A Call for Discernment

[Rebecki]

John MacArthur is doing a series on discernment in the church. Excellent teaching. You can hear it at this OnePlace (http://www.oneplace.com/ministries/Grace_to_You/) site, or you can download it from iTunes in their Podcast section.

:thumb

[LisaBisa]

I agree, its very good so far!

[Hootmon]

I like John MacArthur. Good old-fashioned straight-shooting Biblical exposition.

I like Alistair Begg (Truth for Life) for the same reason. They both tell it like it is...

[nooneuno]

John MacArthur is Lordship salvation. This is a works based salvation. I totally disagree with him.

"LORDSHIP" SALVATION

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Most eradicationists follow the Covenant line of Lordship--both for justification, and for sanctification. Christ's Lordship is primarily found in the Synoptics. It is the stage where believers try to do for the Lord; to one degree or another it results in the Romans Seven struggle.

One might refer to the Lordship motivation as the adolescent stage of the Christian life. That is as far as the Lordship advocates see, and they tragically think that is the way the Christian life should be. Anything short of Lordship they consider to be an unsaved condition; anything beyond, antinomian. Centering upon Lordship deters the believer from coming to know Christ as his Life. Being under His Lordship constitutes law--doing. Knowing Him as Life constitutes grace--being.

quotes from MJS review of WINNING THE WAR WITHIN, Dr. Charles Stanley


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In his [Dr. John MacArthur] later, and equally anti-dispensational book titled Faith Works--The Gospel According to the Apostles, the author favorably quotes no less than 22 Covenant writers, in support of his Lordship Salvation thesis. In both of these books he is highly critical of dispensational writers such as Darby, Scofield, Chafer, Larkin, and Ryrie.

In this book (p. 231) Dr. MacArthur accuses me [Miles Stanford] of teaching two ways of salvation. In all of my writings I have stated carefully and clearly that there is but one way of salvation, i.e., [by grace through faith] based upon the Cross of Christ, but two kinds of salvation: 1) the out-of-Christ, earthly/heavenly kingdom salvation for the nation of Israel and the Gentile nations; 2) the heavenly in-Christ salvation, exclusively for the Church, the heavenly Body of Christ.

It must be said that Dr. MacArthur's Lordship Salvation is a child of Covenant theology; it is an interpolation. It is not the childlike faith in the grace of John 3:16. It rightly insists upon repentance, but wrongly interjects a change of behavior--one must bring forth fruits (works) for repentance (Lu. 3:8) in order to be saved.

No one questions that there must be a sincere change of mind, a turning from one's self to the Saviour, but Lordship advocates attempt to make behavior and fruit essential ingredients of, rather than evidence of, saving faith. Scripture teaches that the Savior saves "the ungodly" (Rom. 5:6) in their sin, and believers from their sin (Gal. 5:16).

quotes from MacARTHUR ABERRATIONS: An Open Letter to the Independent Fundamental Churches of America (IFCA)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dr. John MacArthur, along Covenant lines, seeks to solve the problem by making conversion more demanding, thinking that a Lordship beginning will provide a successful continuation--with the "help" and control of the law.

quote from Dispensational Disintegration (Part 1)


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

There is a good deal of Lordship teaching in [Plymouth] Brethren ministry, much of which may well have been derived from the [William] MacDonald book. The answer to this harmful error is to get back to Pauline Life-ship: "For to me to live is Christ" (Phil. 1:21).

quote from An Open Letter to Open Brethren


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I was recreated in Christ Jesus on the 19th of September, 1940. This occurred by faith alone, apart from works of any kind. I knew absolutely nothing of Lordship, nothing of the law--I didn't even know John 3:16. I made no promises, knowing of nothing that had to be promised.

quote from Wrongly Dividing The Word Of Truth: A Critique of Dr. John H. Gerstner


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

LORDSHIP SALVATION -- To add to the legal confusion, the Calvinist insists that the sinner must submit to His Lordship in order to accept the Saviour. Law to begin with, law to continue with.

