Introduction
Last time we examined Free Grace Theology (FGT) and how, according to this theology, we receive salvation. FGT maintains that we receive it on the basis of belief-in-Christ alone. Significantly, FGT distinguishes between the 'call to believe' and the 'call to follow' (see Free Grace Theology) arguing that for salvation it is only necessary to believe on the Lord Jesus (e.g., Acts 16.31), that is, to answer the 'call to believe'.Lordship Salvation
In opposition to FGT is Lordship Salvation (LS)1 which believes that the 'call to follow' Jesus Christ is part and parcel of the 'call to believe' (Matt 28.19-20; Rom 1.5, 16.26; etc). LS is convinced that discipleship is an inherent part of true belief in Christ as Lord.Hence, one of the major teachings of LS is that being saved-by-grace-through-faith is always followed by works (Eph 2.8-10; Jas 2.17-20). The two (belief, and good works) will inevitably go together because 'faith without works is dead'.2 (FGT would say that discipleship is a thoroughly desirable result of belief in Christ but not an automatic one.)
John MacArthur's, The Gospel According To Jesus (1988)3 sparked a major controversy between the two groups. MacArthur spoke about his views here: his major point in his article centres on the nature of saving faith.
Theologically, this is the crux of the disagreement between the two sides with FTG saying that saving faith is 'confessing with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believing in your heart that God has raised him from the dead' (Rom 10.9, 10 also). But, MacArthur for LS counters this notion by saying that saving faith necessarily involves repentance (Acts 2.38; 3.19; 11.18; 17.30; 26.20) obedience to Christ (Matt 7.21;1 Jn 3.23-24).
Repentance
Both camps argue about the meaning of repentance4,5 with FTG asserting that it simply means to change one's mind about someone or something. One the other hand, the LS group says that repentance is not just changing your opinion about who Jesus Christ is. For in scripture repentance is inextricably connected with sorrow for sin, turning from sin, and a change of life (e.g., see Matt 3.8). Jesus joined repentance with believing the gospel (Mk 1.15): 'repent and believe the gospel'!
Why was Jesus able to declare to others that Zacchaeus had entered into eternal life (Luke 19.1-8, 9-10)? Jesus knew because of the change in Zacchaeus heart towards the poor, and about his former (presumed) cheating of taxpayers (Luke 19.8).
LS would argue that it wasn't just that Zacchaeus believed in Jesus as the Messiah but that he showed repentance for his former life by granting restitution to those he had cheated. Jesus confirmed Zacchaeus' new status by saying, 'This day is salvation come to this house'.
Why was Jesus able to declare to others that Zacchaeus had entered into eternal life (Luke 19.1-8, 9-10)? Jesus knew because of the change in Zacchaeus heart towards the poor, and about his former (presumed) cheating of taxpayers (Luke 19.8).
LS would argue that it wasn't just that Zacchaeus believed in Jesus as the Messiah but that he showed repentance for his former life by granting restitution to those he had cheated. Jesus confirmed Zacchaeus' new status by saying, 'This day is salvation come to this house'.
Covenantalism
At another level of theology, this squabble can be understood in terms of different views about how the biblical covenants are organised. The LS group tends to adhere to a view usually called 'covenant theology'6.
The covenantal view of redemption history holds that the Trinity made 'the covenant of redemption' among themselves purposing to save humanity by the Father sending of the Son, anointed by the Spirit, to die and rise again for sinners.
Before the Fall into sin, 'the covenant of works' operated; after that, 'the covenant of grace' functioned under both the old and new administrations. Hence, three covenants in all.
The various biblical covenants explicitly referred to such as the Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, and New are different administrations of the covenant of grace. This notion is derived from the writings of John Calvin and thus Christian traditions associated with his teaching ('Reformed', Presbyterian, some Anglicans and some Baptists) have continued the Lutheran-Calvinian Reformed teaching of the importance of repentance and obedience in the lives of those claiming to be recipients of God's grace.
The covenantal view of redemption history holds that the Trinity made 'the covenant of redemption' among themselves purposing to save humanity by the Father sending of the Son, anointed by the Spirit, to die and rise again for sinners.
Before the Fall into sin, 'the covenant of works' operated; after that, 'the covenant of grace' functioned under both the old and new administrations. Hence, three covenants in all.
The various biblical covenants explicitly referred to such as the Noahic, Abrahamic, Mosaic, Davidic, and New are different administrations of the covenant of grace. This notion is derived from the writings of John Calvin and thus Christian traditions associated with his teaching ('Reformed', Presbyterian, some Anglicans and some Baptists) have continued the Lutheran-Calvinian Reformed teaching of the importance of repentance and obedience in the lives of those claiming to be recipients of God's grace.
1. Could also be titled, 'discipleship salvation' but as it is commonly called 'Lordship salvation' I will use that title.
2. The answer given by the FGT camp to this citation of James 2 is to say that James is speaking about the judgement of Christians with respect to future rewards (Jas 2.12-13).
3. Two expansions and revisions followed in 1994, and 2008.
4. God is even said to repent (Gen 6.6; Exod 32.14) (which can be understood as language used to accommodate to humans as creatures living in a world of change).
5. The Greek is metanoe-o' which literally translates as 'a change of mind'. However, we should not just accept 'literal' meanings as though they were law. It's far better to examine the way the word is used in the Bible to discover its meaning in context.
6. However, this is by no means a hard and fast rule. John F. MacArthur adheres to LS strongly but is a dispensationalist. I grew up in a movement which accepted and preached LS without question but which was also dispensationalist.
Comments