5 Ways Lordship Salvation Is Not Reformed
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 10 сен 2024
- Jon and Justin compare and contrast the lordship salvation position with a historical, confessional, and reformed theological perspective on Law, Gospel, Justification, Sanctification, Assurance, and your standing before God.
JOIN THE THEOCAST COMMUNITY:
www.theocastco...
FREE EBOOK:
theocast.org/p...
PARTNER with Theocast:
theocast.org/p...
OUR WEBSITE:
theocast.org/
INSTAGRAM:
/ theocast_org
X (TWITTER):
Theocast: / theocast_org
Jon Moffitt: / jonmoffitt
Justin Perdue: / justin_perdue
FACEBOOK:
/ theocast.org
RELATED RESOURCES:
Full Episode - • A Critique of Lordship...
Matthew 16:24 “If any of you want to be my follower, you MUST deny yourself, take up your cross, and follow me.” Lordship in a nutshell; straight from the Lord himself.
As someone who has believed this since 2012, I ask how much denying of oneself is enough to produce assurance. If there is an area of my life, such as giving or helping, that I'm not doing to the full extent of my abilities, am I not saved, because I'm not denying myself. I tell you, the waves of assurance I've had over the years are because I've looked to my works. And when I start failing, I get depressed that I'm a fraud, that my love isn't strong enough.
As with most people who say they don't agree with "Lordship Salvation", these guys don't understand what is meant by the term. First rule of debate/argument = Define your terms. John MacArthur, who is primarily identified with "Lordship" does not get the order of salvation wrong, nor does he redefine faith. He and RC were good friends and 100% on the same side of the Gospel issue. Both men agreed that salvation is by faith alone, and that true saving faith is never alone; it is always accompanied by the fruit of repentance and obedience, which themselves "justify" the truth of their profession of saving faith.
I agree, they do not fully understand what MacArthur teaches
We agree that never was macArthur said faith precede regeneration, that will be arminian.
He also believes we are saved by grace, not by works. But He stresses work as evident of saving grace, which all reformers agreed upon.
Theocast just playing with words, faith is or isn't separable with repentance doesn't matter. It is still included by apostles: repent and believe. Why, Jesus himself omits faith, he said repent, the Kingdom of God is at hand. Unless you repent, you all are likewise perish.
Jesus didn't mention faith.
Theocast maybe try to ease so many carnal christians (like me) of their standing with The Lord, as to put off the burden. I'm carnal christian and despairing, but still I can't deny biblical truth of Lordship.
I pray that the Lord to save me, a false christian that only have faith but not fruit of repentance.
So when you consider your children for baptism, what is your purpose in interviewing this person who has indicated a desire to be a member of the new covenant community of Grace? John MacArthur, I believe would be consistent with his questions to a young person, or any adult who claims to believe and wants to be baptized. Do we not want to know who,why and what they have placed their faith in ? Don’t we look for some evidence of the new birth and the beginnings of the believers transformation? Do you ever wonder if all those that receive the sign are truly regenerate? Is it wrong to say it out loud? Can you ask this question in a way that is for the person in question, in away the causes one not to doubt but to remind them of their profession? If someone has made a confession of faith but shows no signs of what God has promised to do in the life of the saints, can we then judge with the intentions to make clear the power of the Gospel?
I am not a baptist, but I do understand why you wait to give the sign of the new covenant. I come from the tradition of infant baptism, we give the sign to our children in the very real hope that God is faithful, we look in eager expectation as are children grow in their own faith, being taught by the body of believers. We don’t question that they are Christians, but believing in faith we trust that they belong to their Lord and Saviour and in Gods good timing we will witness the evidences of the new birth. We discern the activity of the Spirit in their lives and guide them into a profession of their own faith as they are made able to perceive the gift they have been given. We don’t always know the day of their conversion, but we do encourage our Children through out their journey. We remind them of the great name that is theirs in Christ, Christian! We always consider our Children Christian until God proves us wrong and even then we continue to ask God for mercy and Grace.
@@valkyrafePlease, please, please take comfort from Martin Luther, the one who started the Protestant Reformation, himself.
“Brother, it is impossible for you to become so righteous in this life that your body is as clear and spotless as the sun. You still have spots and wrinkles (Eph 5:27), and yet you are holy.” But you say: “How can I be holy when I have sin and am aware of it?” “That you feel and acknowledge sin-this is good. Thank God, and do not despair. It is one step toward health when a sick man admits and confesses his disease.” “But how will I be liberated from sin?” “Run to Christ, the Physician, who heals the contrite of heart and saves sinners. Believe in Him. If you believe, you are righteous, because you attribute to God the glory of being almighty, merciful, truthful, etc. You justify and praise God. In short, you attribute divinity and everything to Him. And the sin that still remains in you is not imputed but is forgiven for the sake of Christ, in whom you believe and who is perfectly righteous in a formal sense. His righteousness is yours; your sin is His.”
Whether you recognize it or not, you are contrite, you have been struck by "terrors of the conscience" over having sinned against God. Run to Christ, believe in Him. Do not go back to Rome as if the Reformation never happened. You have been terrified by the Law, and this is good as this is the First and most important use of the Law, to show you your need of Christ. Now you need the Gospel to be balm to your terrified conscience. Please watch this and let it bring the peace of the Gospel to you. ruclips.net/video/tTAV3pjPpz0/видео.htmlsi=6dOsyREtHS-IovCC
They have other videos where they show example of MacArthur redefining faith
I just saw a more updated statement of faith from the Masters Seminary and they did correct their statement concerning salvation to state it properly. That is very encouraging.
