Category Archives: Replacement theology

John MacArthur Speaks on Predestination: A Rebuttal

Posted on July 9, 2013 by | 198 comments

photo

John MacArthur Speaks on Predestination Question:

A Grace-Based Rebuttal

Source of the MacArthur Interview: Shepherdsconference.org, 2010, Media, General Session 5, an Interview with John MacArthur
Johnny Mac
Introductory Comments:
Generally speaking, when I review an article or interview, I will select several salient statements upon which to comment. This methodology usually works well, but, at times individuals have made the accusation that the writer’s or speaker’s statements have been misquoted or taken out of context. In order to head off this dodge, I have chosen to print the MacArthur interview on the subject, “The Question of Predestination,” in its entirety. My brief, clearly-labeled comments or responses to MacArthur’s open questions and statements will be inserted throughout the text of the interview; they will be in [brackets].

Note: To view the article in its entirety, go to:

http://califgracer.wordpress.com/

John MacArthur on Predestination:

A Grace-Based Rebuttal

Source of the MacArthur Interview: Shepherdsconference.org, 2010, Media, General Session 5, an Interview with John MacArthur

[Interspersed with bracketed comments]

Question posed to MacArthur:

“Why witness? How do we tell people that God loves them and that Jesus Christ did not die for them? Or do we tell them that?
[Inserted comment: A great question posed to John MacArthur. I have often myself asked Calvinists a similar question: “If God’s got it all slated as to who gets to go to heaven and who must go to hell, and the individual has abolutely no say in the matter, then, WHY HAVE MISSIONS?” To date, I have never heard anyone give a logical biblical answer to that question. Let’s see whether John MacArthur will be the first] . . . .

MacArthur answers:

Well, you tell them whatever the Bible tells you to tell them. And the Bible tells you to go into the world and preach the gospel to every creature. That’s what you do because that’s what the Scripture says.”

[Inserted Comment: Right so far, John: Mark 16:15. And verse 16 tells why Jesus commanded the preaching of the gospel (the death, burial and resurrection of Christ, 1 Cor. 15:1-8)—so people would believe and become saved (cf. Acts 16:30-31); he also warns that those who refuse to believe (right through the point of death) will be lost (cf. John 3:18, John 5:40, 47). Christ Jesus would never command something be preached to the world if that proclamation had no possibility of efficacious results, i.e., if the individual had no ability to respond to the message in belief (Calvinists teach “Total Inability,” the “T” of the Calvinist acronym “TULIP,” that is, that men and women are completely dead in their sins and have absolutely no ability to respond in believing faith to the gospel of Christ Jesus). In view of the multitude of verses that call people to believe and thus be saved, e.g., John 3:16-18; Acts 16:30-31; John 5:24; John 6:29, 40; John 7:37-38 (ALL are welcome); John 11:25-26, this (Calvinist) teaching is UNBIBLICAL and illogical.]

MacArthur continues: “Any tension you have between that and the doctrine of divine election and predestination; any tension you feel in those areas, I feel. I feel the same tension. I ask the same question. I don’t know that there’s some kind of quick answer to the question. I am, however, happy to concede that God can resolve all things that I can’t (crowd laughter and applause). Really! I don’t expect the view and you shouldn’t expect of me to be able to unscrew the ‘unscrutable’ [inscrutable?]. Uh, you, you, really don’t think that I’m going to solve all the vast theological dilemmas that have existed since the Scriptures were penned. [Interviewer inserts, ‘Actually, some people do.’ (crowd laughter; then MacArthur continues)] Ya; the best answer to this question is, ‘My brother, I feel your pain’ (crowd laughter).”

