An Example of Lordship’s Man-Centered Message
At his blog site Tim Challies was doing what I might call a play-by-play from the Resolved Conference held Feb. 16-19 and sponsored by John MacArthur’s Grace Community Church. I had no particular reason for visiting Tim’s site Sunday evening, just clicked on it and found the Resolved Conference (VI) report.
The VI report is a review by Tim Challies of a sermon by Pastor Steve Lawson (Christ Fellowship Baptist Church).
The text Pastor Lawson chose to speak from is Luke 14:25-33 and the title of his message was The Cost of Discipleship (It Will Cost You Everything).
At face value that title is direct and can be supported biblically. The problem is that Pastor Lawson is not only talking about the cost of discipleship for a believer, he teaches, just like John MacArthur, that there is a cost FOR salvation.
In the Bible Luke 14:25-33 is a message directed to those who are born again. This sermon is an example of taking a passage, such as Luke 14:25-33) meant for instructing the born again child of God on how to grow as a disciple of Christ, and reinterpreting it as though it is a gospel message directed to the lost.
Remember the problem with Lordship Salvation is not in regard to the results of salvation. I am in agreement with any Lordship advocate who believes that a genuine conversion should evidence itself in genuine results: a desire to live for Jesus Christ.
It is what Lordship advocates insist are the requirements for salvation that is the error in their system. In Pastor Lawson’s text when he speaks of following Christ, self denial and cross bearing in the context of a born again believer needing to make those commitments to his Lord and Savior he is on biblical ground. When, however, he takes those same commands and presents them as conditions which must be agreed to in exchange for salvation he has checked out on the Scriptures and is preaching a works based message that frustrates grace (Gal. 2:21).
Here are three excerpts from Lawson’s sermon:
“If you want to receive this gift it will cost you the total commitment of all that you are to the Lord Jesus Christ. There are many here who think they are saved, but are not; they have never really done business with God.”
“I want to single you out in the midst of this crowd. Have you taken up a cross in order to follow after Christ? Have you recognized your own sinfulness, acknowledged that God's judgment is true, have you acknowledged Christ's right to rule your life? Have you submitted to the Lordship of Christ? Have you really come to the end of self? Because Jesus does not begin until you end.”You can read how Pastor Lawson conditions the reception of “this gift” (the gift of eternal life) on an upfront “total commitment” from a lost man. In the second quote Pastor Lawson is saying that a relation with Christ cannot begin until the lost man has come to the end of himself. That sounds pious, but that is not the gospel.
And then this astounding statement:
“You need to make terms of peace with this king or you will be subjected in damnation forever. Christ has made terms of peace and you need to settle out-of-court with him. You do not want to go into that final day of conflict with Christ, for He will be ruthless in the execution of justice. He offers mercy today. He will agree to terms of peace and surrender, but they are His terms of peace, not ours. His terms are this: you must love Him more than anything. If you cannot do this, you will meet Him in the final judgment and glorify God in your destruction.”Whether Lawson is speaking to the believer or the lost the quote above (in context with the balance of the message) is probably one of the most biblically unsound I have heard in the last ten years.
Tim Challies confirms that Lawson’s sermon was an evangelistic appeal meant to reach the lost. At his site this is the final paragraph of Tim’s review of Pastor Lawson’s sermon.
“I was glad to see an evangelistic message, even three days into the conference. I think it is wonderful that the speakers are not simply assuming that everyone here is saved, but are continually pushing, continually asking people to examine their hearts and to determine if they are truly saved. Lawson's message was as convicting an evangelistic appeal as I've heard in a long time. And what's more, it was a call for Christian commitment as well.”Lordship advocates see no distinction between salvation and discipleship. That is one of the ways in which they wind up in what is the false gospel commonly referred to as Lordship Salvation. In my book there is a chapter dedicated to this specific issue. The chapter title is- Salvation & Discipleship: Is There A Biblical Difference?
Pastor Lawson’s gospel is a man-centered message and thereby frustrates the grace of God (Gal. 2:21). Pastor Lawson’s sermon is a stark example of the extreme to which the Lordship advocates have twisted the Gospel of grace into a works based message.