Guys thank you for the content. It is quite sad to see all those comments of the video of people disgusted by the idea that our security is in Jesus alone and in what he accomplished for us. It is sad that their concern is obedience when it is God who produces that obedience through his spirit in us. Im terrified of the idea that my motivation to obey would be fear and/or securing my salvation rather than obedience coming out of a regenerate heart full of thankfulness and the love and grace that we received from God first.
This was extremely helpful in pointing out the prominent issues with LordShip Salvation
For so many years, I've seen comments proclaiming Lordship Salvation is "another gospel", but I always poo-hoo'd that, thinking, "They just don't understand," because I'd bought into the double-speak of it.
LS preachers talk a lot about "in faith alone by Christ alone," and then they say, "Our lives prove what we really believe - we're known by our fruit," and go on to say we ought to be loving and praying and working and giving and forgiving and helping, etc, etc, etc. So I was *CONSTANTLY DOUBTING MYSELF AND OTHERS.*
It's so freeing trusting in Jesus for my whole salvation - past and future! And I do NOT want to sin more!
The Free Grace movement is not bad theology it’s just the simple biblical gospel and the refusal to allow anyone to shove works into it.
Thank you for this helpful video. I have been listening to Grace To You and reading Pastor MacArthur's books since the 70's and have learned much from his ministry. He started to become a calvinist in the 90's.(As have I).His original edition of The Gospel According to Jesus was very muddled and confusing as these men on Theocast have said. It was written prior to his beginning to embrace Reformed soteriology. McArthur has gotten a whole lot better since that book was first published, and his recent radio broadcasts have been quite good. Due to his wide influence, Theocast and Heidelblog are trying to help us be discerning and I commend them.
MacArthur and Piper are excellent examples of Christians who do not come from the Reformed tradition but have discovered Calvinism. Because they do not have solid grounding in Reformed theology, their version of Calvinism easily topples into Arminianism.
You guys are so awesome! I’m overwhelmed with joy when you guys upload.
Blessings to you both and your families 🫶🏽
To be sure, we distinguish between the twin gifts of faith and repentance, but we do not separate them at conversion in the reformed faith.
Excellent biblical defense of the gospel of grace and clarification of the difference between justification and sanctification.
I feel free grace is just the gospel . We don’t have to do anything to earn or deserve it. And we don’t prove it by works or maintain it by anything we can or will do. That’s simply free grace
I think they're referring to what I would sooner call cheap grace. It's believe and continue on in your sin. Free grace is the reality of the gospel, but it must be understood correctly. One that is born again can't continue in sin.
Free grace is the other ditch
@joev2223 Maybe you didn't hear them or understand them correctly because they are not saying that you are to continue in Your sins, after God has saved you. But on the contrary, they say that good works will come from the grace that God has shown.
@@savedwretch8711 The question is, according to Theocast's theology, do I actually need to do those good works that come from the grace, or can I just keep sinning as I please? Theocast's theology can offer only two answers to this question:
1. No, you don't need to, because Christ has paid the price. In that case, I can sin as much as I want, with Theocast's permission.
2. Yes, you must obey, because if you do not perform good works it means you have not really understood/received God's grace. Okay, this is just pietism with more steps.
The thing is even after salvation we can choose to sin on our own accord. We still have the flesh and give in to our own sinful desires. That’s why Paul says walk in the spirit and you won’t give into the desires of the flesh. We can still choose to sin on a daily basis. God doesn’t want this for us, and if we choose to obey and walk in the spirit we will be blessed and honor God. But it’s not like we have a knife to our throats forcing us to do good.
Wow!!
This has got to be one of the best episodes I've come across with you guys!
It's like a college course at the comfort of my own home!
Praise God! Thank you!
I had a friend who went to John MacArthur’s seminary and always told me that he learned that he always comes to the Scripture as if this is the first time I saw it. These guys are not taught historical theology especially the scholastics and they just keep making the same mistakes. MacArthur has similar problems when it comes to justification and assurance.
Macarthur and johnson are both teaching a form of neonomianism. One other thing is that the Heidelberg catechism asks the question "why MUST we do good works?" One is truly reformed and thus biblical when they maintain the absolute necessity of a life of good works. Yet the Reformed creeds did not fall into neonomianism.
I think you have to be careful to define faith as passively resting on Christ. Although, it is certainly one aspect of faith it is not all. If you read Hebrews 11 it gives a multitude of examples where faith involves works. By faith the walls of Jericho fell, how do you reconcile that with what you stated in this video that faith is some sort of passive resting not involving works ? Not to mention Jesus said if we had enough faith we could move mountains, something does not add up in your teaching.
Yeah they're a bunch of false teachers clouding the word of God
I absolutely agree: we should all be looking for a Jericho to walk around, or to be martyred, or perhaps something more custom made for us to include in our faith so we can be accepted by God.
@@andrewk8857 how about just the simple turning from sin and walking in obedience?