quote from Covenant Calvinism -- Moses-Centered


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

First, the law-blindness concerning grace. The legalist, especially the Covenantist, makes a great show of grace for justification. But by that he does not mean pure grace--grace alone. His law-blindness causes him to be in terror of pure grace--actually having a hatred of it. To him, sheer grace is antinomianism (lawlessness), and "easy-believism." His Lordship Salvation adds "dos" and "conditions" to justification--hence it is no more of grace.

quote from DR. JAMES I. PACKER -- Rediscovering Holiness


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am afraid that I [Miles Stanford] lost out completely on the Lordship issue. When I was saved (September 19, 1940, 4:30 p.m.) I simply received the Lord Jesus as my Savior, via the sheer grace of God. I knew nothing of Lordship. Later, I learned via the Word that He is sovereign God the Son, hence Lord of all. But I have never considered Him to be Lord over my life, because I came to know Him as my very Christian life. I am not a servant, but a son (Gal. 4:7).

I think that those who look upon Him as their Lord, whether at conversion or afterward, rarely progress beyond that stage--a servant in subjection (sometimes) to Him as their Lord.

One might refer to that motivation and subjection as the adolescent stage of the Christian life. The Lordship principle is found primarily in the law realm of the Synoptics [first three Gospels]. It is the stage where believers try to do for the Lord--it results in the Romans Seven struggle and defeat.

That is as much as they understand, and they tragically think that that is the way the Christian life should be. To them, anything short of that is considered an unsaved condition; anything beyond that is antinomianism. Paul would soon disabuse [to free from error, fallacy, or misconception] them of all that.http://withchrist.org/MJS/lordship.htm

[nooneuno]

worth reading:

15 March 1993

Dr. John F. MacArthur, Jr.

P. 0. Box 1642

Canyon Country, CA 91351

Dear brother John

We were concerned to hear of your wife's serious and traumatic incident (not accident). Your up-to-date account in FAITH WORKS: The Gospel According to the Apostles is very heartening. With you, we are very thankful to the Lord that she is recovering well.

There is no question as to the extreme hardship you are all undergoing in the long recuperation process, and the example of your family faith is an edifying testimony to many. A wonderful deepening of family heart-bonds. I especially admire your ability to write this book in the midst of it, as I have enough difficulty in writing one under the most propitious of conditions.

My purpose in writing to you is not to critique your FAITH WORKS book; I trust other dispensationalists will have the doctrinal convictions to adequately accomplish this. In that I care about you as a younger brother in Christ (near 80 here), and am concerned about your widespread ministry to His Body, there are some things I would like to touch upon in a kindly and scriptural manner.

I am not offended, but there is an error on page 232 of your book that ought to be rectified--at least for your information. You mention that I advocate "multiple ways of salvation." I can see how that could have happened, but I am glad to say that the statement on page 1 of my critique of your book, The Gospel According to Jesus, is otherwise, as follows:

On the ground that the author takes (Covenant Israel), he is right concerning Lordship Salvation. The problem is, he is on the wrong ground; the dispensation of law! What our brother neither sees nor understands, and he is by no means alone, is that there are not two ways, but two distinctly different kinds of salvation. Yet both have the same blessed source, the finished work of the Cross--both are entered by faith.

However (there goes the other shoe), I do insist that there are "two distinctly different kinds of salvation."

Salvation #1 -- The Lord Jesus, as Israel's Messiah and King, preached His "Kingdom Gospel"--as did John the Baptist before Him, and the disciples with Him--to the nation of Israel. This was during His humiliation, prior to the Cross. His believing disciples (not yet Christian) were in expectation of the long-awaited Kingdom. After the Cross and just before His ascension, they asked Him, "Lord, wilt Thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?" (Acts 1:6). Although He did not give them the answer, He did not correct their query.

The content--the components of this Kingdom Gospel--are set forth in Israel's New Covenant (Jer. 31; Ezek. 36). That is, the recipients of this Covenant Kingdom Gospel will have their iniquities forgiven, they will receive a new spirit and a new heart, they will be indwelt by the Spirit of God who will write the Kingdom law upon their hearts, by which the Spirit will cause them to keep the Kingdom ordinances and do them. They will live in the earthly Kingdom forever, under their Messiah/King--but will not be members of the Body of Christ.