[Inserted Comment: Really, Dr. MacArthur? The best answers that you can give are, “I feel the same tension,” “I ask the same question,” “I feel your pain”? Might it be that these issues are “painful” and “unresolvable” only because you view the Bible and the gospel through skewed Calvinist lenses? Christ called us, not to live in tension, anguish and fear, but in trust and rest in his finished work on our behalf. Matthew 11:28 “Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest.” ]

Mac Arthur: “I, uh, I’m not here to give you an answer, but, I will tell you this: I do not believe that Jesus died for nobody. I believe he died for somebody. And I believe he died specifically for those who would believe in him, and those who believe in him are those who are regenerated by the Holy Spirit based upon the eternal sovereign electing purpose of God. I think his atonement was an actual one, not a potential one. I don’t think that it was a general one; I think it was a specific one. I think it was a real death for sin. The issue here is the nature of the atonement.”

[Inserted Comment: Wow, Dr. MacArthur, you are speaking at a leadership conference at a question and answer session, and you say, “I’m not here to give you an answer”? Let’s look at some of your statements: “I do not believe that Jesus died for nobody. I believe he died for somebody.” Response to MacArthur: The Bible declares that Jesus died for everyone, for the world: John 6:33 “The bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto THE WORLD.” John 3:16 “For God so loved THE WORLD, that he gave his only begotten Son, that WHOSOEVER BELIEVETH in him should not perish, but have eternal life.” 1 John 2:2 “And he is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the sins of THE WHOLE WORLD.” 2 Peter 3:9 “The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some me count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, NOT WILLING THAT ANY SHOULD PERISH but that ALL should come to repentance.” 1 Timothy 2:3-6 “For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who WILL HAVE ALL MEN TO BE SAVED, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who GAVE HIMSELF A RANSOM FOR ALL, to be testified in due time.”

Yet, sadly, NOT ALL THE WORLD WILL RECEIVE his gracious gift (Ephesians 2:8-9) of salvation: John 3:36 (which clearly demonstrates man’s free will to accept or reject God’s gracious gift of salvation through believing in his Son, cf. Matthew 23:37; John 3:18) “He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life; and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.”]

To view the entire article, go to:

http://califgracer.wordpress.com/

198 Comments

Posted in Assurance, Assurance of salvation, Bible, Calvinism, Christian, Christianity, Cross, Eternal Security, Faith, Free Grace, Grace, Hope, John MacArthur, Joy, Lordship Faith, Lordship Salvation, Love of God, Once saved always saved, Peace, Reformed theology, Religion, Replacement theology, Resurrection, Salvation, Secure salvation, Security of believers, Security of the believer

Notes on Calvin and Calvinism: Was John Calvin Really a Calvinist?

Posted on February 11, 2013 by | 73 comments

A Possible Sheep in Wolves’ Clothes or a Hard-core Calvinist Through and Through?—Notes on Calvin and Calvinism: Was John Calvin Really a Calvinist?
.
Calvin or not

Sources:

Dr. Phil Stringer, “Was John Calvin a Calvinist?” Grace Leadership Conference, 2011, Quentin Road Bible Baptist Church, Lake Zurich, IL.

Kent Kelly, “Inside the Tulip,” Southern Pines, NC, 1986.

Calvin’s Commentaries and Calvin’s “Institutes.”

Introduction:

In recent years, there has been a growing trend in Christianity for people to claim that John Calvin, the founder of modern Calvinism, did not really believe or teach what is being taught by Calvinists today. Many want to hold Calvin up as some sort of an iconic figure of the Protestant Reformation while, at the same time, they wish to distance themselves from the radical unbiblical teachings attributed to Calvin. They claim that the Five Points of Calvinism, known by the acronym “TULIP,” were actually invented by the Synod of Dort, over fifty years after Calvin’s death, having little or nothing to do with what Calvin actually taught. Some even want to go so far as to claim that Calvin really taught a Free Grace gospel. Startling!

Who are these people, mentioned above?