@@Lij_MC If it was just a matter of turning from sin and walking in obedience (something I do not oppose by any means by the way), remind me why Christ died?
@@mt-on4lt Christ died so that you can walk in obedience, He certainly did not die so that you would continue in sin. If you are continuing in sin, then Christ did not die for you, period. You are still in your sins, and his death will profit you nothing, zero, zip.
Why don't y'all play clips or quote sources when accusing people of believing certain things. For example, play a clip of Dr. MacArthur saying what you claim he believes. Strawmaning is not how you persuade people to the truth. It's how you lose them...
I've always thought lordship salvation was simply another way of saying good fruits will follow true regeneration. Not perfection, no degree of sanctification will ever achieve perfection. Am I right or wrong? Thank you for this video my brothers.
I think this is spot on in regards to what scripture lays out. HE changes our hearts from a heart of stone to a heart of flesh and calls us to HIMSELF which then leads to saving faith and repentance. HE bestows in each a measure of faith for the edification and building up of HIS church. This measure of faith also gives the believer the faith to use their gifts effectively and according to HIS will. This is my understanding. I really enjoy the podcast that these Pastors have. It has opened my eyes to truth. Thank you both for your work for CHRIST!!
I don't think scripture lays this out at all. It seems to me that salvation is much more than an instantaneous change done only by God that causes us to do good works. I think scripture teaches something else entirely.
@@bad_covfefe good works is a result of our rebirth and love for CHRIST. NOT a mandate of rules to follow to gain salvation.
@user-no3bv6ib1p are good works a *necessary* result? If so, then in practice it doesn't matter if they are a result or a requirement, because I still need good works to go to heaven.
The problem is that Protestantism works on a false assumption of what "salvation" is. Salvation is not a "not guilty" verdict that gets you into heaven. Salvation is true union and relationship with Christ, wherein we put on the divine nature. We must strive to do good works and avoid sin in order to do this, and being saved is a lifelong process, not somrthing that happens in an instant.
Thank you for keeping this perspective alive. We tend to drift into the law because we feel it is more effective in bringing about immediate obedience. Long term, though, it trains us to create a "saved" box within which we can live our own little busy joyless Christless lives.
Brother: How was Abram justified? What did he believe? Why wasn't Abram justified when he was called from Ur: 8 By faith Abraham, when he was called, obeyed by going out to a place which he was to receive for an inheritance; and he went out, not knowing where he was going. - Heb 11:8 NASB95 This is Genesis 11-12- why wasn't Abram justified if waking by faith, obeying by faith since he was called until Gen 15:1-6?
He believed the testimony of Melchizedek- that God Most High is Possessor of Heaven & Earth. Then when the LORD spoke to Abram in a vision: 8 By faith Abraham, when he was called, obeyed by going out to a place which he was to receive for an inheritance; and he went out, not knowing where he was going. - Heb 11:8 NASB95
Abram's response: Oh Adonai Jehovah! Adonai- Creator, Possessor of the Heavens & the earth: Sovereign- with an attitude in response of Awe, humility.
& what did Abram believe that he was justified: That Adonai Jehovah will grant the Reward\Wages to the Seed of Abram- from his own body. Gal 3:16.
What does that mean? follow the text of Genesis. Abram just rescued Lot from captivity to the enemy- Lot & his possessions: acting as Kinsman Redeemer in the Authority of the Rights of the Firstborn Son; the one who is Adown: Lord (Steward) of the possessions of the Father. You see this theme followed up in Genesis through the testimony of Joseph- the Adown: Lord of Pharaoh's house & possessions.
Abram believed that God Most High, Adonai Jehovah will give the Reward to his Seed- who receiving the Reward receives the rights of the Firstborn Son; Lord of the possessions of the Father.
You see mentioning Gen 15:1-5 in Romans 4- the Holy Spirit making this clear as to what Abram thought of this Seed in:
24 but for our sake also, to whom it will be credited, as those who believe in Him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead, - Rom 4:24 NASB95
in the Theme of Romans- in Adam: all ungodly, unrighteous & under the wrath of God: now through faith in the testimony of the Seed: and only through faith in this testimony- no be faith which is obvious from Heb 11:8; Abram was justified believing the Seed would be Lord of the Reward- the possessions of God Most High; and being Lord- He was the Firstborn with the Rights of the Firstborn Son- the rights to redeem to restore the lost & captive possessions to the Father's House. God made Jesus Lord and granted before the foundation of the world to grant Him the Reward; and being Lord Christ has authority over the possessions of the Father; the authority as King. Abram believed in the Seed, Lord of the possessions of God Most High: and was credited righteousness.
God then testified to Abram to whom he was joined.
Then in Gen 22- the offering of Isaac- Abraham was brought to worship- godliness: the mirror image of ungodliness-unrighteousness in the rebellion of Adam: then through faith in the Gospel- the testimony of God about His Firstborn Son- Lord; Adown of all creation, God restores Abram to righteousness then transformed him to proper worship in union with Christ- God's Firstborn Heir: and brought Abraham to consider God is Able- has the Strength to, the Power to perform what He obligated Himself to do in promise: even raise the dead. (Heb 11:17-19).
When we believe the Gospel- we believe that Christ if Lord of the Father's possessions- we cannot obtain them by our faithfulness; but we obtain them by Christ's faithfulness- & that He as the Rights as Lord & Firstborn of redemption- to redeem us out of slavery & restored into the Father's House: Christ being Our Lord.
