ajchurney Posted February 21, 2014 Group: Junior Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 3 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 158 Content Per Day: 0.04 Reputation: 101 Days Won: 3 Joined: 01/30/2014 Status: Offline Share Posted February 21, 2014 Oldschool2, I am not a follower of Curtis Hutson, whoever he is. One thing I can say is that Galatians has NOTHING to do with lordship salvation, but about Judaising. The Galatians were trying to be sanctified by following the Law instead of continuing in the grace of Jesus Christ, and the resulting empowering of the Spirit. Lordship salvation is simply a matter of defining the terms "belief", and "trust" according to the teaching of Jesus Himself. Nowhere have you answered even close to sufficiently the real questions raised by Jesus' defining of the terms and requirements to become his disciple and enter the Kingdom. All that is being done is setting up a straw man "works" argument and knocking it down. Now you are quoting a man who is completely artificially injecting Lordship issue into the Galatian Law VS Grace rhetoric of Paul. Loardship salvation is simply a clarification of the true Gospel, not "another gospel". It is inflammatory and error to try to put the "false gospel" label on the idea that Jesus must be recognized as Lord in order to be saved. The argument is that this is one of the things one must BELIEVE concerning the LORD Jesus!! This is so simple that I am actually surprised that there is even any controversy here. I am tempted to start quoting a book full of verses to support this very simple truth, but I shouldn't have to!!! Why are people trying to refute the fact that Jesus is Lord and Savior??!!?? Let me ask a simple question: If one can be saved without believing that Jesus is their Lord and Master, then exactly who are they believing that He is?? Is He THEIR servant instead of the other way around? Is He just some great teacher, but NOT their Lord?? What is Jesus to a truly saved person if He is not their Lord?? Or are you saying it doesn't matter one wit who they believe Jesus is, as long as they believe in the cross and Resurrection? All this is about is defining the Jesus that we are trusting for our salvation. Were we not warned about believing in another Christ as well as another gospel as you quoted? Is not the scriptural Jesus LORD!!??!! It seems there is a willful ignorance to the FACT that there are all kinds of brands of Christianity teaching watered down and even completely false versions of Jesus and His teachings. If Jesus Himself and the ENTIRETY of the NT teaches that Jesus Lord of all, Lord of the church, LORD, then why is it an issue to clarify this as a means to stemming the tide of falsities concerning Jesus? If anyone wants to reply to this PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE do not set up another straw man argument, but actually answer the questions posed. This is a reasonable request in this forum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted February 21, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.76 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.95 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted February 21, 2014 This is fitting: People confuse morality with religion, saying things like, "if I do good, the rest will take care of itself," but Yeshua did not come to simply teach (or reinforce) moral truth, but to die for our sins and to transform our nature. The message of the cross is not that we should reform ourselves with renewed hope, but rather that our old nature must die and be replaced with something far greater... When King David cried out to the Lord, "Create in me a clean heart, O God," he did not use the Hebrew word yatzar (יָצַר), which means to "fashion" or "form" something from pre-existing material (Gen. 2:7), but he instead used the word bara (בָּרָא), a verb exclusively used in the Torah to refer to God's direct creation of the cosmos (Gen 1:1). In other words, David understood that no amount of reformation of his character would be enough, and therefore he appealed to the very power of God that alone could create yesh me'ayin, or "out of nothing." Such was the nature of the remedy required that was fulfilled in the cross of Messiah. https://www.facebook.com/pages/Hebrew-for-Christians/56347292809 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 If you think that's harsh, look what Paul might have said about anyone preaching "Lordship Salvation". "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed [let him be 'damned']." (Galatians 1:6-9) According to Curtis Hutson, "Lordship salvation is an unscriptural teaching regarding the doctrine of salvation and is confusing to Christians. Those who teach it claim that one must make Jesus Lord of his life in order to be saved. They use such expressions as, 'You cannot receive Jesus as Saviour without receiving Him as Lord,' or, 'If Jesus Christ is not the Lord of your life, then you are not saved'... "In verse 6, Paul said, 'I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel.' Paul contrasts the Gospel of the grace of God with 'another gospel' which he does not define ... "He goes on to say, 'There be some that trouble you' (vs. 7). The preaching of another gospel troubles people. He also calls it a perversion of the Gospel of the grace of God. "Then he says something very strong in verse 8: 'But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed [or 'let him be damned']. "Then he emphasizes it again in verse 9: 