A Little Booklet on Lordship Salvation Conclusion
Dr. Earnest Pickering sums up: _______________________________________________________
Conclusion:
John MacArthur is a sincere servant of the Lord, of that we have no doubt. He is a good man, but good men can be wrong. We believe in his advocacy of the so-called "lordship salvation" he is wrong. He desperately desires to see holiness, lasting fruit, and continuing faithfulness in the lives of Christian people. This reviewer and we believe all sincere church leaders desire the same. None of us are happy with shoddy, fleshly, and disobedient Christians. But the remedy for this condition is not found in changing the terms of the gospel . Well over 100 times in the New Testament, we are told that salvation is by faith or through believing. It is a very serious matter to add an ingredient to the gospel of salvation which is not found in the New Testament. While one may argue that "faith", if properly understood, includes the ingredient of "submission" or "enthronement", we believe the Scriptures do not support this contention. Our task is to keep preaching the plain, simple gospel of free grace. It is the work of the Holy Spirit to produce in true believers those qualities of righteousness which we all devoutly long to see.
_______________________________________________________
posted by Rose~ at 1:00 PM
16 Comments:
My favorite quote from this conclusion:
None of us are happy with shoddy, fleshly, and disobedient Christians. But the remedy for this condition is not found in changing the terms of the gospel .
I have enjoyed posting this series. It was really neat to read it for me for several reasons.
1. It is by a Calvinist. I am not a Calvinist and it is great to know that I can agree with a Calvinist minister on this issue.
2. He was the man that baptised me.
3. He was a pastor at out church.
I hope you have enjoyed it as well and have been challenged and edified.
By
Rose~, at 10/24/2006 1:21 PM
When you say Calvinist, do you mean a Five-point Calvinist, or a moderate Calvinist of the Charles Ryrie/ Robert Lightner variety?
By
Matthew Celestine, at 10/24/2006 4:55 PM
Amen Dr Pickering!
By
Bhedr, at 10/24/2006 5:58 PM
More to the point, since the word "none" means "not one," and since the words "of us" form a prepositional phrase, thus cannot serve as a sentence subject; therefore, the subject is "none," which is singular, and the sentence should read: None of us is happy with shoddy, fleshly and disobedient christians.
But I digress.
I have really enjoyed reading this series.
Since I am a Free Gralvinist, it was fun to read the posts and the responses.
By
Joe, at 10/24/2006 6:33 PM
None of us are happy to defend that they exist or that at times we have as well...but thus sayeth the Lord. I no more like to defend Carnal Christians and neither do I wish to live like one, but unfortunately this is true.
By
Bhedr, at 10/24/2006 10:20 PM
But the remedy for this condition is not found in changing the terms of the gospel.
I liked this statement a lot, too. I had already copied it to comment on when I saw your comment, Rose! :-P
This "remedy" shows up a lot in our efforts to help God out. We're all guilty of it in one way or another, and I just continue to hope and pray that I will be open to the guidance of the Holy Spirit in recognizing when I try to change the Gospel because of something I passionately believe.
Thanks for this series, Rose. It's been very thought-provoking on many levels.
steve :)
By
Anonymous, at 10/25/2006 12:35 AM
DF,
I am not sure how to answer that. John tells me that he knew Robert Lightner and they were friends. I also know that he knew J. Vernon McGee because he told me once.
Let's put it this way: I was telling my current pastor one time how bothered I was over TULIP and he gave me a tape of an old sermon by Dr. Pickering that he preached while pastor here. (I did not know him while he was pastor here - it was before I came to this church - but I sat under his ministry at the church in Minneapolis for 7 months). Anyway, I listened to the tape and when I was done, I thought "Well, that's the same thing I've heard a thousand times from Calvinists. Nothing new there to convince me." So, just from listening to that message alone (I had never talked to him in person about the issue) I would say he was a pretty cut and dried Calvinist, probably the Ryrie kind? John says he didn't hold to the "L", and I don't remember him mentioning it in the sermon on tape one way or another. I can say this: I highly doubt that he was the "doctrines of grace" variety.
Does that help?
By
Rose~, at 10/25/2006 10:42 AM
Thanks, Brian. I am glad you appreciated it. I agree with what you said in the last post: he was very respectful in this.
Joe,
You sly guy! I didn't have any idea you were hanging around this one. Now listen...
None of us are happy with shoddy, fleshly, and disobedient Christians is truly a proper sentence. Here is one way of telling: Is it proper to say None are happy? Yes it is. Therefore, the sentence is fine. I think one could use "are" or "is", if I'm not mistaken. ;~)
I am glad that you enjoyed reading this, even the comments! God bless you, Joe.