1. “New” Calvinists. This group generally holds to the modern five points of Calvinism but stands against “double predestination,” sometimes referred to as, “hypercalvinism,” the teaching that God predestined some for heaven and some for hell (neither can do anything to change that fate). They claim that Calvin did not teach double predestination.
2. “Moderate” Calvinists. They hold to only one to four of the five points of Calvinism. Most from this category would object to “limited atonement,” (the “L” of TULIP) the Calvinist false, unbiblical teaching that Christ died only for the elect. Some “moderate” Calvinists also deny that their concept of Calvinism teaches Lordship “Salvation.” Some also deny that Calvin taught Lordship “Salvation.”
3. Free Grace believers. Now, this is astonishing! But, yes, there are actually some who hold to the Free Grace Gospel of the Bible who think that John Calvin was, in reality, a Free Grace theologian! “He has just gotten a bad rap,” they say. How naïve is this! I submit that those who make this claim have read only short isolated clips of what Calvin wrote. Folks such as this love to answer Calvinists by saying, “Well, even Calvin himself didn’t believe what you teach.” Frankly, it is an impossible stretch to demonstrate that Calvin taught Free Grace theology. His standard pattern of writing throughout his commentaries is, when confronted with a Bible text that unmistakably declares that Christ died for the sins of ALL the world and, further, when the Bible explains the Gospel message of God’s Free Grace salvation by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone, Calvin initially states what the text says plainly (Free Grace); HOWEVER, he quickly filters the text through his preconceived skewed theological construct, restating, contradicting and denying what the text of the Bible clearly declares. This theological filter appears to have originated from his background of being a Roman Catholic Priest and, for a time, a humanist. He also held the teachings of Augustine in the highest regard.

Was Calvin simply a moderate or limited Calvinist, a Free Grace Gospel teacher who has been misquoted, or, in reality, a strong Calvinist or Hyper-Calvinist? Let’s look at some quotations from Calvin and see what he really said.