Salvation #2 -- After the Cross, in His new-creation ascension and glorification, the Lord Jesus Christ, as Saviour, Lord, Head, Bridegroom, and Life, ministered His heavenly Gospel of the grace of God to Paul, exclusively for His Bride, His Body, His Church--born at Pentecost.

On page 222 you equate the salvation of earthly Israel with that of the totally unique and heavenly Church:

Many dispensationalists, myself included [and all Covenant theologians] agree that there is some continuity between OT and NT people of God in that we share a common salvation purchased by Jesus Christ and appropriated by grace through faith.

The heavenly Gospel, from the heavenly Christ to the heavenly Church, is referred to by Paul as "my Gospel" (Rom. 16:25); the "Gospel of the grace of God" (Acts 20:24); and "the Gospel of His [glorified] Son" (Rom. 1:9). Paul never refers to his message to the Gentiles as "the Gospel of the Kingdom."

As Dr. Wm. R. Newell said:

Take Romans to Philemon out of the Bible and you are bereft of Christian doctrine. Take Paul's Epistles out of the Bible, and you cannot find anything about the Church, for no other Apostle ever mentions the Body of Christ.

You cannot find the exact meaning of any of the great doctrines, such as Propitiation, Reconciliation, Justification, Identification, Redemption, or Sanctification. Nor can you find what is perhaps the most tremendous fact of every Christian life, that of personal union with the Lord Jesus Christ at the right hand of the Father in glory.

Paul's Gospel produces the new-creation man--a man in Christ before the Father, with Christ living in him (Gal. 2:20). He is baptized into Christ's Body (1 Cor. 12:13), and joined in living union with the ascended Lord Jesus Christ (1 Cor. 6:17; Gal 3:27). He has died unto sin (Rom. 6:11), the law (Gal. 2:19), and the world (Gal. 6:14).

He has been made "complete in Christ" (Col. 2:10), and is "accepted in the Beloved" (Eph. 1:6). He is crucified, dead, buried, and ascended with Christ in the heavenlies (Eph. 2:6), a "citizen of heaven" (Phil. 3:20), and is "blessed with every spiritual blessing in heavenly places in Christ" (Eph. 1:3).

Being in the ascended Lord Jesus, his life hidden with Christ in God, he has been made nigh by the Blood of Christ (Col. 3:3; Eph. 2:13). He has "boldness to enter into the Holiest by the Blood of Jesus" (Heb. 10:19). When Christ returns to earth to establish His Millennial Kingdom, to both judge Israel with the "baptism of fire," and afterwards bless them with their New Covenant, every risen and glorified member of His Body, His Bride, will attend the Bridegroom/King to rule with Him over the earth.

All of the above pertains to the Christian--none of which will ever be true of the recipient of Jesus' Kingdom Gospel--the kingdom Jew.

Dispensationalism -- What sort of dispensationalist would I be if I failed to acknowledge the difference the Cross makes between an earthly and heavenly people? Your failure to make a distinction between these two salvations puts quite a strain on your insistence that you are a dispensationalist. Let's just grant that you are, as you say. Not as strict, of course, as Darby, or Scofield, or Chafer, but evidently more along the latitudinal lines of Dallas, and the Bock-Blaising Progressive Dispensationalism or, what I have termed, Neo-Dispensationalism.

But your associations belie even that. How can you creditably teach and lead others along dispensational lines when you almost exclusively quote with approval anti-dispensational Covenant theologians in your books? To say nothing of joining hands with them in speaking conferences. In your first Lordship book 29 of them are utilized, while in this present book you present us with no less than 19 of Covenant's best: Berghof, Brooks, Calvin, Chantry, Gerstner, Hodge, Hockema, Leighton, Lloyd-Jones, Machan, Manton, Moule, Murray, Owen, Pink, the Puritans, Ryle, Sproul, and Warfield.