“But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ,” (2 Cor. 11:3).
I was so happy to find your site and book, as i was surfing around to find other comments on the Resolved Conference. My college-age daughter is in attendance, and i felt nauseated as i read the latest Challies liveBlog. Wow. This is outrageous. We must love Him more than anything, or we'll be doomed? As i wrote to my daughter, the last time i thought that perhaps i loved God more than anything, i think i was about.......20! How can anyone even make such a claim? Don't they have any awareness of their own heart, their own motives, their own self-seeking, even under spiritual guises? .......
ReplyDeleteCan't wait to get your book. Press on, brother.
-- Bridget, tucson, arizona (originally from chicago area. :) )
"His terms are this: you must love Him more than anything. If you cannot do this, you will meet Him in the final judgement and glorify God in your destruction. (from Challies liveblog of lawson.)"
Bridget:
ReplyDeleteThanks for checking in with me. I found the sermon by Pastor Lawson disturing and alarming.
What especially frustrates me and one of the main reasons for my book is that these men are leading our young people astray with this false teaching. Young people are not quite settled in their lives or theology and are often swayed by an impressive delivery backed by the appearance of scholarship.
Thanks again for the comments.
LM
Are you sure this conference was held at GCC? It is my understanding it was held in Long Beach, CA. and the conference was actually for college aged folks.
ReplyDeleteYes, the location for Resolved is the Long Beach Convention & Entertainment Center.
ReplyDeleteThe point I intended to make is that the conference is sponsored and promoted by the Grace Community Church.
When I use the term, “young people,” I do mean college-age young people, because I was aware that most attendees would be in that age group. That is young, in the sense that I am in the 50+ club.
Thanks for helping to clarify. I will edit above.
Do you have any thoughts on the sermons excerpts? Do they accurately reflect the gospel of salvation by grace through faith (Eph. 2:8-9)?
LM
I don't think it's wise to express thoughts on sermon excerpts. I have found it to be a lose/lose for everyone involved. I perfer to listen to the complete sermon before I express my thoughts.
ReplyDeleteI trust you will correct your posting over at SI concerning the location of this conference.
Hello Again:
ReplyDeleteI do understand and appreciate your concern. If I were only vaguely familiar with the Lordship interpretation of the gospel, it would be unwise for me to comment on sermon excerpts.
I assure you that I am thoroughly familiar with and completely understand Lordship theology. I have studied it from the writing and sermons of Lordship's leading advocates. My book of nearly 300 pages defines, documents and answers Lordship Salvation.
As for Pastor Lawson’s sermon- I read Tim’s lengthy transcription. The error of Lordship Salvation is in that sermon and for me is easily recognizable. I cited the excerpts that demonstrate the disturbing extremes of Lordship Salvation.
Over the course of my nearly 19 years of looking at Lordship Salvation I found this sermon to be typical of many Lordship sermons or books. The Lordship requirements/conditions for salvation are woven in along side what is for the most part orthodox. So, for many, the Lordship interpretation of the gospel is not immediately recognizable.
In any event, you have raised a few peripheral issues that do not address the major theme of my article. Would you care to comment on whether or not you believe Pastor Lawson’s sermon was biblically sound?
LM
PS: Would you care to identify yourself?
I deleted a comment this morning. It was not objectionable, just off subject for this thread. The author is OK with this, and we are visiting via e-mail.
ReplyDeleteLM
To All:
ReplyDeleteJust one observation about the comments from Anonymous above.
His concern was not with the subject matter of the article or Lawson's sermon. His concern was with peripherals, such as:
1) Location of the Resolved conference,
2) My use of "young people," (he may have thought I meant teens/pre-teens.
3) He had a problem with my use of "sermon excerpts."
I did encourage him to share some comments on Lawson's sermon, but he chose to drop out.
It is unfortunate that when the gospel is at stake: location, ages, and excerpts were the chief concern.
LM
Lou,
ReplyDeleteIt seems these guys miss this is a one sided covenant like the covenant of Abraham.
To add anything from our side does nothing... even obedience we walk in is Christ's and not ours...