From Calvin’s Commentaries
1. John 6:33 KJV: “For the bread of God is he which cometh down from heaven, and giveth life unto the world.” Calvin’s response: “This passage teaches that the whole world is dead to God, except so far as Christ quickens it, because life will be found nowhere else than in him.” NOTE: Calvin’s comment here affirms four of the five points of Calvinism (T, U, L, I) and denies that God gave his Son to the whole world (while God’s gift of salvation through belief in his Son is offered to the whole world, sadly, many will reject his gift—Matt. 23:37).
2. John 3:16 KJV: “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” Calvin’s response: Calvin begins by acknowledging the clear meaning of the verse, but then quickly reverses his position: Calvin: “Let us remember, on the other hand, that while life is promised universally to all who believe in Christ, still faith is not common to all. For Christ is made known and held out to the view of all, but the elect alone are they whose eyes God opens, that they may seek him by faith.” Additionally, Calvin said, “We must not assume that ‘the world’ means every single individual human being, ‘world’ refers to those who have the capacity and ability to believe.” NOTE: Calvin affirms in this statement, unconditional election, limited atonement and irresistible grace (U, L and I of the Calvinist acronym TULIP). Dr. Phil Stringer relates further that Calvin repeatedly says throughout his Commentaries that “all,” or, “the world” mean, to him, all kinds of human beings, some out of each class or race of people, or ranks of life, not every human being. Calvin, thereby, attempts to dodge the clear straightforward meaning of “all” or “all the world,” in Scripture, as meaning EVERYONE. As Dr. Stringer put it so aptly, “Even a child can understand that all means ALL.”
3. Matthew 23:37 KJV: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets, and stonest them which are sent unto thee, how often would I have gathered thy children together, even as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wings, and ye would not! Calvin’s response: “Again, when the sophists seize on this passage, to prove free will, and to set aside the secret predestination of God, the answer is easy. God wills to gather all men, say they; and therefore all are at liberty to come, and their will does not depend on the election of God. I reply: The will of God, which is here mentioned, must be judged from the result. For since by his word he calls all men indiscriminately to salvation, and since the end of preaching is, that all should betake themselves to his guardianship and protection, it may justly be said that he wills to gather all to himself. It is not, therefore, the secret purpose of God, but his will, which is manifested by the nature of the word, that is here described; for, undoubtedly, whomsoever he efficaciously wills to gather, he inwardly draws by his Spirit, and does not merely invite by the outward voice of man.” NOTE: Calvin holds to the classic Calvinist denial of free will while affirming the Calvinist U, L and I.
4. 2 Peter 3:9 KJV: “The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.” Calvin’s response: once again, Calvin makes an initial affirmation of what the verse plainly states, but he quickly denies his affirmation with the following statement, “But it may be asked, If God wishes none to perish, why is it that so many do perish? To this my answer is, that no mention is here made of the hidden purpose of God, according to which the reprobate are doomed to their own ruin, but only of his will as made known to us in the gospel. For God there stretches forth his hand without a difference to all, but lays hold only of those, to lead them to himself, whom he has chosen before the foundation of the world.” Comment: Calvin clearly twists the clear meaning of the text, pushing his notion of limited atonement.
5. 1 John 2:2 KJV: “And he is the propitiation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world.” Calvin’s response: “Here a question may be raised, how have the sins of the whole world been expiated? I pass by the dotages of the fanatics, who under this pretense extend salvation to all the reprobate, and therefore to Satan himself. Such a monstrous thing deserves no refutation. . . . It seems to me that the Apostle is to be understood as speaking only of all those who believe, whether Jews or Gentiles, over the whole world. Then under the word all or whole, he does not include the reprobate, but designates those who should believe as well as those who were then scattered through various parts of the world.” Once again, Calvin denies the simple straightforward message of 1 John 2:2, while pushing his own theological platform of limited atonement.
6. James 2:17 KJV: “Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.” Calvin remarks, “He [James] says that faith is dead, being by itself, that is, when destitute of good works. We hence conclude that it is indeed no faith, for when dead, it does not properly retain the name.” James 2:18 KJV: “Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works; shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.” Calvin’s response: “Shew me by works thy faith; for since it is not an idle thing, it must necessarily be proved by works. The meaning then is, Unless thy faith brings forth fruits, I deny that thou hast any faith. This verse is a key to the meaning of James: faith is to be proved by works; then faith properly justifies and saves, and works prove its genuineness.” COMMENT: Calvin makes the standard error of Lordship “Salvation” teachers in misinterpreting James. James’ epistle clearly speaks to believers about the quality of their faith, NOT the reality of faith. Calvin unmistakably declares the Calvinist teaching of perseverance, the “P” of the Calvinist TULIP. Calvinist perseverance is nothing other than the false teaching of Lordship “Salvation.” For a detailed look at this subject, see Dr. Tom Cucuzza’s outstanding book, “Secure Forever! God’s Promise or Our Perseverance,” St. Cloud, MN: Xulon Press, 2008 (see the link on the right column of Expreacherman.com).
7. Finally, if there were any doubt left in anyone’s mind about where Calvin stood on what is known today as, “Calvinism,” look at this main title in Calvin’s “Institutes” section dealing with the subject of predestination. The title itself leaves no doubt on Calvin’s position: “Of the Eternal Election by Which God has Predestined Some to Salvation and Others Predestination in Hell.” This title and statement of his position, declares Calvin to be, not only a Calvinist, but a HYPERCALVINIST!

73 Comments

Posted in Assurance, Assurance of salvation, Bible, Calvinism, Chan, Christianity, Cross, Easy Believism, Eternal Security, Faith, Francis Chan, Free Grace, John MacArthur, John Piper, Lordship, Lordship Faith, Lordship Salvation, Once saved always saved, Paul Washer, Reformed theology, Religion, Replacement theology, Salvation, Secure salvation, Security of believers, Security of the believer

Paul Washer, Lordship Salvation: Paul Washer Redefines the Plan of Salvation, Obliterating Assurance of Salvation

Posted on August 8, 2012 by | 54 comments

Source: “The Gift Nobody Wants,” True Disciple 2008, by Paul Washer, Preached at Grace Community Church, San Antonio, TX, December 4, 2008. Available for download at SermonAudio.com, Online Sermons: http://www.sermonaudio.com/gcc

The following are some quotations from Paul Washer’s sermon listed above, along with a few associated comments. At the end of this post is an excerpt from Dr. Charlie Bing’s Doctoral Dissertation on Lordship Salvation. That section deals with the true biblical meaning of the term “repentance.”