What are people to think about you? Where is your leadership responsibility regarding your purported dispensationalism? What if I were to lard my books with approving quotes from the likes of TV's: Roberts, Swaggart, Robinson, Tilton, Lee, Hinn, Hagin, or Copeland? Or Fuller's Wagner and Kraft, Biola's Kwast and Louweres, Moody's Dickason, Trinity's Grudem and Warner, along with Wimber and Hayford?

Your association with Jack Hayford may seem ever so innocent and interesting, but you have responsibility to a tongue-vulnerable Church. You certainly should back up the stand of your book Charismatic Chaos. I would think by now you have received an inscribed copy of Hayford's latest book, The Beauty of Spiritual Language. As you may have noted, it is a strong pitch for "pseudotongues," and certainly has the potential for enticing many more into the present-day charismatic chaos that has long plagued and devastated the Body.

Regeneration -- Your present book contains another telling indication of your Covenant orientation. Step by step you are being "Reformed." I refer to your use of the terms "quicken," and "awakened," on pages 67 and 69:

The unsaved are dead, incapable of any spiritual activity. Until God quickens us, we have no capacity to respond to Him in faith. Believing is therefore the first act of an awakened spiritual corpse; it is the new man drawing his first breath.

Without going into the issue, this is Covenant teaching that one must be saved in order to be saved. No personal responsibility involved. Covenant's Westminster Confession of Faith 10.1 sets forth the teaching:

This effectual call is of God's free and special grace alone, not from anything at all foreseen in man; who is altogether passive therein, until, being quickened and renewed by the Holy Spirit, he is thereby enabled to answer this call, and to embrace the grace offered and conveyed in it.

Just the briefest of thoughts concerning this. A spiritually dead, corpse-like man is capable of seeing God's truth, and is held responsible for it. If not, God would not hold him responsible. A corpse is a separated body; the person ever lives:

"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse. For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God" (Rom. 1:18-21).

One-Naturism -- You state on page 120 that "we cannot have two contradictory natures at the same time." Your teaching that the believer has but one nature is primarily a Covenant error, all of whom teach it. The Wesleyan people, instead of eradicating the Adamic nature (old man), as you do, keep the nature and eradicate the sin.

If you were to hold positional truth in higher esteem it would help you to understand that Romans 6:1-10 has to do with position. The indwelling old Adamic man was judicially crucified, thereby enabling the Holy Spirit to hold it inoperative via our faith, our reckoning ourselves to have died to it. Freedom from the power of indwelling sin is not via struggle or rule (law), but by faith in the finished work of the Cross, in reliance upon the Holy Spirit.

When you replace the Adamic old man with "vestiges of our sinful flesh" (p. 30), or "graveclothes of sinful flesh" (P. 117), or "residual fallenness" (p. 134), it becomes increasingly difficult for the believer to take personal responsibility for the sins in his life. As a result his confession becomes impersonal, and begins to wane. In more and more instances 1 John 1: 9 is simply being forsaken.

The result can been seen in the one-naturism of Bob George--sans confession. It has also developed in the one-nature Neuer Leben, International movement in Phoenix, soon to be called Total Life, International. Their conference manual, incidentally, contains 12 diagrams featured in Charles Solomon's books. It is considered an "affront to God" to confess sins that He has already forgiven.

Death -- Surely you must realize that death does not mean extinction or cessation, but that it always means separation. Every sinner is spiritually dead, while at the same time existing and active; he is separated from God. That is what crucifixion and death mean in Romans Six--separation. But I, as a new creation in Christ, am positionally separated from him via my death to sin at Calvary. It is on that basis I reckon my self dead indeed to sin.

Lordship Conversion -- Although I consider your Lordship teaching concerning initial faith to be an issue, I don't think it is the issue concerning your ministry. All I will say about your initial faith-demands is this:

Repentance -- With you, I believe in repentance. "Repentance toward God, and faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ" (Acts 20:21). Repentance is a change of mind Godward. When I was saved (September 19, 1940, 4:30 p.m.), by exercising simple faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as a Person, I turned from my sinful self to Him. The repentance you call for on page 33 is too inclusivistic, making a result of conversion its necessary ingredient. If you had only waited a moment!