It is a matter of total trust after Salvation by Grace. Faith is the active trust we walk in as we experience that saving Grace.
The saddest things is that though it seems like nit picking it is not. To teach we do anything to be saved by Grace diminishes grace and reduces it to works... then Christianity becomes just a religion to appease an angry god instead of a Loving God Who did everything for us to be with Him and experience His love.
Though one has to dig deeper into these guys teachings than say the Mormons of JW's to preach works and deny is as much as a lie as the Cults that claim to be Christian yet are not at all.
Blessings,
iggy
Good post and comment by iggy. I dont know why the Lordshippers always put this list of conditions on, and I think it is to compensate for the drift from truth occuring today. They see something is wrong, but this does not change this absolutely free offer from God in Christ and we need to stick to the free offer. Its His offer and Spirit that will work if we simply preach and teach it.
ReplyDeleteHi Bhedr:
ReplyDeleteSeems you've been surfing my blog. Hope you find many more helpful comments.
Lou
Reposting this comment here from the newer 2009 thread per Lou's request.
ReplyDeleteLou,
I wonder if we can discuss a quote from one of these articles? It is this quote of Steve Lawson from the Challis article linked in “An Example of Lordship's Man Centered Message.” :
“I want to single you out in the midst of this crowd. Have you taken up a cross in order to follow after Christ? Have you recognized your own sinfulness, acknowledged that God’s judgment is true, have you acknowledged Christ’s right to rule your life? Have you submitted to the Lordship of Christ? Have you really come to the end of self? Because Jesus does not begin until you end.”
I remember reading Challis' post some time ago and finding this section particularly disturbing but couldn't put my finger on just exactly why. Now I think I know. From a biblical statement about recognizing our own sinfulness and God's true (righteous) judgment on sin, Lawson jumps right to acknowledging Christ's right to rule one's life, etc. He skips completely over what God has done about our sin. He mentions neither the cross of Christ nor the personal need to accept Christ's finished work on our behalf. What is this supposed to mean? “Yes, we are filthy rotten sinners and here we are as such to be Your subjects. You'll just have to disregard Romans 12:1 since we are neither holy nor acceptable. Still, here we are anyway.”? Why do you suppose he failed to mention the crux of the issue in salvation?
Actually, I think I have an idea of why. Here is another quote (Lawson again) from a bit earlier:
“They[sic] key word of this text is the last word of both 26 and 27: disciple. Jesus longs for and died for disciples. Not one drop of blood was shed beyond the disciples.”
This explains everything, doesn't it? We are back to TULIP in full flower. Jesus only died for “disciples” not for whosoever will. Therefore, we will first have to determine if you are a disciple so we can decide whether or not Jesus has died for you. Obviously, this would necessitate the commitment to discipleship prior to salvation. Otherwise, since “not one drop of blood was shed beyond the disciples” you really have no Savior to believe in, do you? Naturally, because of total inability no one would just sign up to be a follower of Christ. Only the regenerate need apply. But then, only the regenerate will apply. (They are kind of right on that point. The Lordshippers are right that discipleship is for the regenerate.) But now they have created the problem that regeneration must happen prior to salvation, which voids the testimony of the Holy Spirit that the sinner is dead in trespasses and sins and must come unto Christ to be made alive in Him. How can a person be dead and regenerate at the same time? Further, they are already alive but have not yet come to Christ, so they are alive apart from Christ. So now they are in the position of needing to prove their regeneration in order to have access to the cross where, provided they are a disciple, they have a Savior.
In that same vein, here are some other interesting quotes which fail to mention either the fact that Jesus died for YOU or the need to personally accept Jesus' death on the cross for YOU (I can't tell if they are Lawson's or Challis'):
“You need to make terms of peace with this king or you will be subjected in damnation forever. Christ has made terms of peace and you need to settle out-of-court with him. You do not want to go into that final day of conflict with Christ, for He will be ruthless in the execution of justice. He offers mercy today. He will agree to terms of peace and surrender, but they are His terms of peace, not ours. His terms are this: you must love Him more than anything. If you cannot do this, you will meet Him in the final judgement [sic] and glorify God in your destruction.”
