SermonIndex Audio Sermons
Image Map
Discussion Forum : Scriptures and Doctrine : Forthright Talk on the “Non-Lordship” Message

Print Thread (PDF)

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 Next Page )
PosterThread
murrcolr
Member



Joined: 2007/4/25
Posts: 1529
Scotland, UK

 Re:

Quote: I would say that to be 'carnal' or walking in the flesh (carnal = flesh) is not necessarily the same as wilful rebellious sin that does not want to submit to the Lordship of Christ.

Scripture describes that the flesh and the Spirit at war with each other, as thier desires are opposite, not only that it describes the flesh as keeping us from doing the things we would want to do. (Gal 5:17)

That particular scripture I quote from above if we read it and consider what is being said it lets us know that there remains a power that controls the regenerate after conversion.

One of the biggest failings I see in Lordship Salvation doctrine is that it fails to address the carnality that remains after conversion and that carnality keeps us in bondage and keep us from doing what we would…


_________________
Colin Murray

 2015/2/17 16:20Profile
Oracio
Member



Joined: 2007/6/26
Posts: 2037
Whittier CA USA

 Re:

Quote:
If you agree with what I said in essence, then do you believe that someone who has been genuinely born again can become un-saved? Which is the opposite of OSAS.


That's a tough question for me at the moment. What I meant was that I agreed with the thrust of your post as far as the process of sanctification was concerned. But to answer your question, I'm not 100% sure on either side, but I lean toward the traditional reformed view of the perseverance of the saints. I see seemingly convincing scriptures on both sides.

I would also contend that many have also swung the pendulum on the opposite way of the cheap grace teaching with the teaching of sinless perfection. Robert N. Wilkin, the Free Grace theologian whom I mentioned in the OP, said he came out of a holiness church that taught sinless perfection and that he was very discouraged during that whole time of being involved with that church. So he ended up going to the opposite extreme and fell for the cheap grace doctrine. I'd say that the Lordship position is a more biblical position between those two extremes.


_________________
Oracio

 2015/2/17 17:26Profile
murrcolr
Member



Joined: 2007/4/25
Posts: 1529
Scotland, UK

 Re:

Quote: The “Carnal Christian” doctrine is another term used to describe this easy-believism

Following on from my last post (please read it to understand my thinking) this what the Lordship Salvation doctrine must say because it fails horrendously to address the carnal Christian.

I want to stamp something very strongly here; He that committeth sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning 1 John 3:8

Quote“Free Gracers” say that that passage teaches clearly that one can be “carnal” and still saved, and by “carnal” they mean indulging in any type of sinful or fleshly behavior.

Fine but let’s look at your mindset to see how you excuse sin.

Quote: For example, let’s suppose we have a weak moment and are tempted and are caught in the sin of lust, maybe by looking at a billboard or something. Would that mean we lost our salvation and need to be born again, again?

Weak moment - I am wondering what to say here, do I call you a hypocrite; do I call you a whitewashed tomb, clean on the outside but dead on the inside. Why would I consider using such strong words, well scripture tells us very plainly if you hate your brother you’re a murder; if you lust after a women in your heart then you it’s just like you have fornicated with her.

There is no excuse for sin externally or internally, let’s not deceive ourselves and get puffed up with pride and claim we are under Christ Lordship when we are yet carnal and under the bondage of sin.

Maybe the example of excusing sin is not enough?

Quote: He is simply saying that by reason of them being sectarian or factious toward one another, the Corinthian believers were behaving in a carnal or fleshly manner.

Sectarianism – coming from Scotland I am well aware what the fruit of “sectarianism” – it is hatred that leads to people being murdered. That’s why John says in 1 Jhn 3:8 Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer.

My point here is the Corinthians may not have killing each other physically, but internally there was deep-seated issues; they were carnal still under the power a mysterious internal force called Sin.

Quote: But falling into those types of sins occasionally as believers is much different that running headlong into all types of sins, unchecked and unrepentant.

Brother the deceitfulness of sin is at work, there is no difference; scripture says clearly; if we fail in one point of the law we become accountable for all of the law.


_________________
Colin Murray

 2015/2/17 17:41Profile
back-to-acts
Member



Joined: 2011/5/12
Posts: 28
Texas

 Re:

Dave wrote:
The problem with this is it is using human reasoning to say we cannot forfeit eternal life once we have it. I have heard similar things like, "Your children don't stop being your children even if they disown you." Again using human reasoning to establish a doctrine. It's not a good comparison, because you could say that every human is in a way a child of God, in that God created them, but only those who choose to submit to His authority will have the rights and privilege of sons. If they afterward walk away from Him, then they loose that privilege. You see anyone can use the same examples to argue either way! we have to look at what scripture teaches in it's full revelation and not isolated text taken out to make a point.