Therefore sinners cannot come to sincere faith apart from a complete change of heart, a turnaround of the mind and affections and will. That is repentance (p. 33). (Emphasis mine.)

Would you say that was totally true of your conversion, and of all your converts, as well as all of your church members, and all of your Lordship followers? I, for one, lost out almost completely there!

Lordship Sanctification -- I think the primary issue, the real breakdown of your message, is the post-conversion application of Lordship to sanctification. One might refer to that motivation as the adolescent stage of the Christian life. The Lordship principle is mainly found in the law realm of the Synoptics. It is the stage where believers try to do for the Lord; to one degree or another, it is the Romans Seven struggle. That is as far as they see, and they tragically think that is the way the Christian life should be. Anything short of that is considered to be an unsaved condition; anything beyond, antinomianism.

The eighth chapter of your book is titled "The Death Struggle With Sin." At the outset (p. 123) you quote J.I. Packer, who is typical of all Covenant theologians:

The form that sanctification takes is conflict with the indwelling sin that constantly assaults us. The conflict, which is lifelong, involves both resistance to sin's assaults and the counterattack of sanctification, whereby we seek to drain the life out of this troublesome enemy (Hot Tub Religion, p. 172).

Here the power and character and source of sin are unknown. Personal conflict will never overcome sin, and certainly it is futile, if not foolish, to try to "drain the life out of it." Not even honest prayer can weaken it. The work of the Cross alone (and it required that) could break the power of sin, and has already done so.

The eighth chapter of your book, Saved Without a Doubt, is titled "Gaining Victory." It is an example of the juvenile law-oriented believer struggling to deal with symptoms, instead of the source--sin. But then, if the source is nothing but a trace of residual sin, there is not much to deal with. On page 137 you say:

Let's face it: All of us could be killing more of our personal sins than we are. The crucial question to ask yourself is, "How do I kill sin in my life?" Here are some practical steps for establishing a pattern of victory in your life.

The way to kill sin in your life is to feed it Scripture. [Which Scripture?] It's a foolproof poison against the weed of sin (p. 139). Honest prayers are a preservative against sin. They expose secret sins and weaken prevailing sins (p. 140).

If you want to engage in a real battle with sin, just set your course day by day, moment by moment, and step by step on a path of obedience to God's Word. [Which portion?] At first it will seem hard and progress will seem slow, but if you stay with it obedience will become habitual (p. 140).


continued!!!!!!---------->>>>>>>

[Dear2HIM]

Belief, Faith, the works that faith produces are all a work from God from beginning to end. How can this be a "works salvation"?

I don't hold John McArthur as the Pope of evangelicalism, but I think that he is a good preacher/teacher.

[nooneuno]

If you deal confidently and consistently with the sin in your life, you will experience the effect of righteousness, which Isaiah 32:17 defines as everlasting assurance and security (p. 141).

All of this is in the realm of Lordship law--seeking to do something about sin, struggling to deal directly with symptom-sins. But that is as futile as the Romans Seven "O wretched man" struggle, because "the strength of sin is the law" (1 Cor. 15:56). The middle-grounder does not yet realize that "ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ" (Rom. 7:4). Hence in his legal struggles and lack of doctrinal knowledge (even if he does know he does not rest therein), he is unable to reckon himself as having died unto sin (Rom. 6:11). You cannot do both--struggle, and reckon by faith!

From Lordship to Life -- Dear Ruth Paxson shared what is unknown, or unacceptable, to those in the Lordship realm. In her monumental Life on the Highest Plane, she sets forth the scriptural sequence of spiritual progress: "From Saviour, to Lord, to Life." This classic is "antinomiously" based upon the position of the ascended believer (which all are), and includes the two indwelling Adams.

However, you are not too far behind a true spiritual-growth schedule. A fine dispensational pastor has, in the past several years, awakened to the positional (identification) life truths of the Word, via Paul. He is preaching (not yet sharing) position from his pulpit, and also among IFCA leaders--and this after 35 years in the ministry, doctorate and all. But he would not, nor does he have to, retreat to Lordship for either conversion or sanctification.

