Lordship salvation vs. "easy believism"

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

GraceAndTruth

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2015
2,031
637
113
Early Christians believed in different ways also. See if any of these sound familiar even in these forums today.

Permanence of personal salvation
What the early Christians believed


What the early Christians believed:
The teachings of early Christians are important to us today. From circa 30 CE (when Jesus was executed) to 200 CE (the end of the first century CE), believers were not very far removed from the direct teachings of Jesus and the apostles. Various Christian groups during much of the first century had direct access to the teachings of Paul and the former disciples in the form of his lectures and letters. By the late first century, this knowledge had been passed on to elders (a.k.a. Church Fathers), who wrote extensively on matters of belief. None of these elders were great theologians; none developed intricate systems of codified Christian beliefs and practices. That was to come later in the history of the Christian church.

The early "mainline" Christian movement unanimously believed that a saved person could lose their salvation. (By "mainline" we refer to Pauline Christianity which gradually evolved into the established Christian church. Authority eventually became concentrated in the five bishops or patriarchs located in Alexandria, Antioch, Constantinople, Jerusalem and Rome.) Early Christians believed that continued obedience was required of the believer in order to for them to maintain their salvation intact. Some examples in the writings from that era are: 1

Irenaeus (120 to 205 CE) was the overseer of the church at Lyons, France. He believed that a person could only be saved once. If they performed some evil deed, then God would permanently reject them. A Christian had "only one swing at the cat." Irenaeus explained this very clearly in his book "Against Heresies," Book 4, Chapter 27, Section 2:

"Christ will not die again on behalf of those who now commit sin because death shall no more have dominion over Him...we should beware, lest somehow, after [we have attained] the knowledge of Christ, if we do things displeasing to God, we [will] obtain no further forgiveness of sins, but rather be shut out from His kingdom."​

Tertullian (140 to 230 CE) was the elder in the church at Carthage, North Africa. He wrote in his book "On Repentance," Chapter 6:

"Some people act as though God were under an obligation to bestow even on the unworthy His intended gift...For do not many afterwards fall out of grace? Is not this gift taken away from many?"

Cyprian (200 to 258 CE) was an overseer of the church in Carthage, North Africa. Referring to Matthew 10:22, he wrote in his book "Unity of the Church," Sec. 21:

"It is written 'He who endures to the end, the same shall be saved.' So whatever precedes the end is only a step by which we ascend to the summit of salvation. It is not the final point wherein we have already gained the full result of the ascent."​

He appears to have believed that an individual only attains salvation at the end of their life. Everything before their death are just steps on the way towards salvation. One might infer that a saved person could stumble in sin before they died and never attain salvation.​

Reference used:

  1. D.W. Bercot, "Will the Real Heretics Please Stand Up: A New Look at Today's Evangelical Church in the Light of Early Christianity," Scroll Publishing, Tyler, TX, (1989), Pages 72-73.
The earliest church fathers writings....so called....were never part of the bible (as you know).....therefor what they believe is irrevelant. However I use them for understanding customs and history of their time.....and some of thier earliest beliefs were helpful on established doctine Sometimes you find a gem of a tale....like the apostle John being boiled in oil and walking away from it.

For instance Tertullian's letter to Perpetua verified that infant baptism would just get the baby wet. His letter to the Jews was to inform them why they had to go through the tribulation.
.........then he went south and joined the idiot MONTANIISTS!!
so,....they had their feet of clay
 

OIC1965

Well-known member
Sep 19, 2020
2,754
1,016
113
My Point is that John Calvin followed Augustine which in turn everything else follows. Calvinists don't argue against this .
Yes, John Calvin agreed with Augustine on soteriology. Yet you still have not demonstrated that Augustine was a gnostic...and you won’t because he wasn’t.
 

OIC1965

Well-known member
Sep 19, 2020
2,754
1,016
113
The earliest church fathers writings....so called....were never part of the bible (as you know).....therefor what they believe is irrevelant. However I use them for understanding customs and history of their time.....and some of thier earliest beliefs were helpful on established doctine Sometimes you find a gem of a tale....like the apostle John being boiled in oil and walking away from it.