Hi Steve,
Great minds think alike!
No, we shouldn't "help God out." I am so glad that you have been provoked to thought by this. I also thank you for the comments you left and participated with.
By
Rose~, at 10/25/2006 10:49 AM
I haven't read the whole thing, but some good ending!
I have been through the ringer lately (meaning seeing again and again things in the verses I haven't taken full consideration before) keeping my eyes on the verses and seeing again and again some misdirections in my thinking in the past so thankful for all my free-grace friends' perspective. I'm surprised to say that but you guys have been extremely helpful recently on all of our conversations before as I think back to them on the verses.
Grace has got to be the center of everything and everything we think of in the Christian life!
My wife and I have been going through the "Heaven" book with my church. We just got done with Chapter 4 on the gospel presentation he gives to the lost reading the book. There is something in there I noticed and noticed over and over again. A great retelling of the gospel story keeps us keeping our eyes on Christ the author and finisher of our faith. Let's look to the Son and have faith in Christ's finish work and remember to be faithful in telling the story again and again........
Back to obsurity probably for a bit.....My company's got me going batty lately so it's hard to be on a computer after working on the computer all of the time
By
Shawn, at 10/26/2006 1:15 AM
It is great to see Shawn again.
By
Matthew Celestine, at 10/26/2006 7:36 AM
yes It is Matthew.
By
Bhedr, at 10/26/2006 9:17 PM
Always Good to see Shawn. You take care brother and don't have a computer wreck like I would a truck wreck on the Highway.
By
Bhedr, at 10/26/2006 9:19 PM
Rose
You commented on my first posting back in August. Some seventy posts later I find this posting has been good, for me and my wife Charity.
We are still in the same town, after five years. Almost a record for us.
So I returned to your blog, to discover your posting Earnest Pickering's booklet.
GARBC or Fundamentalist groups, (WBF. BBF) of which I have been apart of for over 50 years. John MacArthur came in to my view of doctrine in 1975.
After been in FBC - Hammond, Ind,
and seeing 10,000 baptism per year (1980) I see the need of John's book. Sword of the Lord after John Rice died took issue with the "Lordship Salvation" as well.
Terms do get you in trouble.
Fundamental Reformed Dispensationalist Calvinist could really raise the blood pressure.
Charity says, "Charles just teach the Word."
Hope you and your husband are looking forward to your child with great joy.
By
Charles e. Whisnant, at 10/27/2006 10:55 AM
Shawn,
That was such a wonderful, encouraging comment! Thank you for saying that all these conversations we have had have had an impact on you. I know that they have certainly had an impact in my life as well. God bless you, brother. I hope that your work will get easier.
Charles,
Thanks for the comment. So you know of the GARBC, but have moved on, eh? Is Fundamental Reformed Dispensationalist Calvinist ... is that what you would call yourself? lol.
Labels are funny for raising BP, aren't they?
Did you know Pickering or read any of his material before?
God bless and thanks for the well wishes.
By
Rose~, at 10/27/2006 6:20 PM
Rose
10% this 20%this 15% this and 50% this and 5% this. One Label just doesn't fit us does it. Charity and I heard the same sermon today, and she said "That was the best Brian has done." I said, "good grief, did you hear him say, Christians will go through the Tribulation, if there is one? She said, "Where did you get that from?"
So each of us listen through our theological grid of thinking. Our point of view about Scripture.
If you are of Covenant Reformed Theology mind set you don't see even a Tribulation, let along a literal 1000 Kingdom in the future, its now.
But a Fundamentalist Dispensation- ist believes the 1000 years reign is yet in the future.
A Reformed Dispensationalist believes in the five points of Tulip, but also believes Revelation is still future.
Fundamentalist 30% Reformed 20%Dispensationalist 20% Calvinist in the area of Salvation 100% otherwise 10%.
Terms have to be define clearly by those who use them. If you say you are "Refomred" You need to clearly state what part of that position you do agree with. You know?
Charity said, "I think we should be what the bible says." I laughed, softly. But we all believe the Bible. But we all believe differently waht the Bible says. Why is that?
Well there you have it Rose.
How did you see your preachers sermon today, same as your husband?
Charles
By
Charles e. Whisnant, at 10/29/2006 2:17 PM
Charles,
That was a very interesting description of yourself! Thanks for sharing that. I am sorry that I did not respond until now. I was neglectful.
You didn't answer me - do you know of the GARBC?
(I like the name Charity)
By
Rose~, at 11/06/2006 9:39 AM
Post a Comment
<< Home