In my first book of some 30 years ago (late start) I listed some outstanding leaders of the past. They "averaged 15 years after they entered upon their ministry before they began to know the Lord Jesus as their Life, ceased trying to work for Him, and began allowing Him to be their All to do His work (via the Spirit) through them."

These individuals were, on the basis of their written testimony: Pierson, Chapman, Tauler, Goforth, Mueller, Taylor, Watt, Trumbull, Meyer, A. Murray, Havergal, Guyon, Mabie, Gordon, Hyde, Mantle, McConkey, Deck, Paxson, Stoney, Saphir, Carmichael, and Hopkins. There are many more, of course.

I appreciate what you included concerning Romans Six, etc., in your seventh chapter, "Free of Sins, Slaves of Righteousness.'' I t is similar to what Dr. Chafer included in his Systematic Theology, what is in the Scofield Reference Bible Notes, and that which is all through the voluminous writings of John Darby and his fellow Brethren--such as Kelly, Stoney, Coates, Mackintosh, Bellett, Chapman, Grant, Wigram, and many other of those giants of the faith. The only difference is that the ministry of all of the above was based upon position, including the two indwelling Adams, with no Lordship as a condition for either conversion or sanctification.

Others mention Romans Six, position in Christ, etc., but their ministries are not based upon these truths--such as Gothard, who includes identification but his work is non-dispensationally law-oriented; and David Wilkerson, who has taken on the identification truths while maintaining a chaotic charismatic ministry. Then there are some of the demon caster-outers, such as Neil Anderson, late of Biola, and Fred Dickason, long of Moody, who profess identification while exorcising "demons" from members of the Body of Christ.

If you are going to progress (grow) beyond Jesus' Kingdom Gospel to earthly Israel, you are going to have to enter into the heavenly Gospel of the Grace of God that He gave to Paul from glory. That is neither found in the OT, nor the Synoptics (including the Sermon on the Mount and the so-called Lord's Prayer), but primarily in the Pauline Epistles--all of them.

There is nothing that the Lord Jesus set forth in the Sermon on the Mount that he did not give on a higher spiritual level through Paul to the Church--the difference between earth and the flesh, as over against heaven and the re-Created spirit. He is not honored by our lingering on the earthly Kingdom level. "Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth" (Col. 3:2). Abide above!

You cannot turn to your Covenant compeers for this. They don't have it and, what is more, they won't have it--nor will they have you. I believe that the reason why Covenant Theology stops short of position, and heavenly grace for sanctification, is that they are blinded by the very law they would have as their "rule of life"! It is rather a rule of death (2 Cor. 3:7). The law is meant to bring one to Christ--Christ glorified as heavenly Head to the heavenly Body--not to Jesus and His pre-Cross Kingdom Gospel to Israel. On that basis the law blinds and binds the member of the Body of Christ.

You can continue to love and honor God's holy and righteous law, without being under it, or trying to keep it. You don't have to fear antinomianism or lawlessness. How can you be under, or have that written upon your heart, which you have died to at Calvary?

"But now we are delivered from the law, having died to that in which we were held, that we should serve in newness of spirit and not in the oldness of the letter" (Rom. 7:6). "For the letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life" (2 Cor. 3:6).

"That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us [not by struggles, or certain steps], who walk ... after the Spirit" (Rom. 8:4).

Now that should satisfy any law-lover! What is the ministry of the indwelling Spirit to a member of the heavenly Body of Christ? It is certainly not law-that He will write on the heart of the Kingdom Jew. It is Christ!--crucified, buried, risen, ascended, and glorified. He is Head and Life of the Church, which is, individually, of His very flesh and bones (Eph. 5:30), one spirit with Him, of His very human-divine life and nature (Col. 3:4).

"For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death" (Rom. 8:2). "This I say then, walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfill the lust of the flesh" (Gal. 5:16).

Now to get back to the blindness of the law upon the "Covenanters." (Never did see that rabbit!)

"But if the ministration of death, written and engraved in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not steadfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance, which glory was to be done away [at the Cross], how shall not the ministration of the Spirit be more glorious?" (2 Cor. 3:7,8).


