ" means. Saving faith is an abiding, obedient, trusting reliance on the LORD Christ Himself, and not some trust on a prayer we may have once said or some facts about Christ we may profess. The Apostle Peter was not taking a minimalist approach to salvation when he stated: "But also for this very reason, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue, to virtue knowledge, to knowledge self-control, to self-control perserverance, to preserverance godliness, to godliness brotherly kindness, and to brotherly kindness love. For if these things are yours and abound, you will be neither barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. For he who lacks these things is shortsighted, even to blindness and has forgotten that he was cleansed from his old sins. Therefore, brethren, be even more diligent to make your call and election sure, for if you do these things you will never stumble; for so an entrance will be supplied to you abundantly into the kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. (2 Peter 1:5-11)"

AMEN!

 

IFBReformer,

A couple of comments by Paul:

"But in accordance with you hardness and impenitent heart you are treasuring up for yourself wrath in the day of wrath and righteous judgement if God, "who will render to each one according to his deeds": eternal life to those by patient continuance in doing good seek for glory, honor, and immortality; but to those who are self-seeking and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness--indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, on every soul of man who does evil, of the Jew first and also of the Greek, but glory, honor, and peace on every who works what is good, to the Jew first and also for the Greek." (Romans 2:5-10)

Sounds like Paul is pretty clear here, and in agreement with Christ's "hard sayings".

(Perhaps, then, we should interpret some of Paul's less clear statements with his clear statement here )

 

Doubting Thomas,

Your Statement:
"Are prophets the only ones we can apply the tree/fruit analogy? I don't think so....Does this mean we are to go around judging fellow believers? Well it depends. Obviously, we cannot make infallible pontifications about one's eternal state based on the small glimpses we may have of that believer's life."

My Response:
I think here you get to the heart of my disagreement with the Lordship advocates.

I do think we are to judge those within the church with righteous(unhypicritical) judgement. We are to keep the church pure.

So if someone claims to be a brother and he is a member of our church, and he has sinned or is doing sin and will not seek forgiveness and stop doing this sin then he should be disciplined - this would be explusion from the local church.

Where I have a problem is when we tell him he is not saved because he has done this or because he will not seek forgivness and stop doing it.

Does Paul tell us that disobedient brethren are to be regarded as unbelievers or that we are to question their salvation?

2 Thessalonians 3:14-15(NIV)
"14If anyone does not obey our instruction in this letter, take special note of him. Do not associate with him, in order that he may feel ashamed. 15Yet do not regard him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother."

I think the church needs more discipline today than it ever has. But disciplining someone and calling into question their salvation are two very different things.

Notice Paul tells us not to associate with the disobedient brother so that he will be ashamed. This corresponds perfectly with Christ's admonition to treat disobedient believers like "heathen and tax collectors". They did not associate with those kinds of people.

1 Corinthians 5:9-13(NIV)
"9I have written you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people-- 10not at all meaning the people of this world who are immoral, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters. In that case you would have to leave this world. 11But now I am writing you that you must not associate with anyone who calls himself a brother but is sexually immoral or greedy, an idolater or a slanderer, a drunkard or a swindler. With such a man do not even eat.
12What business is it of mine to judge those outside the church? Are you not to judge those inside? 13God will judge those outside. "Expel the wicked man from among you.""

Paul tells us not to associate with a someone who calls themselves a brother and is not willing to seek forgiveness and stop these things. This is very consistant with 2 Thessalonians 3:14-15. But notice throughout this
passage and 2 Thessalonians 3:14-15 he does not
tell us to doubt his salvation.

Some have tried(in error) to use verse 5 of 1 Corinthians 5 to say that he is not saved or
has lost his salvation but lets examine this verse and see:

"5hand this man over to Satan, so that the sinful nature[flesh] may be destroyed and his spirit saved on the day of the Lord."

What is Paul saying here:

He is saying that if a believer is in willful rebellion against God kick him out of the church. God will allow Satan to have his way with this person and sometimes God will even allow the person to die. So his flesh will or sinful nature will be destroyed, but his Spirit will be saved(raptured) on the day of the Lord.

Look at what God did with some of the Corinthian believers who abused the communion table - he took them home early did'nt he?

So like I said, It is one thing to judge a believer based on his behavior and kick him out of the church for willful rebellion against God. It is another thing to regard this disobedient brother as unbeliever.

This goes against Paul's clear teaching that we not to "regard him as an enemy, but warn him as a brother."

"2 Timothy 2:19
Nevertheless, God's solid foundation stands firm, sealed with this inscription: "The Lord knows those who are his," and, "Everyone who confesses the name of the Lord must turn away from wickedness."

IFBReformer

 

Doubting Thomas,

I will be addressing other points you have made as well. I am running a bit short on time today so I will try and get back to this tommorow.

By the way, I pray everything goe well for you with your new baby on the way. Our 4th child is on the way due in November. We have two boys and girl and a boy on the way.

Talk more with you later

IFBReformer

 

Thank you---congrats to you and I pray everything goes well with the birth of your fourth!

 

Doubting Thomas,

Your previous statement:

My Response:
I agree that we should help our erring brothers to repent. Having said that we do not question the fact that they are a brother(see my previous post on this issue).

The translation of James 5:19-20 in the KJV and NASB gives the reader the impression that a brother can loose his salvation because of sin and it is our job to bring him back so he can keep his salvation.