First off I am not using human reasoning to come to this conclusion. If regeneration is a work of God, are you saying that we can undo that work? Us believing and repenting and receiving Christ is partly our job ( through the Spirit) but the making us a live and new creatures is God's work.

Secondly, you cannot use the argument that we are all children of God based upon 1 John 3:10 . We are either children of God or children of the devil. So before regenration, we belong to the devil, after we belong to Jesus as his sons ( John 1:12) . So that argument would fail just simply based upon scripture.

Doesnt our Father use human examples to describe Himself in Hebrews 12:7 talking about Him being a Father that disciplines? Isn't the picture of the prodigal a picture of God's love for one who has fallen away?

I would make the argument based upon Ezekiel 36 that something does happen to our soul/spirit at regeneration. Of course it is not physical in the sense of our fleshly bodies that will return to the dust. But something does happen where we are given new hearts, and new desires.

The problem with SOME lordship salvation teaching is that it removes the power of the spirit and regeneration from the picture and only focuses on the outward evidences. It hinges on the verge of legalism.
I believe it also puts us as humans in the drivers seat to remain "saved" .

If you have been truly born again, then Jesus is your Lord. Not the other way around. Millions of people are going to hell in my opinion because they have never been born again, not because they haven't made Jesus their Lord. I think SOME lordship salvation teaching gets those 2 switched around.

Also, in Hebrews 10:26-27 - when do we cross that line? Who determines that line? What if we do sin willfully today? If you are willfully sinning, bets are you still have the same will that you had before your "supposed" regeneration- which would nulify that regeneration experience.



_________________
Travis Cunningham

 2015/2/17 17:47Profile
back-to-acts
Member



Joined: 2011/5/12
Posts: 28
Texas

 Re:

That's a tough question for me at the moment. What I meant was that I agreed with the thrust of your post as far as the process of sanctification was concerned. But to answer your question, I'm not 100% sure on either side, but I lean toward the traditional reformed view of the perseverance of the saints. I see seemingly convincing scriptures on both sides.

I would also contend that many have also swung the pendulum on the opposite way of the cheap grace teaching with the teaching of sinless perfection. Robert N. Wilkin, the Free Grace theologian whom I mentioned in the OP, said he came out of a holiness church that taught sinless perfection and that he was very discouraged during that whole time of being involved with that church. So he ended up going to the opposite extreme and fell for the cheap grace doctrine. I'd say that the Lordship position is a more biblical position between those two extremes.


I agree 100% with what you posted here brother. I am in the same state of mind where I see valid points on both sides. My only concern is that we over emphasize our own power in following the Lord ( some lordship teaching) and not the power of the Spirit. He has raised us up to new life, we follow Him faithfully and obediently as our Lord.


_________________
Travis Cunningham

 2015/2/17 17:53Profile
Oracio
Member



Joined: 2007/6/26
Posts: 2037
Whittier CA USA

 Re:

Quote:
Weak moment - I am wondering what to say here, do I call you a hypocrite; do I call you a whitewashed tomb, clean on the outside but dead on the inside. Why would I consider using such strong words, well scripture tells us very plainly if you hate your brother you’re a murder; if you lust after a women in your heart then you it’s just like you have fornicated with her.

There is no excuse for sin externally or internally, let’s not deceive ourselves and get puffed up with pride and claim we are under Christ Lordship when we are yet carnal and under the bondage of sin.


So let me get this straight. By your line of reasoning and interpretation of 1John 3:8, if a Christian is not sinless or perfect in thought, word and deed, regarding sins of omission and commission, he/she is a hypocrite and a child of the devil? I don’t believe that’s what God’s Word teaches.

Regarding 1 John 3:8 and other similar verses, the meaning is in reference to a continual or habitual lifestyle or pattern of unrepentant sin. If we interpret those verses according to your type of interpretation, you have people who are unsaved the moment they commit any sin whatsoever, again, whether in thought, word, or deed, sins of omission and commission. That would mean only those that are sinless or perfect are saved. Here is another verse in that passage that would have to be taken that way:

“6 Whoever abides in Him does not sin. Whoever sins has neither seen Him nor known Him”

So again, according to your type of interpretation that verse has to mean that one who abides in Christ and knows God is sinless or perfect and that those that are not so do not abide in Christ nor know God. Again, I don’t believe that’s what God’s Word is teaching there. Otherwise I and many other brethren here are unsaved, including you if you are not sinless or perfect.