Continued ---------->>>>>>

[nooneuno]

The Holy Spirit's ministration in the believer is the glorified Lord Jesus Christ.

"But their minds were blinded; for until this day remaineth the same veil untaken away in the reading of the old testament; which veil is done away in Christ. But even unto this day, when Moses is read, the veil is upon their heart. Nevertheless, when it shall turn to the Lord, the veil shall be taken away" (2 Cor. 3:14-16).

If we have turned to the Lord, the blindness of the law is taken away so that we may be free to gaze upon the Source of grace and truth. You cannot be occupied with Moses and his law and, at the same time, be occupied with the risen and glorified Lord Jesus Christ.

"If [since] ye, then, be risen with Christ, seek those things which are above, where Christ [and you] sitteth on the right hand of God. Set your affection on things above, not on things on the earth. For ye died, and your life is hid with Christ in God" (Col. 3:1-3).

"Now the Lord is that Spirit; and where the Spirit of the Lord is there is liberty" (2 Cor. 3:17).

The Lord is in the Glory, and the Spirit's ministration is to focus the believer, soul and spirit, upon Him. To walk in the Spirit is to be centered in Christ glorified, in fellowship and worship.

"But we all [that's us] with unveiled face beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory [progressive growth] even as by the Spirit of the Lord" (2 Cor. 3:18).

"For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shone in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ" (2 Cor. 4:6).

And how is that glorious image developed in us and manifested as our Christian life? Simply via the fruit of the Spirit, which is the manifestation of the characteristics of the Lord Jesus' human-divine life. Against that life there is no law--nothing is necessary but faith, and it is all spiritually natural, effortless outflow via the Spirit. To try to produce that fruit would be like hanging baubles on a Christmas tree.

That is why I shocked and outraged you, John, by maintaining that the Christian life does not require legal obedience and submission. All that is required is loving fellowship and worship with the Father and the Son--in spirit, positionally, abiding There in the Holiest before the Throne.

Surely you would not denigrate these truths as "all the follies that have ever defiled dispensationalism," as "blatant antinomianism," and "something that should be abandoned"!

You are burdened about the carnal condition of the Church, much of which you would blame upon the faithful dispensationalist, Dr. Chafer. It is a shame that you treat him in such a contumelious manner. His doctrinal contribution to the Body of Christ is something that few will ever touch. You are not alone in your concern for the Church. The Lord has His thousands out here who are just as insightful and heart-heavy as you are.

His beloved Bride must be shown deference, and treated royally as bespeaks her heavenly position. She must not be held back to an earthly level by Lordship, and the bondage and blindness of the least bit of law. She needs to be escorted to her glorified position in her Bridegroom, now. Anything less than that simply contributes to her present delinquency--a dereliction mainly due to deficient leadership.

"Stand fast, therefore, in the [heavenly] liberty with which Christ [at Calvary] hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the [Lordship] yoke of bondage" (Gal. 5:1).

I'll close with an uplifting word from William Kelly, scholarly editor of John Darby's works:

You and I who believe are "in Him," seen and accepted before our Father, "in the Beloved." "As is the earthly, such are they also that are heavenly." The full image of it we have not yet, it is true. That will be completely ours in the day of His rapturous coming. But the thing we are!

Do you and I know what it is to look into those heavens, where the eternal Son of the Father sits in glory all His own, and see and recognize in Him what we are before the Father--"As He is," even in this world?

Can we say quite confidently, each for himself, "Yes, we are identified with Him who is our Life before the face of the Father; as He is, in whom no spot was ever found, nor can be, after the Father's own heart wholly"? That is to be in Christ, a new creation. Our rule of life is to walk in Him via His Spirit, as being what we really are: citizens of heaven, pilgrims and strangers upon earth.

All the rest the Cross has ended for us. We have died with the Lord Jesus out of the old Adamic position; our old Adamic man was crucified with Him on the Cross. He is still in us, indeed, but in us a foreign element; and we are not in him before our Father, nor identified therein in anywise, but in Christ where He is.