That's what David saw:
1 A Psalm of David. The LORD says to my Lord: "Sit at My right hand Until I make Your enemies a footstool for Your feet." 2 The LORD will stretch forth Your strong scepter from Zion, [saying,] "Rule in the midst of Your enemies." - Ps 110:1-2 NASB95
& it is so noteworthy- that in this Psalm- the same testimony that Abram was given- was what David was meditating upon:
4 The LORD has sworn and will not change His mind, "You are a priest forever According to the order of Melchizedek." - Ps 110:4 NASB95
15 Then the seventh angel sounded; and there were loud voices in heaven, saying, "The kingdom of the world has become [the kingdom] of Our Lord and of His Christ; and He will reign forever and ever." - Rev 11:15 NASB95
9 For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, 10 so that at the name of Jesus EVERY KNEE WILL BOW, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, 11 and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. - Phil 2:9-11 NASB95
Here in Romans- the Holy Spirit repeats Abram's testimony of faith- the steps of faith of our father Abraham: just in case you might drift away......
9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus [as] Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; - Rom 10:9 NASB95
22 But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe. - Gal 3:22 KJV
BTW- Speaking of Abraham in this text- when was Abraham regenerated when Scripture states that, "Him who justifies the ungodly"? In Gen 15:1-6 when did God regenerate the ungodly Abraham who was walking "by faith obeyed" since his call in Ur some years before? God justifies the ungodly- just before he was justified he still was ungodly- a unacceptable worshipper of God; hmmm.
3 For what does the Scripture say? "ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS." 4 Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. 5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness, - Rom 4:3-5 NASB95
When did God have mercy upon Abraham that the Holy Spirit would regenerate him; when he was redeemed & justified at that Mercy Seat in His Blood?
24 they are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus. 25 God presented him as the mercy seat by his blood, through faith, to demonstrate his righteousness, because in his restraint God passed over the sins previously committed. - Rom 3:24-25 CSB When justified- God passed over the sins of Abraham until that Seed in whom he believed would ascend & present Himself Blameless through the Spirit, enter the Veil and sprinkle His Blood on that Mercy Seat- and coming down from that Mercy Seat (kata) the Holy Spirit came down to regenerate...
4 But when the kindness of God our Savior and [His] love for mankind appeared, 5 He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, 6 whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, 7 so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to [the] hope of eternal life. - Titus 3:4-7 NASB95
Just Thoughts
And when the sick Israelites looked to the snakes "lifted up" on sticks, for their healing. All who looked upon the lifted up snakes were healed. Just like when Jesus was lifted up. We look unto him for our healing.
So the 1689 confession qualifies saving faith as trusting, resting and hoping in Christs sufficiency ? Who is it that does the trusting and hoping? Sounds like a human work to me in the same way that repentance and obedience sounds like a human work in your view of the Lordship guys. But you reply it is God who enables us to trust, rest and hope just as the Lordship guys say it is God who enables us to repent and obey. Sorry guys, this one doesnt fly.
Theocast's theology is internally inconsistent. The problem is they are building their theology on the broken foundation that is Protestantism. If they instead embraced Holy Orthodoxy, which is true Christianity and the Church that Christ founded and which gave us the Bible, then this problem would be solved.
I kind of agree that these folks are mightily confused, the faith of Hebrews 11 clearly shows that faith is not passive but active in good works. Secondly no man can believe in Christ unless he first desires to obey the law, as a matter of fact tries as hard as he can, and realizes he is unable to. MacArthur is correct that this precedes salvation, the Lutheran confessions also clearly teach that contrition over sin and a willingness to obey the law precedes salvation. These folks seem outright antinomian to me.
@@henrka But they will say your accusation of antinomian is good and shows they are preaching the true gospel. Lol. What they don't realize is that we know they are not actually antinomian, but that their theology leads directly to and permits antinomianism. There is no reason why, as a follower of Theocast, you couldn't also be an antinomian, and that is a problem.
@@bad_covfefe they are 💯 antinomian, or at least they are not reformed. They teach our sanctification is caused by our justification, that is utterly not reformed. Justification and sanctification according to the reformed confessions, and Calvin as well, are two gifts we receive simultaneously when we believe in the lord Jesus Christ. Justification does neither precede nor cause sanctification according to the reformed confessions. We may or not agree with it, but this is the reformed teaching, that the grace of justification and the grace of sanctification are simultaneous, and independent of each other, one is not the cause of the other.
@@bad_covfefe the main reason they are antinomian, though, is they do not believe you have to repent or be willing to obey the law as they put it, before coming to faith. Jesus clearly taught he did not come to save those that do not need a physician (the unrepentant), Jesus said , come to me all you who are heavy laden (repentant), and I will give you rest. Repentance is a pre-requirement to come to Jesus. This is why John the Baptist came first, to preach a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins, to prepare the way for Christ. Christ does not remit the sins of the unrepentant, that is a fact, this is why scripture teaches to repent and believe the gospel, in that order, Mark 1:15. So these fellows are 💯 antinomian, they are actually classical antinomians.