But a close look reveals this is not what this verse is talking about. First consider the translation of this verse in the NIV:

James 5:19-20(NIV)
"19My brothers, if one of you should wander from the truth and someone should bring him back, 20remember this: Whoever turns a sinner from the error of his way will save him[greek - psuche] from death and cover over a multitude of sins."

I John 3:16(NIV)
"16This is how we know what love is: Jesus Christ laid down his life[psuche] for us. And we ought to lay down our lives[psuche] for our brothers."

The most literal meaning of the Greek word psuche is "the breath of life". It is pretty evenly split on its translation either as 'life'(lives) or 'soul'. It is other times translated as 'heart' and 'mind'.

So when James says when we convince a brother of the error of his ways we help to save his life(physical life). But don't we all die?

Well there are sins that lead to physical death. One of those sins is abusing the Lord's Supper.

Your Statement:

My Response:
Ok Lets examine this passage in Galatians 5:

Galatians 5:13-26(NIV)
"13You, my brothers, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature; rather, serve one another in love. 14The entire law is summed up in a single command: "Love your neighbor as yourself." 15If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other.

16So I say, live by the Spirit, and you will not gratify the desires of the sinful nature. 17For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with each other, so that you do not do what you want. 18But if you are led by the Spirit, you are not under law.

19The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; 20idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions 21and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.
22But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, 23gentleness and self-control. Against such things there is no law. 24Those who belong to Christ Jesus have crucified the sinful nature with its passions and desires. 25Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit. 26Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other."

This passage is rich with theological truths.

In verse Paul says "do not use your freedom to indulge the sinful nature". This tells us we are capable of indulging the sinful nature as Christians.

In verse 15 Paul says "If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other." - what did he mean by "biting and devouring each other"?

He explains this in verse 26 when he says "Let us not become conceited, provoking and envying each other."

The sin of the Galatians was that they were envying each other, provoking each other to wrath or sin, and acting conceited toward one another.

Later Paul told them that their sin(envying,provking and conceitedness) was an act "of the sinful nature" and listed it with other sins which would seem much more heinous like "sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft"

But was he saying that Christians who envy or are conceited or provoke others "will not inherit the kingdom of God"?

I want to direct your attention to some other "inherit the kindom" passages to help with the interpretation of this passage in Galatians 5:


I Corinthians 6:7-11(NIV)
"7The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated? 8Instead, you yourselves cheat and do wrong, and you do this to your brothers.
9Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders 10nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God."

So in I Corinthians 6:7-11 we see a similar situation to that of the Galatians. They were cheating eachother and taking each other to court.

Paul makes a similar listing of acts of the sinful nature and states again "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God?" but in verse verse 11 he says "that is what some of you were" but that they "were washed" ,"were sanctified" and "were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ".

That is speaking of justification and positional sanctifaction that we receive at conversion. In God's eyes we are perfect and righteous.

He was telling them that those were reasons people went to hell, because they had sinned against God and did not have their sins covered by the blood of the lamb.

He was telling them here as well the Galatians that they were made holy, now live holy. The reason God's wrath had come upon man was for sins that they were doing, and that they should stop.

But nowhere doe he suggest that they would loose their salvation(thus loosing their justifacation and positional sanctifacation before God).

In fact going back to Galatians 5, Paul clearly states the reality of the conflict within us:

Galatians 5:17(NIV)
"For the sinful nature desires what is contrary to the Spirit, and the Spirit what is contrary to the sinful nature. They are in conflict with each other, so that you do not do what you want."

Paul acknowledges the fact of the conflict, and acknowledges the battles the have lost. This verse is a direct allusion to what Paul said in Romans chapter 7.

He tells the Galatians in verse 16 to "live by the Spirit" and then in verse "Since we live by the Spirit, let us keep in step with the Spirit". This is similiar to the Biblical exhortion "you are holy" and in other passages "now be holy". Again this is all a contrast between our positional and practical sanctifacation. We have eternal live because the Spirit is alive in us. Now we should strive to obey that spirit, but Paul acknowledges the very real reality that many times we don't.

But he never calls their salvation into question, he is simply exhorting them to holy living.

IFBReformer

 

Doubting Thomas:

Your Statement:

My Response:
I agree we do not place our faith in some prayer we said. We place our faith in the finished work of Christ on the cross.

You say my questions reveal a "minimalist approach to salvation". I would respond that your answers reveal an "additionalist approach to salvation".

I tell people believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and they will be saved.

You tell people believe on the Lord Jesus Christ AND if they live right after conversion, get rid of their bad habits and if sin is only an occasion lapse they may be able to prove they are saved.

I do not argue that God wants us to lead holy lives, but we cannot do so first until we are saved - then gradually we learn what God expects of us and then we decide if we will allow him to help us overcome our sin.

But the reality acknowledged throughout the New Testament is that we do not all grow to the same degree. Some of may be very fruitful and others of us may not be as fruitful.

But we all will produce fruit - their is no argument there.

It just seems to me that you(if you are like MacArthur here) are leaning toward perfectionism. And when we say if a person does not do A, B and C after they are saved then they prove they are not saved we are imposing something on Salvation that God did not.

Salvation is the free gift of God, it is not something we earn, and it is not a commodity exchange(ourselves for Christ) as MacArthur says it is.

Certainly we out to strive to be like Christ - he is our example, that is what Discipleship is all about. But some of us more like Christ than others and we cannot judge our weaker brethren to the point where we say they are not saved because they have not achieved our level of spirituality.

IFBReformer