Can we own this, reckon upon this, and yet seek to get on in a world that crucified the Lord Jesus, a world to which we are dead, and whose prince and god is Satan, and friendship with which is enmity against God? Can we take the law with others, where our Father has shown us such heavenly grace? Not I, "for I, through the law, have died to the law, that I might live unto God" (Gal. 2:19).

I have been very hard on you, John, and I don't blame you if you should not be inclined to respond. But if you should (no colleagues, please), I intend to share what you have to say with those who receive this open letter. Although I probably have to some degree, I have sought not to misrepresent you in any way--a difficult endeavor.

Yours for His glorified best.

Resting in Him,

Miles
http://withchrist.org/MJS/faithworks.htm

[Mommy2KandM]

Thanks rebecki.. I will check it out. I really like Alastair Begg as well (someone else mentioned him) :thumb

[Mr. Berean]

I don't agree with all of MacArthur's theology, but I believe that he loves the Lord, and that he has written some good stuff about the seeker-sensitive movement.

[Rebecki]

Well, I'm not a dispensationalist, so those quotes and the opinion of that last fellow has no bearing on how I view John MacArthur. Clearly those are quotes and opinions of dispensationalists.

John MacArthur is not afraid to call a spade a spade, which is dearly needed in these last days. I know what I believe and I stand firm on it. All I know is that I'm born again through the grace and mercy of Jesus Christ, and I stand firm on that and that alone.

:):

[Dear2HIM]

Well, I'm not a dispensationalist, so those quotes and the opinion of that last fellow has no bearing on how I view John MacArthur. Clearly those are quotes and opinions of dispensationalists.

John MacArthur is not afraid to call a spade a spade, which is dearly needed in these last days. I know what I believe and I stand firm on it. All I know is that I'm born again through the grace and mercy of Jesus Christ, and I stand firm on that and that alone.

:):

Like your sig! Reminds me of the Petra Praise album. I loved that song.

[JIM]

Noone,
You wrote: John MacArthur is Lordship salvation. This is a works based salvation. I totally disagree with him.

Have you ever read either of his books concerning the issue? If you have then it is interesting to see that you have come to that conclusion.
To sum up the Lordship position is that if you say you are a beliver act like it. It does not say that our works/fruit make us righteous before God. Just that if one claims to be a christian they should have a life tat shows forth Christ. Granted one will not be totally perfect in their walk BUT neither can one say they are believer and not live lie it. Sanctification is the process of growing in Christlikeness. One can not say they are a believer and not live for Christ. As Jesus said many times a tree is known by its fruit.

The nonlordship teachers in my opinion are the ones that are most dangerous to christianity and true doctrine. I have seen many times people walk an aisle, say a sinners prayer, join committees at church and live like a helian.
Are they saved? Truly only God knows their heart BUT I as a believer, after following biblical principles on confronting a bro or sister in Christ, would have to remove myself from them. The nonlordship people would say that they were most certainly saved but tell me would a person who has the Spirit of God behave routinely in a way that brought shame to God?? I can tell you many instances where people have walked an aisle, said a prayer and later left Christ. Th Lordship advocate would say that such a person is prob ot saved, the nonlordship would say, of yes most certainly they are saved.

One of the most dangerous teachings today is the teaching on being a carnal christian. That has lead to the lack of church discipline, dumbing down of the gospel and poor witness of the church to the world.

May I recommend a series by the late Earnest Reisinger? He taught the nonlordship and carnal christian position till he was convinced otherwise. You can find it at founders.org and go to the link for the Founders journal. It is a series right at the beginning volumes of the publication. He also wrote a book on the topic which is a great read as well

Also what I found interesting is that one of your sources for your quotes, Miles Stanford, decried MacArthur for using quoes from covenentalists. find that interesting, and even a bit humorous, since the reformers were covenentalists and have given us a great christian heritage thanks to their reformational teachings. I guess he threw the baby out with the bath water.

To sum it up MacArthur never taught works salvation. He just taught that if a person says they have faith they will as scripture says LIVE by it. Because true saving faith is not mere lip service...... IT IS LIFE... A LIFE LVED FOR GOD.......

Jim