Salvation is a free gift, don’t add anything to a free gift. Works come from our salvation
Thank you for this post. You show that the Bible teaches the basis for our assurance of justification. I am wondering if God’s first covenant with Adam and Eve, the “covenant of works” is not “agreement” but an ultimatum. The ultimatum covenant.
“Bad theology of the free grace movement”. I would like to see a video on this topic with scriptural refutations on free grace. Beware how quickly you land in the lordship works based salvation camp.
Yes, because these guys do believe in a changed life if you become a born-again believer. As James explained in his book, fruitless faith that does not have works is dead and useless.
@@nikokapanen82I think you would agree that James 2 verses like 14 are not about eternal salvation. Theocast has a video
Brothers, the verses from Ezekiel are precisely the one’s many so-called Calvinists cite as evidence that regeneration precedes faith and repentance, and that God is sovereign over our salvation.
Thanks for highlighting this verse that makes this oh so clear.
Alas, Calvinism starts with the nature and character of God. Thus, we are not forced to live and die on proof texts. All revelation is consistent and cohesive. The same God that determines the outcome of cast lots and where every bolt of lightening will strike, is the same God that determines when and where in history men will be born and the number of their days. The king's heart is like rivers of water in His hand and He turns it wherever He will. Same God that determines who is born blind or seeing, mute or speaking. Yes, He determines who He will bring from spiritual death to spiritual life.
Great message. Those who have been regenerated will obey. The goodness of Yah brings us to repentance. That goodness is in the gospel of grace. Amen!
What about Lordship SANCTIFICATION?
I dont see much of a difference between the Calvinism of the Puritans and the Lordship Salvation of John MacArthur and John Piper. Its the "P" of TULIP. RC Sproul also held to the same view. I dont agree with this view, but Lordship Salvation is the logical outcome of the doctrine of the perserverance of the saints.
Thank you brothers.
Idc what "Christianity" considers to be reformed. I only care about whether the Bible teaches x, y, z or not. If Christ says He is supposed to the Master of a Christian's life, idc if the false teachers disagree with Him. Christians are supposed to follow _His_ lead and believe _His_ words. As Peter told Caiaphas, if it seems evil to you to obey God, make your own choice.
Excellent video!
Anyone familiar with John Frame and the Doctrine of God on the Lordship of God? Question: how does John Frame differ from John MacArthur?
You make some very good points. However the 1689 does nor pass the test of reformed. It is simply a baptist version of the savoy and the westminster. The Heidelberg catechism properly defines faith first not as activity but as union and bond. Secondly it defines faith as an assured confidence and a certain knowledge.
Finally, another person who knows their catechism. I agree with you that the 1689 does not qualify as Reformed, but I will say that what these guys are arguing is consistent with the Reformed Confessions. Regeneration, then faith, then repentance, sanctification and good works as the fruit of faith. I would add that question 21, if you break it down, follows the classic notitia, assesus, fidicua definition. Certain knowledge, hold for true, assured confidence.
I appreciate what they are doing. I just want people to understand that the reformed faith is far mire than the doctrines of grace. It us covenental and federal theology which embraces our generations by promise. The promise being controlled by election. Blessings to you.
@@atcustompainting Amen, so many today just want to rip the doctrines of grace out of the fertile soil of Reformed Theology from which they spring, and then place them into another theological system where they make little to no sense.
Sadly that is so. I am thankful our gracious covenant God still maintaines his covenant with their seed even though the do not keep God's covenant by baptism of their infants.
@@atcustompainting Amen.
Two questions. I’m seeing satanist coming to Christ around you tube. With god anything is possible however after a complete rejection of god can they be saved according to the word of god.
Question two is after apostasy or giving up on faith of being saved by thinking one’s condemned to hell will there remain a sacrifice for sins if that person feels drawn by god to repent and be saved.
Was Charles C Ryrie right ?
I came into Calvinism in part through the reading of MacArthurs book .
Calvinism teaches that God only saves the elect, you really never know if you are one of the elect. It is pretty much a works based salvation
You know you're one of the elect if you continue to put your trust in Christ for 100% forgiveness of your past and future sins.
I used to be just like these guys. Afraid to associate myself with “free grace” because of the shame that comes with it. The truth is that God’s Grace is FREE with no strings attached. Because it is free doesn’t mean that you are encouraged to sin it just simply means that his grace abounds over sin (Romans 5:20). The licence to sin accusation is a legalistic straw man that was no different to the time of the apostles. Paul was accused of the same for teaching the true gospel.
The debt of sin cost Jesus everything and costs us nothing. Grace is free. Now the issue is that legalists always want to have something to pay for no matter how small it is. So after salvation they turn into fruit inspectors with an ambiguous understanding of man’s sinful nature.
Derogatory comments towards Free Grace come from the fact that without the true grace of God shame will always be attached to sin. That is why the Gospel is shameful to legalists. Paul knew this and was still not ashamed. David knew this and was still not ashamed. Adam and Eve became ashamed when sin came into the picture because they were absent of God’s Grace. So the sewed fig leaves (covering of sin) but God clothed them (pointing to his grace and the Gospel).
“For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God to salvation for everyone who believes, for the Jew first and also for the Greek.”
Romans 1:16
“They cried to You, and were delivered; They trusted in You, and were not ashamed.”
Psalms 22:5
“And they were both naked, the man and his wife, and were not ashamed.”
