Doctrines of Lordship Salvation and Mediatorial Kingship of Christ
- Thread starter Warren
- Start date
- Status
TylerRay
Puritan Board Graduate
As far as I know, "Lordship Salvation" isn't really a technical term. If it is used to mean that saving faith includes obedience, then it is heresy. If it is used to mean that obedience always accompanies saving faith, then it is orthodoxy.
Mediatorial Kingship is a different issue. It is the doctrine than Christ has inherited a Kingship over the nations by virtue of his being the Messiah. This doctrine was developed by the Covenanters and is still a Covenanter distinctive.
Mediatorial Kingship is a different issue. It is the doctrine than Christ has inherited a Kingship over the nations by virtue of his being the Messiah. This doctrine was developed by the Covenanters and is still a Covenanter distinctive.
DMcFadden
Puritanboard Commissioner
Post WWII evangelicalism promoted the slogan, "accept Jesus as your personal Lrod and savior." In the preaching of many, this became "accept Jesus as your personal savior." To some this seemed to be a truncation of the Gospel message. Devotees of Dallas Theological Seminary (cf. "Grace" by the old school Dallas patriarch, L.S. Chafer, and more recent works by Charles Ryrie and Zane Hodges) vigorously heralded the idea that any mention of "works," even as the fruit of regeneration, would contaminate the whole. Lordship Salvation as a response to this movement became popular through the immensely successful "The Gospel According to Jesus" by John MacArthur. MacArthur contended that one cannot truly accept Jesus as savior without also accepting him as Lord.
The whole dispute is somewhat reminiscent of the Majorist controversy following the death of Luther. One side (the Philippist Georg Major) argued that good works were essential to salvation, the other side (Gnesio - Lutheran Nicolaus von Amsdorf) objected that they were prejudicial and destructive of salvation, and the Lutherans cobbled together Article IV of the Formula of Concord to settle the issue. From a Reformational perspective, the "accept Jesus as your savior" and "accept Jesus as your Lord and savior" formulations both represent a flawed understanding of soteriology that smacks of synergism rather than monergism.
One can appreciate the effort MacArthur made to counter the improper framing of salvation by the "non Lordship" teachers without fully embracing the slogan "Lordship salvation." Old fashioned Reformational monergism does just fine, thank you.
The whole dispute is somewhat reminiscent of the Majorist controversy following the death of Luther. One side (the Philippist Georg Major) argued that good works were essential to salvation, the other side (Gnesio - Lutheran Nicolaus von Amsdorf) objected that they were prejudicial and destructive of salvation, and the Lutherans cobbled together Article IV of the Formula of Concord to settle the issue. From a Reformational perspective, the "accept Jesus as your savior" and "accept Jesus as your Lord and savior" formulations both represent a flawed understanding of soteriology that smacks of synergism rather than monergism.
One can appreciate the effort MacArthur made to counter the improper framing of salvation by the "non Lordship" teachers without fully embracing the slogan "Lordship salvation." Old fashioned Reformational monergism does just fine, thank you.
bookslover
Puritan Board Doctor
A nice way to put it is: the Lordship Salvation position stresses that Ephesians 2.10 is attached to Ephesians 2.8-9.
TylerRay
Puritan Board Graduate
To clarify the two senses in which "Lordship Salvation" can be used in my post above, dispensational antinomians will oftentimes use the word to describe those who teach that where there is no obedience there is no faith. In contrast, I recently saw the term used here on PB to describe those who teach that obedience is of the essence of saving faith.
Warren
Puritan Board Freshman
Tyler, that was what confused me as well, referring back to the MacArthur Study Bible topic. Reading off MacArthur's website, I thought he spoke more from the later mind, yet he's from that dispensation stock... I just find it hard to believe he'd preach the former doctrine, the antinomian one. I think I'm just better off staying away from Lordship Salvation...
Richard, I guess I don't need Lordship Salvation to teach me this. If we read the Bible as if without verses, we couldn't argue otherwise.
Richard, I guess I don't need Lordship Salvation to teach me this. If we read the Bible as if without verses, we couldn't argue otherwise.
TylerRay
Puritan Board Graduate
Tyler, that was what confused me as well, referring back to the MacArthur Study Bible topic. Reading off MacArthur's website, I thought he spoke more from the later mind, yet he's from that dispensation stock... I just find it hard to believe he'd preach the former doctrine, the antinomian one. I think I'm just better off staying away from Lordship Salvation...
Richard, I guess I don't need Lordship Salvation to teach me this. If we read the Bible as if without verses, we couldn't argue otherwise.
Warren,
Yes, MacArthur fell into the error of viewing obedience as being of the essence of faith. Although he is a dispensationalist, he fell off the opposite side of the horse from the one that most dispensationalists do (i. e., antinomianism).
In another recent thread I spoke of the many defects of dispensationalism and how, as a grid for understanding the Scriptures and salvation, distorts many topics. I think dispensationalism combined with synergism makes it even worse. As Dennis noted, "Lordship Salvation" from a synergist is going to amount to this debate:
Arminian "all you need is faith" believes: You need to use your unaided will to trust in Jesus and that's enough to save you.
Arminian "Lordship Salvaion": No, it's not enough that you use your unaided will to believe in Jesus but you need to also make him your Lord and live in such a way that shows he's your Lord.
Both are un-Biblical notions.
Christ as Mediator of the Covenant of Grace is central to Reformed theology. By it, we understand that Christ is the only way that man can have fruition with the Creator. The Father sent the Son to die for His people and be raised. The Spirit applies the work of Redemption as Christ the Mediator is Prophet, Priest, and King. As Prophet Christ makes the proclamation of the Word fruitful by the Spirit that men would hear and be brought to life by the Spirit. As Priest, His perfect sacrifice is applied to those who are united to Him by faith. As King, He reigns and rules and conforms us to Him.
Thus, in Reformed soteriology the believer acts but it is Christ the Mediator Who is the ground of their hearing, their believing, their salvation, their adoption, and their sanctification. It all begins with Christ and it is by His power that the believer is saved.
And, yes, Jesus is Lord as Mediator but it is not because of the un-Biblical idea of the person able to just bridge the gap between God and man without a mediator and say: I invite you into my heart and you may now sit on the throne of my life.
Arminian "all you need is faith" believes: You need to use your unaided will to trust in Jesus and that's enough to save you.
Arminian "Lordship Salvaion": No, it's not enough that you use your unaided will to believe in Jesus but you need to also make him your Lord and live in such a way that shows he's your Lord.
Both are un-Biblical notions.
Christ as Mediator of the Covenant of Grace is central to Reformed theology. By it, we understand that Christ is the only way that man can have fruition with the Creator. The Father sent the Son to die for His people and be raised. The Spirit applies the work of Redemption as Christ the Mediator is Prophet, Priest, and King. As Prophet Christ makes the proclamation of the Word fruitful by the Spirit that men would hear and be brought to life by the Spirit. As Priest, His perfect sacrifice is applied to those who are united to Him by faith. As King, He reigns and rules and conforms us to Him.
Thus, in Reformed soteriology the believer acts but it is Christ the Mediator Who is the ground of their hearing, their believing, their salvation, their adoption, and their sanctification. It all begins with Christ and it is by His power that the believer is saved.
And, yes, Jesus is Lord as Mediator but it is not because of the un-Biblical idea of the person able to just bridge the gap between God and man without a mediator and say: I invite you into my heart and you may now sit on the throne of my life.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Poll