_________________
Oracio

 2015/2/17 19:03Profile
murrcolr
Member



Joined: 2007/4/25
Posts: 1529
Scotland, UK

 Re:

Quote: So let me get this straight. By your line of reasoning and interpretation of 1John 3:8, if a Christian is not sinless or perfect in thought, word and deed, regarding sins of omission and commission, he/she is a hypocrite and a child of the devil?

I am not the one pontificating about being under the Lordship of Christ; while excusing certain sins, while at the same time calling many many thousands of conversions false by the Lordship doctrines low standards, if we must set standards then lets apply the perfect standard of the law.


_________________
Colin Murray

 2015/2/18 0:06Profile
Sidewalk
Member



Joined: 2011/11/11
Posts: 706
San Diego

 Re:

I must admit that I am not saved...in the sense that as near as I can tell I am still living in an earthly body. The "saved" scenario is reserved for a future date when I shall hear the Savior pronounce my successful graduation. Indeed I look forward to that!

But for now, I work it all out with fear and trembling. I am invited to the feast, but must show up by my own decision. I have the power to rather go evaluate the oxen I just purchased, check out the land, marry the wife, or read my emails. I have the right to skip the feast, insult the king, ignore the wedding garment. All of that is in my purview.

Ah, but He has sent His Messenger and told me the wonders of the feast. He has whetted my senses to the aromas of the food, the awesomeness of the music, the thrill of the dance, the exceeding joy of the back-stage passes to the throne of the King. All my other options shrivel and go dark in comparison, my heart and my feet are moving toward the King's banquet! While I am not yet there, it fills my longing and remains my best thought every day.

Am I free to choose something else? Certainly. But nothing I have seen compares with the vision in my soul of the King's bounty!

Also as I parabalize (is that a word?) my fantasy, I would also note the means of my potential derailment.

Temptation. The one who would keep me from the feast must offer something that catches my attention, something that might be seen as better, sweeter, more fulfilling- a real temptation.

But the temptation is not the fall! For theological reasons that I won't probe here, the Adversary has a right to try and pull me away from my Godly course! So important, the scripture notes that Jesus Himself was pulled by temptation- "In every way, just as we are!"

But He did not sin. Temptation and sin are related, are connected- but are not the same. Sin has a germinating phase, and temptation is a part of that. But until one pulls the trigger, sin is still at bay and the virtue of righteous resistance is still operating.

How many yield to temptation without even a wimpy little fight?

I think holiness is not the absence of temptation, but the wise knowing of how it works and the learning of skillfully using the armor of God to escape from it.

"Tempted in all points just as we." Good enough for Jesus, good enough for me!


_________________
Tom Cameron

 2015/2/18 0:37Profile
Oracio
Member



Joined: 2007/6/26
Posts: 2037
Whittier CA USA

 Re:

Quote:
I am not the one pontificating about being under the Lordship of Christ; while excusing certain sins, while at the same time calling many many thousands of conversions false by the Lordship doctrines low standards, if we must set standards then lets apply the perfect standard of the law.


So this is my question for you. Are you living up to your view of the standard of true conversion, which I take to be sinless perfection? Again if not, according to your standard you know not God and are unregenerate along with every other Christian who is not completely sinless. By your standard, you have no reason to be assured of the forgiveness of your sins and justification by faith in Christ unless you are 100% sinless. If you are not sinless and therefore not born again, what are you waiting for? Why don't you get right with God and truly get born again? If you know you are not truly born again, pardon my bluntness but why should I listen to any insight you may claim to have from God's Word? After all, those that are not born again remain in death and darkness and cannot discern the things of the Spirit of God. I'm simply holding you up to your own standard of perfection which you say is the standard of true conversion based on your interpretation of certain scriptures.


_________________
Oracio

 2015/2/18 1:27Profile
murrcolr
Member



Joined: 2007/4/25
Posts: 1529
Scotland, UK

 Re:

Quote: Are you living up to your view of the standard of true conversion.

My standard for conversion is simple through grace by faith we are saved, all I would ask someone after conversion is this question, "where is Jesus in your life" if they reply with a certain answer, then I know they that the Holy Spirit has begun his work and they are converted. Very very simple...

Unlike Lordship Salvation which seems to mix up justification/sanctification and seeks a perfection of sorts, that Christ must be Lord at the time at conversion, if you don't come up to the mark of the Lordship standards which is a low standard of no external sin then your conversion is classed as false.

What I mean by a low standard is that there is no chance within the Lordship salvation doctrine that you'll never ever conquer the flesh that deep seated internal sins of the heart, while I would say you can conquer the flesh that deep seated internal sins of the heart but not at conversion.


_________________
Colin Murray

 2015/2/18 3:35Profile





©2002-2020 SermonIndex.net
Promoting Genuine Biblical Revival.
Privacy Policy