Paul Washer Quotations:

In a not-so-veiled mocking caricature of the common invitation for people to trust in Christ alone by grace through faith for salvation (Ephesians 2:8-9;), Washer says the following (pp. 1-2):

“‘Who would like to repeat this prayer after me? Oh, I see that hand. Come forward.’ We see none of that [in Scripture]. But the message of our Lord we see, ‘Repent and believe.’ . . . It is only until we come into this modern time that we hear nothing of repentance and faith unless it is redefined in the context of receiving Jesus which means pray this prayer and ask him into your heart and if you have done that sincerely you can stand on the fact that you have been born again. Now that is serious, folks. This is serious.”

Comment: In actuality, the biblical gospel of grace never says to simply say or recite a formulaic prayer or to “come forward” to be saved. It says, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved” (Acts 16:31).

Washer continues: “The reason there were just as many people and still are just as many people going out of the church as coming into the church is because the gospel that we are preaching is not the gospel. It is a truncated version of the gospel and the invitation we give cannot even be found in the New Testament. Now does anyone have a problem with that? The reason why they are leaving, well, they went out from us because they were not of us. They were not truly converted.”

Comment: This is the standard “out” for Lordship Salvation teaching. If anyone, true believer or not, ceases attending church, becomes lukewarm, or seems to have strayed from the faith, the standard LS response is to simply write them off as, “never having been genuinely saved to begin with.”

Paul Washer discusses (p. 4) Mark 1:15:
“‘The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand; repent and believe in the gospel.’ Now both of these commands are in the present tense imperative and I believe there is an issue here. I believe that there is something going on that will cure the malady that is so frequent today in America. It is almost as if Christ is saying, ‘The time is fulfilled and the kingdom of God is at hand. Now spend the rest of your life repenting and believing.'”

Response: In reference to Mark 1:15 above, as well as John 3:16, the present tense usage in no way mandates that pisteuo must be interpreted as continuous ongoing belief (the default position of Lordship Faith teaching). Quoting Bible scholar, Fred Chay, PhD, “Continual belief is no more in mind in John 3:16 than continual baptizing [also present tense usage “the baptizing one” meaning that John’s baptizing would have to continue while he was imprisoned and even after his death!] is in view in Mark 6:14. With this in mind, it becomes clear that it is dangerous indeed to assume that the normative use of the word pisteuo is always continuous action, especially in the light of the fact that it cannot even be assumed that the present tense in general assumes continuous aspect” (Chay and Correia, “The Faith that Saves,” Grace Line, Inc., 2008, pp. 48-52—available from Free Grace Alliance) http://www.freegracealliance.com/ .

Washer continues, as he describes a man who claims to have trusted in Christ alone as his Savior some ten years earlier:

“They don’t realize that the evidence, the raw bone biblical evidence that there was one time in your life that you repented unto salvation is that you continue repenting until today and growing in repentance. They do not realize that if at one time in your life you believed unto salvation, the evidence of that will be you continue believing unto salvation and growing in faith.”

Comment: the standard Lordship Faith tactic or approach is to place the onus of salvation back onto the person; the individual must continue repenting and believing in order to validate or to prove his true belief; he can never rest in the finished work of Christ on the cross on his behalf. Mr. Washer, your approach decimates assurance of salvation! (we are kept by the grace and power of God—John 10:27-30).

Paul Washer Quotation (p. 5): “A person who can show no mark of the sanctifying work of God in their life has no assurance that they have been justified. Now that is biblical teaching.”

Comment: Again, assurance of salvation is placed, not upon the finished work of Christ on the cross of Calvary (see Corinthians 15:1-8), but back upon the individual to prove or maintain his or her salvation—a standard teaching of Lordship Salvation and a real assurance killer!

