Ok, help me flesh this out, but it seems to make a lot of sense.
The Lordship position "claims" that they believe in a faith alone that saves in Jesus Christ BUT if you really believe, then you will persevere in good works and not fall away.
If that is true, why were most of the epistles written? They are quoted by Lordship proponents as proof that if you are not doing good works, you should question you were ever really saved and are not if you do not persevere, yet that begs the question. Shouldn't they point back to belief in Jesus Christ so that the works will follow, not just encourage you to do good works? After all, there are plenty of people who believe good works save.. that seems it would be confusing..
There seem to be only 3 options. 1, it is telling people that they better do good works TO be saved. 2. They are saying you are saved, so do good works and stop screwing around Rom 12:1-2.(which would be unnessecary in the reformed position) OR 3. they are saying that you are saved, but to keep yourself saved you must do good works. All 3 are not inline with the reformed position, and only one fits the "Good News" spelled out clearly in the Evangelistic Gospel. The reformed position is confusion. Claiming it is written to false professors, it is telling them to "persevere" "love God" and "do good works" for the purpose of ??? going to the lake of fire anyway? And IF they are about eternal life, the consequences are based on works & not faith which is just another hair in their ointment. It seems the Catholic or Armenian position is more consistent even if not any more biblical.
Are you following my line of thought? I was praying for a way to clearly show a reformed person that Grace is Grace! and this came into my mind to share. I appreciate feedback.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
I agree with #2. I have often said that Romans 12:1 can make no sense in John MacArthur's theology. Interestingly, in his two books advocating Lordship salvation, he only devotes four lines to this verse (Faith Works, p.119). And there he treats the aorist tense as if it were a continual present.
I am with you on that Bill!
I really like that statement about pointing BACK at Christ. I mean if one isn't performing up to expectation (by the way what are those expectations exactly and how much is needed to show you are good until of course persevering to the end) then the logical conclusion is to turn to grace to Christ Himself. It just shows that Lordship contains a lot of self contradictory baggage, I was saved in 1981 and I can honestly say if I was unsaved today and listened to a Lordship presentation I would either walk away or have a psychotic break.
Good points Mark. Lordship does not sound like "Good News" does it.
On the reformed view , faith is an inevitable part of their 5 point package deal , imposed upon a " particular people"
by a covert decree , and administered through an irresistable and unconditional " election".It is rendered less than an instrumental means of acquiring Christ's righteousness - Romans 3.21 - 4.17 . Even more elusive , unhappily , is the ability to nail down an objective means for knowing that this arbitrary package deal applies to ME . I would submit that this DOUBT is the 6th point of reformed theology , which Arminians and Romanists embrace without shame .
Of course salvation comes before Faith in the reformed view, because of the letter T which contradicts Scripture clearly. Very good points, and TULIPD would seem to fit very well.
Further , it seems that on the reformed view , "WE" do not really exist - ontologically. Without volitional agency , only one will acts to perform everything - the monergystic god of the package deal - i.e. - TULIPD.
One might well ask WHO does the believing in Jesus for eternal life .
As well , clear comparisons to a sort of ethical pantheism can be made if indeed the created order be monovolitional.
Insuperable though the difficulties appear to any accustomed to the omnibenevolence of the Good Shepherd , yet this view tells us that the " Horrible Decree" will sort out all the messy contradictions between God's revealed nature and their doctrine of double predestination and reprobation .
To quote from the Roberta Flack and Donny Hathaway hit song " Where is the Love?"
So , reformed theology reduces to complete determinism .
Since , on their view , we posess NO ability to do otherwise , this Calvinist god does it all from A-Z . This would include all the rape , murder , envy , jeolousy , genocide , theft and every conceivable sin (and consequence of sin )in all of recorded history .
In this sense , I would agree with Arno Gaebelein , who broke fellowship with Arthur W. Pink over his book THE SOVEREIGNTY OF GOD . Arno remarked - ¨The book ... is akin to blasphemy .It presents God as a Being of injustice and maligns his Holy character ... which make the God of Love a monster ... It is just this kind of teaching which makes atheists¨.
Whenever freedom is sacrificed at the altar of ¨Sovereignty¨, the fingerprints of another ¨god¨ are evident .
This ¨god¨ would rightly be called a monste
oops ... that last part was cut off ... should read ¨monster ¨...
gotta get up to speed with all the in´s and out´s of this format during PREVIEW !!
THANKS TRENT !
You are welcome. :)
Post a Comment