For instance Tertullian's letter to Perpetua verified that infant baptism would just get the baby wet. His letter to the Jews was to inform them why they had to go through the tribulation.
.........then he went south and joined the idiot MONTANIISTS!!
so,....they had their feet of clay
Yes. None were infallible.
 

throughfaith

Well-known member
Aug 4, 2020
10,467
1,593
113
Same here. o_O

Seems like JM is hoping to cover all his bases. Calvinism and LS?
What is Lordship Salvation?Lordship Salvation for Dummies
Lordship Salvation says that one must not only believe in Jesus as the Savior, but one must yield one’s life to Him as Lord of your life. According to Lordship Salvation, a person can believe in Jesus for everlasting life and not be saved because that faith must be joined by a commitment to serve Him one’s entire life
Calvinsm IS lordship salvation.
 

OIC1965

Well-known member
Sep 19, 2020
2,754
1,016
113
My Point is that John Calvin followed Augustine which in turn everything else follows. Calvinists don't argue against this .
Again, I’m not a calvinist, so fire away at Calvinism all you want. What I am opposed to is calling them Gnostics or gnostic leaning. I oppose that because it’s not true, imo. Now If you want to try to convince me, go ahead.

But ECF is not going to convince me. Especially since I happen to know a bit about both Calvinism and Gnosticism.
 

GraceAndTruth

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2015
2,031
637
113
I'd like to give a heads up for the Biship of Hierapolis.......Papias who lived from 60 to 130 AD. He wrote extensively....
 

OIC1965

Well-known member
Sep 19, 2020
2,754
1,016
113
Lordship salvation in Calvinsm is defined in their phrase ' Faith alone. But that faith is never alone. The consequence of the system ,especially the P in all practical sense is works salvation. This is why Calvinsm is a legalistic system.
Faith is never alone. Faith alone saves, but faith is not alone. She has two sisters named Hope and Love, sir.
 

OIC1965

Well-known member
Sep 19, 2020
2,754
1,016
113
Maybe LS is just a way to express the natural change in the born again person, and outward expression of an inward change.
I would not have an issue with it if defined this way.
 

GraceAndTruth

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2015
2,031
637
113
I would not have an issue with it if defined this way.
me nither, I know from my own experience that there have been changes in me......not by my will but by a change of mind, putting on the mind of Christ Progress of change........thought - desire - action
 

OIC1965

Well-known member
Sep 19, 2020
2,754
1,016
113
me nither, I know from my own experience that there have been changes in me......not by my will but by a change of mind, putting on the mind of Christ Progress of change........thought - desire - action
Today’s church teaches discipling as if it’s an option. It’s not. It’s a command.

The reason why so many converts are not becoming disciples, could it be due to either our message, our methods, or both?
 

OIC1965

Well-known member
Sep 19, 2020
2,754
1,016
113
Last night, in YouTube, I listened to gotquetions.org, on the subject of lordship salvation. The speaker said that only lordship salvation saves. Anything less than that, is "easy believism" - and isn't able to save anyone. I also listened to John MacArthur in Youtube - preaching on the subject. He said Jesus and the apostles preached the need for repentance and the need to accept Jesus as Lord, in order for anyone to get saved. He mentioned a lot of Bible verses giving proof of this. He said many think they're saved, by praying the "sinner's prayer of repentance" - but make no effort to change their lives for the better. He said the word "repentance" means, "changing one's way of thinking - plans to do things differently." Both of these speakers said that belief isn't enough to save anyone. Only if coupled with repentance, does it save anyone. And many verses mentioned - showed repentace as preceding baptism and salvation - that's how the verses were worded! The verses mentioned repentance, before mentioningn all the other.
I've observed, that many evidently - true Christians believe that repentance isn't a necessary part to receiving salvation. I believe some of these Christians are true Christians. Since they appear to be walking in obedience to Christ in their daily lives. But their theology - their way of explaining it to others is incorrect. And so has the potential for misleading other people into "easy believism." With the result of their dying without Christ, often.
I talked to the husband of the home we clean house at yesterday about this, and he said that he has also noticed that many true Christians don't understand the subject the same as we do - who do see the need for repentance. He agreed it is hard for them to change their views on the subject, as they've learned incorrectly on it from habit and through people who taught that way. He said we must be loving towards them, though we can't agree on this subject - which is true, according to the Bible. But we dhould pray that they come to understand correctly on the subject.

I believe in salvation by Grace through faith. My question is this; is the modern church ignoring the great commission by making as many converts as they can, but not discipling people?

Lordship/ discipleship is after saved by grace through faith. Yet Jesus commanded us to make disciples, teaching them to observe all His commandments

Have we cut that part (teaching CONVERTS to observe all He commands) out of our methodology to make Christianity more “ user friendly”?
 

GraceAndTruth

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2015
2,031
637
113
Today’s church teaches discipling as if it’s an option. It’s not. It’s a command.