Genesis 2:25
I believe that these gentlemen know the truth of the gospel but they still have a fear (shame) of being attached to free grace because it’s not a credible theological stand point amongst legalists. That doesn’t change the fact that Gods grace is free and the Bible is clear on that. You don’t need to find a middle ground, you need to believe in the Gospel without shame and without mans fig leaves. 🙏
It gives a new perspective to the whole issue, when you understand that the "lordship vs. non-lordship" issue is totally internal to dispensationalism. Without dispensationalism it would not exists. The whole "as savior but not lord" paradigm comes from the "rightly dividing" hermeneutical paradigm in dispensationalism. This all underlines how terrible a doctrine dispensationalism is.
G'day, Theocast! What about the saying, "If Jesus is not LORD OF all, He is not LORD AT all?" Is this an example of Lordship salvation?
This is true for Believers! But we don’t make him Lord for salvation
We get it, y’all don’t like Lordship Salvation, but when will you also speak on the falsehood of free grace theology as well?
Gods grace is free and we can’t do anything to earn or maintain it. The more we rely and rest in Jesus the more we can do for him. But if we try to add our own doing and our own hard work then we start missing the point. We SHOULD do good things and love God etc. but it’s having our focus on the wrong things regarding salvation.
@@Brexbin Why do I have to do good things? If grace is free, then why can't I just accept the grace and live as I please, sinning freely?
ruclips.net/video/vBoNVVlyX7c/видео.htmlsi=KeJv9KIAEw6QwOQm
@@bad_covfefe Heidelberg Catechism Question 64
Q. But doesn’t this teaching
make people indifferent and wicked?
A. No.
It is impossible for those grafted into Christ through true faith not to produce fruits of gratitude.1
1 Luke 6:43-45; John 15:5
Question 86
Q. Since we have been delivered
from our misery
by grace through Christ
without any merit of our own,
why then should we do good works?
A. Because Christ, having redeemed us by his blood,
is also restoring us by his Spirit into his image, so that with our whole lives
we may show that we are thankful to God for his benefits,1
so that he may be praised through us,2
so that we may be assured of our faith by its fruits,3
and so that by our godly living
our neighbors may be won over to Christ.4
1 Rom. 6:13; 12:1-2; 1 Pet. 2:5-10
2 Matt. 5:16; 1 Cor. 6:19-20
3 Matt. 7:17-18; Gal. 5:22-24; 2 Pet. 1:10-11
4 Matt. 5:14-16; Rom. 14:17-19; 1 Pet.
Question 87
Q. Can those be saved
who do not turn to God
from their ungrateful
and unrepentant ways?
A. By no means.
Scripture tells us that
no unchaste person,
no idolater, adulterer, thief,
no covetous person,
no drunkard, slanderer, robber,
or the like
will inherit the kingdom of God.1
1 1 Cor. 6:9-10; Gal. 5:19-21; Eph. 5:1-20; 1 John 3:14
EDIT: I've rethought my comment and it occurred to me you are asking about the free grace theology movement of the LS movement, not just cheap grace generally speaking.
Theocast has a very particular emphasis and focus against pietism, which is a distortion of Law/Gospel. Lordship Salvation falls in line with one of many distortions that are prevalent in Reformed circles. The Free Grace movement had it's issues and I am certain they've spoken about it, but it's not really a focus for them.
Unless we turn from the World and sin to Christ in obedience and faith we’re just deceiving ourselves and others too.
What Bible commentary’s would you guys recommended ?
The Reformation Study Bible has commentary by RC Sproul, who I think these guys are similar to. I've even found it helpful for passages not related to the reformation, like the violent verses in the OT.
fixing our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of faith, who for the joy set before Him endured the cross, despising the shame, and has sat down at the right hand of the throne of God.
- Hebrews 12:2
Jesus is both the author and perfecter of our faith.
Now faith is the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. For by it the men of old gained approval. By faith we understand that the worlds were prepared by the word of God, so that what is seen was not made out of things which are visible.
- Hebrews 11:1-3
All these died in faith, without receiving the promises, but having seen them and having welcomed them from a distance, and having confessed that they were strangers and exiles on the earth.
- Hebrews 11:13
And all these, having gained approval through their faith, did not receive what was promised, because God had provided something better for us, so that apart from us they would not be made perfect.
- Hebrews 11:39-40
Beautiful, very well put brothers, only those who don't have ears to hear will not hear or understand.
I understand, I just disagree with their interpretation of scripture.
The Protestant Reformation was largely an over reaction. Grace alone theology is an over reaction to Catholic error. The bible does not teach that we must do all kinds of man made rituals to be saved. Nor does it teach that we are saved by grace alone through faith alone. It teaches that we are saved by a relationship with Jesus. None of us deserves to be in relationship with Jesus. It is gift. But it comes with conditions. We remain in that relationship with Jesus through loving, reverent obedience to what HE taught. Neither Catholicism nor Protestantism produce the kind of Christians Jesus' teachings produce. Friends, Christianity is not about always having total assurance. It's okay to examine ourselves at times to see IF we are in the faith. It's okay to contemplate the possibility that we are not on track to entering the kingdom. It's okay to have fear and trembling. IT'S OKAY, guys. Christianity is not about FEELING GOOD all the time. If Jesus wanted us to have this unconditional assurance all the time, then he wouldn't have said half the things he did, things which often cause people to feel concerned about their own salvation. HE IS TRYING TO HELP US! EMRBACE THE DISCOMFORT.