Washer Quotation (p. 20): “People ask me, ‘Is there free will?’ I say, ‘Let’s not even answer that question. Let’s just go a little bit farther.’ The question is not: Is there free will? The question is: Is there good will? You are free to will, but will only [act] according to your nature and your nature is evil, so what you are going to do is evil unless God comes in and gives you a new heart, unless God regenerates you.”

Comment: Standard Calvinist unbiblical plan of salvation, that is, God must regenerate the sinner prior to his coming to faith. This false teaching flies in the face of the multitude of calls to salvation in the Bible (to be received—through free will—by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone), e.g., John 3:16, Acts 16:31; 19:4, John 11:26 (calls to believe in Christ for salvation are throughout the Gospel of John), 1 John 5:13.

Washer’s example of a child: Washer uses the example of a young child regarding the plan of salvation [no name or gender will be given] (pp.24-25). The child was concerned with life and death; “I don’t want to die,” they said. He assured the youngster that, although death is always a possibility for everyone, that they were young and healthy and although no one knows the future, we trust in God. But the child pleaded, “I want God.” Washer asked, “You do?” “Yes, I want God,” the child replied. Washer said, “Well, you have heard the gospel . . . You know that you are to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ.”
The child responded, “Oh, . . ., I believe. I believe in Jesus.” Washer pondered what to say next: “Now, what do I do with them? Do I sit there and go, ‘[name withheld], you don’t believe. You just don’t believe. You are not fully understanding what is going on here’? But do I say, ‘Oh, [name withheld], you believe and you are saved. Let’s go tell [name withheld]’? That is what most people would do. But, you see, a discerning heart would recognize after talking to the [child]. [They] were not weeping over sin. [They] were not weeping over an offense against God. [They] were weeping over self-preservation. [They] didn’t want to die. And so what did I do? I said, ‘[name withheld],’ I redirected [them]. I said, ‘[name withheld], I want you to know something. If you truly believe in the Lord Jesus Christ as the one who can take away your sins, any [one] who truly believes and trusts in him, recognizes the depth, something in the depth of [their] sin, turns from it and believes in Jesus is saved. And if you are doing that, if you are really doing that, that has really happened to you, you are saved. But now let me tell you something. The evidence of your salvation is going to be God beginning to work in your life, directing you towards Scripture, pointing out sin in your life, making you contrite and things such as that over disobedience to your parents. And [certain people] are just going to watch you, [name withheld]. And [they] are going to use the Scripture and just help you as you go through these next months and years to discern whether you have truly come to know him.”

Response: read the story of the Philippian jailer in Acts 16. There was a violent earthquake. The prison doors had broken open. He was distraught that the prisoners might have fled and he feared for his life. Verses 30-33 tell of the man’s miraculous conversion, along with his family: “And brought them [Paul and Silas] out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house. And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house. And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.”

Observation: notice that when the jailer and his family trusted in Christ alone for salvation, Paul and Silas accepted them IMMEDIATELY as brothers and sisters in Christ and then baptized them as an outward symbol of the new inward reality. Paul and Silas did not say that they were going to watch the jailer and his family to make sure that they were truly saved.

Repentance and Salvation

The following is a brief excerpt from Dr. Charlie Bing’s Doctoral Dissertation on Lordship Salvation. This review section deals with the topics, “Repentance and Salvation.” In it, Dr. Bing highlights some of the errors of the Lordship Salvation position on repentance. Below is the excerpt and the associated link to read the chapter in its entirety:

http://www.gracelife.org/resources/dissertation.asp?id=chp6

Repentance and Salvation

The controversy over repentance concerns the scope of its meaning in soteriological contexts. The Lordship Salvation position takes repentance to mean a turning from sin and sins which is necessary for salvation.
By association with metamelomai and epistrepho it is argued that the word metanoeo denotes both regret for sins and turning from sins. The study concluded that this argument is not supported from biblical usage. Furthermore, “repent” is not an accurate translation of metanoeo, which has the basic meaning “change the mind.”
Key Bible passages considered did not substantiate the Lordship understanding of repentance. An evaluation of the passages that concern the offer of salvation by John the Baptist (Matt 3:2, 11; Mark 1:4/Luke 3:3; Acts 13:24), Jesus Christ (Matt 4:17/Mark 1:15; Matt 11:20-21/Luke 10:13; Matt 9:13/Mark 2:17/Luke 5:32; Matt 12:41/Luke 11:32; Luke 13:3, 5; Luke 15; 16:30; 24:47), and the Apostles (Acts 2:38; 3:19; 8:22; 14:15 [with 1 Thess 1:9]; 17:30; 20:21) showed that metanoeo should be taken in its basic sense of “change the mind.” In these passages, that about which the mind changed was not always sin or sins, but could also be God or one’s opinion about Jesus Christ. Turning from sins is more accurately a result of repentance in some of the passages and should not be confused with repentance itself.
When sins are closely associated with repentance in Bible passages (2 Cor 12:21; Heb 6:1; Rev 2; 3; 9:20-21; 16:9), it is usually Christians who are in view, not unbelievers. Turning from specific sins is not required of the unbeliever in order to secure salvation. The exception of the unbelievers in Revelation 9:20-21 and 16:9 is not an offer of salvation.
Passages used by Lordship proponents to define repentance in terms of its fruits or works (Matt 3:8/Luke 3:8; Acts 26:20) did not support that understanding. It was argued that though there is a logical relationship between repentance and its fruits, the term repentance itself does not require resultant works for its meaning.

54 Comments

Posted in Assurance, Assurance of salvation, Bible, Calvinism, Chan, Christian, Christianity, Conservative, contemplative, Cross, Danger, Easy Believism, Eternal Security, Faith, Francis Chan, Free Grace, Glenn Beck, Grace, HELL, Hope, John MacArthur, John Piper, Joy, Lordship, Lordship Faith, Lordship Salvation, Love of God, Once saved always saved, Reformed theology, Religion, Replacement theology, Resurrection, Salvation, Secure salvation, Security of believers, Security of the believer, Thansgiving

Similarities Re: Dominionism, Calvinism, Replacement “theology,” and Lordship “salvation”

Posted on September 20, 2011 by | 62 comments

I propose a few questions based on observations and comments on some of our more popular recent posts. Shall we discuss Questions and Similarities Regarding Dominionism, Calvinism, Replacement “theology,” and Lordship “salvation” (LS)?

1) Can we blame any or all of these four errors on a lack of clear Dispensational teaching of God’s Word?

2) Aren’t Old Testament verses taken out of context, in many cases, to justify virtually every one of these four philosophies?

Example for Dominionism: “He shall have dominion also from sea to sea, and from the river unto the ends of the earth.” Psalm 72:8

Many use this and other  verses to justify a Dominionist “theology” — but due to a lack of dispensational teaching and understanding — they wrongly assume that verse and many more apply to today. One can see how they take verses about God’s earthly Dominion in the future and misplace them into today. This teaching  also seems to be similar to certain versions of “Kingdom Now” teaching.

3) Or, are these teachings deliberately pushed to glorify a selfish teacher or church rather that God’s Salvation by Grace through Faith in Jesus Christ alone?

4) Could we say that Calvinist/Reformed “theology” is the teaching which holds the greatest responsibility for Replacement “theology“?

5) Aren’t all Lordship “salvationists”  — Calvinists? Are there any exceptions? Is it not true that LS, Dominionism and Calvinism use the Calvinist catchword “Sovereignty” to justify their theory of God’s Sovereign Dominion today and likewise the Replacement “theology” of today?

I have posed these as questions, as I believe most are true. We will be interested in your respectful comments. Thanks

Eternal Life — No Cost to You! << Click

62 Comments

Posted in Atheist, Calvinism, Chan, Christian, Christianity, Danger, Dominionism, Emerging, Faith, Free Grace, Grace, John MacArthur, Lordship Salvation, Reformed theology, Religion, Replacement theology, Rick Warren, Salvation