'As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach another gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed [or 'let him be damned']." Pretty harsh, huh. I guess Paul didn't like Galatianists.http://cavaliersonly.com/christian_articles_and_messages/a_perversion_of_the_gospel_lordship_salvation_by_curtis_hutson You are making a huge exegetical mistake. Galatians was written to a group of believers who were attaching the law to salvation. They were being led to believe that they needed to convert to the Jewish religion in addition to receiving Jesus in order to enter the Kingdom of God. That is why they were subjecting themselves to circumcision. Circumcision is the last thing a Gentile man does in the conversion process. This was not a lordship issue. Far from it. They were departing from the Christian faith and faith in Jesus and were trusting in the flesh. So the references to Galatians doesn't really apply here, at all. Galatians is a law vs. grace issue, not a Lordship issue. Jesus' lordship is a basic theological/biblical teaching found all throughout the New Testament. Paul, in Phil. 2, calls on every tounge to confess that Jesus Christ is Lord to the Glory of God the Father. (Phil. 2:10-11) We are not given the option of receiving Jesus as Savior and not as Lord. The Bible doesn't separate the two. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 This is fitting: People confuse morality with religion, saying things like, "if I do good, the rest will take care of itself," but Yeshua did not come to simply teach (or reinforce) moral truth, but to die for our sins and to transform our nature. The message of the cross is not that we should reform ourselves with renewed hope, but rather that our old nature must die and be replaced with something far greater... When King David cried out to the Lord, "Create in me a clean heart, O God," he did not use the Hebrew word yatzar (יָצַר), which means to "fashion" or "form" something from pre-existing material (Gen. 2:7), but he instead used the word bara (בָּרָא), a verb exclusively used in the Torah to refer to God's direct creation of the cosmos (Gen 1:1). In other words, David understood that no amount of reformation of his character would be enough, and therefore he appealed to the very power of God that alone could create yesh me'ayin, or "out of nothing." Such was the nature of the remedy required that was fulfilled in the cross of Messiah. https://www.facebook.com/pages/Hebrew-for-Christians/56347292809 That inner transformation is only possible is Jesus is submitted to as Lord. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nebula Posted February 21, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 10 Topic Count: 5,823 Topics Per Day: 0.76 Content Count: 45,870 Content Per Day: 5.95 Reputation: 1,897 Days Won: 83 Joined: 03/22/2003 Status: Offline Birthday: 11/19/1970 Share Posted February 21, 2014 This is fitting: People confuse morality with religion, saying things like, "if I do good, the rest will take care of itself," but Yeshua did not come to simply teach (or reinforce) moral truth, but to die for our sins and to transform our nature. The message of the cross is not that we should reform ourselves with renewed hope, but rather that our old nature must die and be replaced with something far greater... When King David cried out to the Lord, "Create in me a clean heart, O God," he did not use the Hebrew word yatzar (יָצַר), which means to "fashion" or "form" something from pre-existing material (Gen. 2:7), but he instead used the word bara (בָּרָא), a verb exclusively used in the Torah to refer to God's direct creation of the cosmos (Gen 1:1). In other words, David understood that no amount of reformation of his character would be enough, and therefore he appealed to the very power of God that alone could create yesh me'ayin, or "out of nothing." Such was the nature of the remedy required that was fulfilled in the cross of Messiah. https://www.facebook.com/pages/Hebrew-for-Christians/56347292809 That inner transformation is only possible is Jesus is submitted to as Lord. I wasn't denying this. But is salvation about what you do or what Jesus does? Yes, we have to walk in agreement with him. But if my obedience depends on me and my effort, I'm screwed. Conversely, those who play around with "cheap grace" are not putting their old nature to death, which means they haven't really put their faith in Jesus to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldSchool2 Posted February 21, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 7 Topic Count: 701 Topics Per Day: 0.13 Content Count: 7,511 Content Per Day: 1.35 Reputation: 1,759 Days Won: 0 Joined: 01/16/2009 Status: Offline Birthday: 02/18/1955 Share Posted February 21, 2014 If you think that's harsh, look what Paul might have said about anyone preaching "Lordship Salvation". "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed [let him be 'damned']." (Galatians 1:6-9) According to Curtis Hutson, "Lordship salvation is an unscriptural teaching regarding the doctrine of salvation and is confusing to Christians. Those who teach it claim that one must make Jesus Lord of his life in order to be saved. They use such expressions as, 'You cannot receive Jesus as Saviour without receiving Him as Lord,' or, 'If Jesus Christ is not the Lord of your life, then you are not saved'... "In verse 6, Paul said, 'I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel.' Paul contrasts the Gospel of the grace of God with 'another gospel' which he does not define ... "He goes on to say, 'There