His terms are that you must love Him more than anything? Or are the terms that you must eat of His flesh broken for YOU and drink of His blood shed for YOU? Perhaps you cannot love Him at this time, but can you believe Him? Where is the cross on which He died FOR YOU?
“...[Jesus]is saying that you must transfer ownership of all that you are and have to all that He is. Your life is no longer your life, but His life. Your time is His time, your possessions are His possessions. This is what it is to meet His terms of peace. In short, Christ demands the total and complete surrender of our lives. Saving faith is coming to the end of ourselves and trusting all that we are and have to all that He is.”
Where is the cross to which the handwriting of requirements against YOU was nailed and the penalty of YOUR sin paid in Christ?
“Jesus is calling today for all of us here to come to Him. [But is He calling each in the same way or is He calling only some “effectively”? I do not want to hear who He is "calling" since I do not know if you are speaking of a "general call" or an "effective call." I want to know for whom Christ died.] We need to search our hearts to see if we’ve come to this place of total commitment and to see if we’ve yielded our lives to the soveriegn [sic] Lordship of the one who died.”
If He is really calling “all of us here to come to Him”, then why didn't Lawson say, “...the one who died for us?” Or even clearer, make the whole sentence singular- “You need to...the one who died for you.” But no. All we get is “the one who died.” A singular fact of death with no personal application.
Challis mentions someone who spoke on Isaiah 53 before Lawson. We don't have any information on that sermon. Perhaps the death of Christ was put in terms the lost could find hope in. We don't know. We've only got this review of Steve Lawson's speech which is devoid of Christ crucified for the lost.
JanH
Jan:
ReplyDeleteYou wrote, “I remember reading Challis' post some time ago and finding this section particularly disturbing but couldn't put my finger on just exactly why. Now I think I know. From a biblical statement about recognizing our own sinfulness and God's true (righteous) judgment on sin, Lawson jumps right to acknowledging Christ’s right to rule one's life, etc. He skips completely over what God has done about our sin. He mentions neither the cross of Christ nor the personal need to accept Christ’s finished work on our behalf. What is this supposed to mean? ‘Yes, we are filthy rotten sinners and here we are as such to be Your subjects. You'll just have to disregard Romans 12:1 since we are neither holy nor acceptable. Still, here we are anyway.’? Why do you suppose he failed to mention the crux of the issue in salvation?”
That is a great question.
About a year ago I had a brief discussion about that with someone. It may have been Phillip Evans, but I’m not sure. Whoever it was noted exactly what you just did, no preaching Christ’s finished work on the cross.
I have heard at least two evangelistic sermons (live) by LS men whom NEVER in those sermons mentioned the cross. Only “submit, surrender, commit” and you will be saved.
I’ll have to pick this up with you later.
Thanks,
Lou
"I have heard at least two evangelistic sermons (live) by LS men whom NEVER in those sermons mentioned the cross. Only “submit, surrender, commit” and you will be saved."
ReplyDeleteLou,
I'm glad to hear it's not just me. Looking forward to your elaboration.
JanH
(P.S. I don't know who Phillip Evans is, but I'm glad he noticed it too.)
Thank you once again for this light on such a problem. LS has had me confused until I found this blog. Not that I was confused about salvation, but just how this regeneration of the LS group is put forth. It seems confusing to listen to their messages. And having a friend or two that believe this way- this has helped me see where they get such ideas as John the Baptist was regenerated from the womb.
ReplyDeleteNow to try to help them see the error is difficult, it really is. My friend doesn't like John 3:16 when those of us 'use it wrong'. They say it is a context thing. I'm always like- whoever means just that. Well, thanks again and I enjoyed the repost of the 2009 comment. :)
LG:
ReplyDeleteI am grateful to know that my efforts here have been helpful to you in regard to the Lordship Salvation interpretation of the gospel.
It's spread has been insidious.
Most who have already bought into LS and/or the extra biblical teaching of regeneration before faith are nearly unrecoverable. My primary goal is to advise, alert protect the unsuspecting or those unsure of what LS is so that they do not fall into the trap of LS.
LM