What do you think about "The Sinner's Prayer?"
I'm sure God has used the sinner's prayer to save somebody. But in reality it is not found in the Bible.
They also believe faith is a work
I've heard them go on and on about faith being a gift of God so no one can boast
Salvation is threefold: Justification, Sanctification, Glorification. ALL who are glorified in the end, are the same ALL who were sanctified in their lives, and ALL of these are those who were Justified by God's grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone. The only people confusing things is you two. There's going to be no one who is finally saved (glorified) who was not also justified and sanctified. Someone claiming to be "saved" yet who unrepentantly lives a life of debauchery, is self-deceived and if they continue in that way, will not inherit a chicken coop in the poor side of Heaven, but shall not inherit the kingdom of God at all, but rather shall be told "I never knew you" by the L-O-R-D Jesus Christ. There is no such thing as a person who has Jesus as Savior but not as Lord.
"Do this or else." Guys, Jesus and Paul unambiguously warn us in this kind of way, and it is okay. Stop resisting what they say. When Paul said that "if we live according to the flesh we will die, but if we put to death the deeds of the body by the Spirit we will live," he is saying "put to death the deeds of the body by the Spirit OR ELSE YOU WILL DIE."
When Jesus said that he will spit out those who are lukewarm, or that he would blot out the name of those who do not overcome from the book of life, he is making an "OR ELSE" statement. Friends, please. Stop softening and neutering the bible. Let it be the radical, scary, life changing, sobering book it was always meant to be. It is meant to produce BOTH intimacy with God AND fear and trembling. Stop trying to take the teeth out of it. God help us all.
Lordship Salvation Doctrine might be ok if they interpreted Scriptures correctly. When I hear the Lord-Lorders cite their own works, I gasp in horror that anyone would cite his own works as a reason to expect to enter into the Kingdom. The last thing on my mind, is that I better have better works so that I can be worthy to cite my works; but this is how Lordshippers eisegete the passage. If I cite my works, I expect to be rejected for not being sinless, for having practiced lawlessness; therefore, I will never cite my own works. The Lordshipper interpretation of this section of Scripture, is literally damnable.
Just as we tend not to refer to Cheap Grace Doctrine as "Free Grace Theology", so also we should not refer to Lord-Lorder Salvation Doctrine as "Lordship Salvation". All who believe are saved unto honoring Christ as Lord, but the Lord-Lorders looked to their own works as a dishonor against the promises of God. To agree with them about citing our own works, is therefore better named for them than for our Lord.
Cheap Grace Doctrine denies that God's grace includes everything which God promises it does and which Lord Jesus' blood paid for. I prefer Amazing Grace Doctrine: the teaching that God's grace is so amazing that it includes everything He promises it includes and everything which Lord Jesus' blood paid for.
Good conversation. I'd add that it is very important to define the terms we are dealing with. The phrase "Christ is not the savior of anyone whom he is not Lord of" is a phrase that no biblical Christian should have trouble with or complaint to.
I actually don't find it a beneficial quote at all. What is implied for those he is Lord of? Obedience and works. Are obedience and work a good thing? Yes. Do obedience and works belong in the Gospel? No. This is the nitty gritty kernel issue there. The LS proponents have so ardently tried to refute cheap grace theology that they've presented a confusing distortion between the relationship of faith and works. Fruit, obedience, and works have their place in the Christian life, but they must be seen as an effect of salvation and never in any way be construed as a cause. Salvation must first be grasped as a completely free gift given to sinful people before works or obedience comes into the picture. There is a clear order in the salvation that needs to be grasped.
I agree with you, but I don't know 1 person who holds to Lordship salvation who would state that works and obedience bring about salvation. Like you say obedience and goodworks are products of a renewed heart by grace, but I've no trouble stating like the Apostle James did, the only evidence of saving faith is works, if we love Jesus we will obey his commands. We are saved by faith alone, but not by a faith that is alone. Blessings.
@@empese1127 That's correct, and nobody is accusing Lordship Salvation proponents of committing the Galatian heresy for that reason. The issue is not an explicit affirmation of works and obedience meriting salvation on behalf of LS proponents; the issue is a distortion of the relationship between saving faith and works by either overemphasizing the newness of the New Creation or caveating justification by faith immediately with the fruits of faith. Even with works produced from a living faith, they must be clearly distinguished from faith itself, in the same way that justification and sanctification must be clearly distinguished, though one is a fruit of the other.
@@empese1127 I would commend to you the book called "Christ the Lord" by Michael Horton where the issues of Lordship Salvation are more thoroughly addressed.
This is the single worst take in the history of Theocast. Whoever gave this idea the ok should be demoted. This is as bad as some of the radical synergist stuff online. These guys evidently need to just sit down and read J-Mac's Gospel According to Jesus.
This is so bad, I'm wondering if I will ever listen again. If the guys could be this off on something this high profile, I have to question their level of study of the subjects they cover. Hate to be melodramatic, but this just shocked me. This is Leightonian levels of bad.