The reason why so many converts are not becoming disciples, could it be due to either our message, our methods, or both?
If they don't like the message, why be there?'
I'm not sure why .... for myself I had a great desire to read the bible immediately. So I did......started with Genesis and went through the whole bible. I do not know why people who claim to be born again do not have that hunger for the scriptures.

I think MacArthur as one of those who believed with joy but then fell away......the fame and fortune overcame the desire for truth and it was replaced with the desire to be KNOWN.

I am a "calvinist" unashamed of giving all the glory to God. I have studied a lot and still do after 40+ years.
I still have that desire to know. I see other churches with other doctrines dying. The people are not getting fed with anything stronger than milk (for their baby theology). Calvinism is strong....there is no scripture that does not come into agreement with all other scripture from that viewpoint. Calvinism glorifies God completely

But that is just me.

What do you think?
 

GraceAndTruth

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2015
2,031
637
113
Anyway, 'go and make disciples' was a command to the apostles. Which they did. Discipleship is not a call to salvation but a call to higher understanding........to grow in knowledge of God's word. Disciples must be born again before they can grow.
 

soggykitten

Well-known member
Jul 3, 2020
2,322
1,369
113
The earliest church fathers writings....so called....were never part of the bible (as you know).....therefor what they believe is irrevelant. However I use them for understanding customs and history of their time.....and some of thier earliest beliefs were helpful on established doctine Sometimes you find a gem of a tale....like the apostle John being boiled in oil and walking away from it.

For instance Tertullian's letter to Perpetua verified that infant baptism would just get the baby wet. His letter to the Jews was to inform them why they had to go through the tribulation.
.........then he went south and joined the idiot MONTANIISTS!!
so,....they had their feet of clay
They didn't necessarily influence scripture as we know it today. However, their writings did influence the early church.
 

soggykitten

Well-known member
Jul 3, 2020
2,322
1,369
113
Yes, John Calvin agreed with Augustine on soteriology. Yet you still have not demonstrated that Augustine was a gnostic...and you won’t because he wasn’t.
He was pre-conversion. He was in faith to a practice known as Manichaeism
 

OIC1965

Well-known member
Sep 19, 2020
2,754
1,016
113
If they don't like the message, why be there?'
I'm not sure why .... for myself I had a great desire to read the bible immediately. So I did......started with Genesis and went through the whole bible. I do not know why people who claim to be born again do not have that hunger for the scriptures.

I think MacArthur as one of those who believed with joy but then fell away......the fame and fortune overcame the desire for truth and it was replaced with the desire to be KNOWN.

I am a "calvinist" unashamed of giving all the glory to God. I have studied a lot and still do after 40+ years.
I still have that desire to know. I see other churches with other doctrines dying. The people are not getting fed with anything stronger than milk (for their baby theology). Calvinism is strong....there is no scripture that does not come into agreement with all other scripture from that viewpoint. Calvinism glorifies God completely

But that is just me.

What do you think?
I agree with Calvinists on some things like Sovereignty of God, faith itself is born of Grace, pretemporal election and predestination, ( but I don’t hold to double predestination) and other things. I have disagreements with much of the Tulip though.

For example I believe that man in His fallenness is depraved, but yet I believe in faith before regeneration, which is contrary to Calvinists doctrine of depravity). I hold this position of faith/regeneration logical order because of scriptures like the one in Ephesians that says “ having believed you were sealed with the Spirit”. This would put, imo, regeneration simultaneous with faith. Some argue regeneration after faith or faith after regeneration, but I don’t find either of those arguments convincing. It could be that regeneration is after faith, but I don’t see it that way in a temporal sense. I believe the instant we believe, we are regenerated. I do hold to the logical order of faith then regeneration because of ( I think it’s Ephesians 1:11 or 1:13).

I hold that Christ died for all men because of the passage in Hebrews that states that He tasted death for every man. But I also believe that only those who believe will be saved by it. I also believe that God knew who would believe no later than He knew Christ would be the Lamb slain. All of it, the Fall, the redemption, The elect has been eternally known by God. To say otherwise would be open theism, which I reject.

Therefore I have no problem with believing that God predestined us to adoption, to an inheritance, and to being conformed to the image of His Son before the foundation of the world. Perfect Omniscience would surely include perfect foreknowledge.

So I am not a Calvinist, but on the other hand, I also find many of the arguments employed by non Calvinists to be problematic.

i Am not in full agreement with Calvinism, but I find some of the arguments that non Calvinists use to be more disagreeable to me than my disagreements with Calvinism.