be some that trouble you' (vs. 7). The preaching of another gospel troubles people. He also calls it a perversion of the Gospel of the grace of God. "Then he says something very strong in verse 8: 'But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed [or 'let him be damned']. "Then he emphasizes it again in verse 9: 'As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach another gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed [or 'let him be damned']." Pretty harsh, huh. I guess Paul didn't like Galatianists.http://cavaliersonly.com/christian_articles_and_messages/a_perversion_of_the_gospel_lordship_salvation_by_curtis_hutson You are making a huge exegetical mistake. Galatians was written to a group of believers who were attaching the law to salvation ... Attaching anything to salvation is more than a mistake, but I'll let Curtis Hutson explain it. "There are not two ways to be saved. One is either saved by grace through faith or saved by grace through faith plus surrender. The Bible says in Ephesians 2:8-9, 'For by grace are ye saved through faith; and not that of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.' If it is salvation by grace through faith, as this Scripture declares, then it is not salvation by grace through faith plus surrender, or plus anything else. It is salvation by grace through faith. PERIOD! "You say, 'Dr. Hutson, don’t you believe in surrender?' Absolutely! Wholeheartedly! But not to be saved ... "The surrender of the life to the Lordship of Christ is a beautiful and wonderful thing; but when you make surrender a requirement for salvation, it becomes an ugly, dirty, wicked thing and frustrates the marvelous grace of God!" It becomes a form of Galatianism: saved by Grace, kept by works of "surrender". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevenseas Posted February 21, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 30 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,373 Content Per Day: 0.76 Reputation: 683 Days Won: 22 Joined: 02/28/2012 Status: Offline Share Posted February 21, 2014 That is NOT Shiloh's quote: I posted it from "A Perversion Of The Gospel! Lordship Salvation by Curtis Hutson". I also provided the link for it in my post (#32). Shiloh is the poster inferring that Lordship Salvation was a response to Bonhoeffer's cheap grace concept.For someone not trying to confuse the issue, you are doing just the opposite. You can sure come across pretty harsh sometimes ... If you think that's harsh, look what Paul might have said about anyone preaching "Lordship Salvation". "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed [let him be 'damned']." (Galatians 1:6-9) According to Curtis Hutson, "Lordship salvation is an unscriptural teaching regarding the doctrine of salvation and is confusing to Christians. Those who teach it claim that one must make Jesus Lord of his life in order to be saved. They use such expressions as, 'You cannot receive Jesus as Saviour without receiving Him as Lord,' or, 'If Jesus Christ is not the Lord of your life, then you are not saved'... "In verse 6, Paul said, 'I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel.' Paul contrasts the Gospel of the grace of God with 'another gospel' which he does not define ... "He goes on to say, 'There be some that trouble you' (vs. 7). The preaching of another gospel troubles people. He also calls it a perversion of the Gospel of the grace of God. "Then he says something very strong in verse 8: 'But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed [or 'let him be damned']. "Then he emphasizes it again in verse 9: 'As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach another gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed [or 'let him be damned']." Pretty harsh, huh. I guess Paul didn't like Galatianists.http://cavaliersonly.com/christian_articles_and_messages/a_perversion_of_the_gospel_lordship_salvation_by_curtis_hutson I'm not sure what your point is? I find you are not consistent in whatever it is you are trying to say to me...although to be sure, it just seems like some kind of accusation.... I explained I mixed up your avatar with Shilohs. Apparently, that explanation will not suffice. Do you think Paul would really want others to imitate his personality or Christ's? I don't understand why some people, and in this case yourself, will say things like "well Jesus got mad at the money changers so I can get mad too" or Paul was ticked off at the Galatians so I can be irritated with you". I don't believe I have ever had any exchanges with you before, if I did, I truly do not remember them. So, let me just state for the record. I don't believe another gospel...some people seem to like to throw that out at others as though they alone understand what is actually not difficult to understand. You actually do not know what I believe or you would not respond to me that way. I'll just mention again that no one can call Jesus Lord except by the Holy Spirit. We are saved or we are not saved. We grow in Christ...it is a matter of maturity...not who can cry the loudest at the altar. I am sorry you seem to think I am confused about salvation. I am not; nor am I confused about calling Christ Lord. He either is or He is not Lord. And I guess both He and I know exactly where we stand on that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sevenseas Posted February 21, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 30 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,373 Content Per Day: 0.76 Reputation: 683 Days Won: 22 Joined: 