@Michael_Chandler_Keaton search for heidelblog and gaj "The Gospel According To John (MacArthur)"
They did read it, this is the video responding to it. Have you read it? Have you actually listen to their episode? ruclips.net/video/rpm-qPBEuBg/видео.htmlsi=zlGAgUjjONqGfUSq
Umm, I think if you took the sum total of those who ascribe to a confession coming out of the Reformation, and know what their confessional documents say, a significant majority would have major issues with a lot of what MacArthur says. He continually confuses Law and Gospel, and blurs the line between justification and sanctification. Theocast is hardly the first in the Reformation tradition to point this out. It is why Doug Wilson et. al. were unable to get away with similar, though distinct ideas with Federal Vision in the confessional Presbyterian and Reformed world.
Sounds like a like antinomianism.
Funny, I actually heard Paul Washer say if you're not accused of antinomianism at least once, you're doing something wrong.
With respect to obedience and doctrine, we are not all the sons of God. Rather, it is only those who truly believe in Him and do His will. . . . Those who do not obey Him, being disinherited by Him, have ceased to be His sons (Irenaeus, 180 ce).
11 It is neither the faith, nor the love, nor the hope, nor the endurance of one day; rather, “He that endures to the end will be saved” (Clement of Alexandria, 195 ce).
12 Hoodwinking multitudes, [Marcus, the heretic] deceived many persons of this description who had become his disciples. He taught them that they were prone, no doubt, to sin. However, he said that they were beyond the reach of danger because they belonged to the perfect Power (Hippolytus, 225 ce).
13 Certain ones of those [heretics] who hold different opinions misuse these passages. They essentially destroy free will by introducing ruined natures incapable of salvation and by introducing others as being saved in such a way that they cannot be lost (Origen, 225 ce).
6 A tree is made manifest by its fruit. So those who profess themselves to be Christians will be recognized by their conduct (Ignatius, 105 ce).7
Into this joy, many persons desire to enter. They know that, “By grace you are saved, not of works,” but by the will of God through Jesus Christ. . . . But He who raised Him up from the dead will raise up us also-if we do His will, and walk in His commandments, and love what He loved, keeping ourselves from all unrighteousness (Polycarp, 135 ce).
8 Let us therefore repent with the whole heart, so that none of us perish by the way. . . . Let us then practice righteousness so that we may be saved to the end (Second Clement, 150 ce).
9 Let those who are not found living as He taught, be understood not to be Christians, even though they profess with the lips the teachings of Christ. For it is not those who make profession, but those who do the works, who will be saved. . . . The Son of God has promised again to deliver us with prepared prepared garments-if we do His commandments (Justin Martyr, 160 ce).10
Theocast cannot pretend that their vire is in any way based in history. The early Church would unanimously be against their teachings here, and mamy of the men I quoted are ones who met the Apostles and transmitted their teachings, including ehich books of scripture actually came from the Apostles, down to us.
You’ll never get the works if you don’t trust solely in Christ and forsake you’re own works as a means to acceptance with God
@@brainequ We agree on that. But to say that my works give no indication whether I am Christian or not (as theocast claims) is flatly contradicted by ALL of the earliest Christian writers, including the ones who met the Apostles.
The level of BS here is beyond belief. Did you guys learn this from a seminary?
The new heart has to do with the new covenant between Israel and God. This does not apply to the church age. Ezekiel 36 26 is a promise to Israel, and its fulfillment is in the future. It is during Jesus' second coming. Why are you applying this to everyone?
Regardless of what one thinks about “free grace”, “Lordship salvation”, repentance, obedience, etc., the idea that regeneration precedes faith is absurd. It is a construct invented by fleshly religious minds to enable them to prove and abide by a theology of exhaustive divine determinism, which is nowhere to be found in the first 400 years of the church after the resurrection of Christ.
✝️🍞🍷
Very misleading video
Why?
Most pharisees would find this video misleading.
@@savedwretch8711 As would anyone who thinks avoiding sin is important. Theocast's theology is internally inconsistent.
I don't know why MacArthurs name is being dragged with the faulty views. They make it sound like MacArthur isn't teaching the correct order of salvation. @@joev2223
Who cares about if something is not reformed? Only people who want to be reformed rather than live according to scriptures.
Everyone claims to live according to the scriptures, friend. That's the problem. Everyone has their own interpretation, because people interpret the scriptures differently.
Who cares? Catholicism was the dominant misguided religion since the first century, this is a long time. By God’s grace Martin Luther changed all this: Reformed! Catholicism is ALL about works and this thought still creeps in to this day and those who are reformed are constantly fighting this heresy. To say “who cares” is playing down what was already fought for and boy was it a deadly fight.
@@bad_covfefe Of course I know this... but reformed label is connected with a lot of idolatry of the past and some kind of fake standard next to scriptures. Like we are suppose to be reformed. No, we are not. Scripture is in its own category and everytime you create theological label, however biblical you think it is, and you try to comfort people into it (underline this), you are on dangerous road... Theological labels are not bad, but we are not to be them, we use them to identify what Bible teaches.
@@marklar2012 how do we tell what the Bible teaches?
@@bad_covfefe By doing careful exegesis, praying, consulting church history, etc.
Jesus plus works = SALVATION I guess Jesus was lying when he said it is finished Either you are Born Again or not you can no more lose your salvation than you can go from circumcision to un-circumcision