02/28/2012 Status: Offline Share Posted February 21, 2014 ps...I agree with what Shiloh said regarding Galatians. Galatians was written to correct the error being taught by the 'Judaizer's' that the law had to be kept in order to be perfect before God. Seeming to forget that the law had never saved anyone yet, it suddenly became a stumbling block for those who had once received the grace of God by salavation ALONE through Christ. Christ is the fullfillment of the law and the ONLY way to God. As we can only come to God as He draws us to Himself, so we can only surrender our lives and truly call Jesus Lord in every sense of the meaning, when God works in our hearts and sheds His light, through His Word, in places we may not even know we need surrender. IMO, Paul was probably more grieved than angry at this situation. Perhaps you do not agree, but I am convinced of the matter and I am far from being alone. I also have faith that should I be wrong, God will convince me of that error because He has permission to work in my heart that way and above all else, I desire truth as God's truth is the only thing I have left. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
*Zion* Posted February 21, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 16 Topic Count: 154 Topics Per Day: 0.04 Content Count: 3,245 Content Per Day: 0.78 Reputation: 2,397 Days Won: 9 Joined: 12/09/2012 Status: Offline Birthday: 05/11/1984 Author Share Posted February 21, 2014 To reiterate... The crux of it is that if we are to deny the Lordship of God Most High, what are we doing claiming to be His followers, as Christians are supposed to be? This is what must be settled once and for all. This what it all boils down to. Lordship doctrine: Jesus is Lord. It seems that there are many Christians out there who have never heard of the fear of the Lord; or worse simply choose not to acknowledge it, to their own peril. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted February 21, 2014 Share Posted February 21, 2014 If you think that's harsh, look what Paul might have said about anyone preaching "Lordship Salvation". "I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel: Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed [let him be 'damned']." (Galatians 1:6-9) According to Curtis Hutson, "Lordship salvation is an unscriptural teaching regarding the doctrine of salvation and is confusing to Christians. Those who teach it claim that one must make Jesus Lord of his life in order to be saved. They use such expressions as, 'You cannot receive Jesus as Saviour without receiving Him as Lord,' or, 'If Jesus Christ is not the Lord of your life, then you are not saved'... "In verse 6, Paul said, 'I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel.' Paul contrasts the Gospel of the grace of God with 'another gospel' which he does not define ... "He goes on to say, 'There be some that trouble you' (vs. 7). The preaching of another gospel troubles people. He also calls it a perversion of the Gospel of the grace of God. "Then he says something very strong in verse 8: 'But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed [or 'let him be damned']. "Then he emphasizes it again in verse 9: 'As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach another gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed [or 'let him be damned']." Pretty harsh, huh. I guess Paul didn't like Galatianists.http://cavaliersonly.com/christian_articles_and_messages/a_perversion_of_the_gospel_lordship_salvation_by_curtis_hutson You are making a huge exegetical mistake. Galatians was written to a group of believers who were attaching the law to salvation ... Attaching anything to salvation is more than a mistake... But what you fail to understand is that the Lordship of Jesus is not being attached to salvation. Jesus doesn't offer Himself only as Savior. Jesus offers Himself as Savior and Lord. That is the terms He has set in how He is to be accepted. He is not interested in simply being our Savior, but also wants to be our Lord. As the old saying goes, "He will be Lord of all, or not Lord at all." "There are not two ways to be saved. One is either saved by grace through faith or saved by grace through faith plus surrender. The Bible says in Ephesians 2:8-9, 'For by grace are ye saved through faith; and not that of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.' If it is salvation by grace through faith, as this Scripture declares, then it is not salvation by grace through faith plus surrender, or plus anything else. It is salvation by grace through faith. PERIOD! "You say, 'Dr. Hutson, don’t you believe in surrender?' Absolutely! Wholeheartedly! But not to be saved ... "The surrender of the life to the Lordship of Christ is a beautiful and wonderful thing; but when you make surrender a requirement for salvation, it becomes an ugly, dirty, wicked thing and frustrates the marvelous grace of God!" It becomes a form of Galatianism: saved by Grace, kept by works of "surrender". Nope. You are wrong. Surrender is what we do when we repent. Surrendering to Jesus is the response that acknowledges that we are sinners in need of Savior and it is a response to His Lordship to say, "Jesus, I will obey your Gospel and repent of my sin; please have mercy upon me and forgive me." Surrender isn't a separate requirement being added to salvation. Surrender is a daily part of the Christian walk. We are to daily surrender to control and direction of the Holy Spirit as followers of Jesus Christ. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts