End of Discussion on This Particular Thread of Thought

The points in my last two post are for those who believe that salvation is free. They were constructed in a way to give my perspective on things. They were given to show the logical implications of the understanding that eternal life is absolutely free. If a person preaches a gospel where it is costly to the unsaved, is this the same gospel of the freeness of God's grace and gift? And if this is not the same gospel, what does that imply for the person who believes this different gospel? I have not peered in to anyone's heart. I have not judged any particular man's salvation.

I just flatly state my great and heartfelt conviction that any man who believes the Lordship Salvation gospel IS NOT BELIEVING THE SAVING MESSAGE OF CHRIST. I should have just left it at that. Yet what is the implication if they have not believed the only message that saves? That they are unsaved.

Calvinists are confusing sometimes. I don't know what they believe in their heart concerning how they figure they will get into heaven or what they have believed in the past (remember, salvation is received the instant that one believes in Christ for eternal life). I can only go on what they preach as their doctrine now. Some LS people I have responded to lately flatly state that obedience is necessary for eternal life. This is not the gospel of grace, but the gospel of obligation.

My posts were intended really for those who believe in the gospel of the free grace of God yet do not see the implications that all other forms of the "gospel" are false, and if believed, the person has not believed the simple gospel message that saves.

I wanted to have people understand that the free grace/lordship salvation debate has a lot to do with people getting saved, not just with the way they live the Christian life.

In my posts I have directly stated the answer to your questions concerning being friends. I would be friends with anyone. I would be friendly and loving.

But life is so much more than the blogosphere and coffee and donut relationships. There is a real battle out there and Satan has deceived many within our churches.

I don't preach against people. I preach against doctrine. A false prophet is known by his fruit (which is his doctrine, what he says). If someone states that salvation takes faith + obedience+ forsaking sins + whatever, that shows he is a false prophet. That doesn't necessarily mean that he is unsaved. I know that J.I. Packer used to believe in the free grace gospel, for he says so, but then he says later, when he believed the LS gospel he was saved.

I do believe that people get saved in spite of the preachers abbherent theology, sometimes. If at anytime during a conversation, listening to the word of God, or reading it, someone is convinced that Jesus has given them eternal life through their faith in Him alone, they are saved.

But those who now preach LS, whether or not they are saved, are preaching a false gospel to those who are unsaved. The Lordship gospel is confusing, adds many caveats, includes obedience, and is quite subjective. How is one to know if he submitted enough, committed enough, followed enough, repented enough, obeyed enough? Do you see how the personal contingency that is laid on the unsaved by the LS gospel can effect the psychology? If they are worried that they may have not done enough, they have already been swayed to believe that salvation is somewhat contingent on themselves. That one believes that they must DO these things can be naturally shown that they understand the conditionality for eternal life based upon their repentance, their commitment, their following, their obedience, etc, and not on Christ alone.

I have not fingerpointed to any particular person. I am pointing to an abbherent theology. It matter what people believe. Truth matters. It matters so much that without the simple appropriation of the truth of the gospel, no man can enter the kingdom of God. This knowlege breaks me. So much confusion, ignorance, and false teaching is swirling around.

Bob Wilkin writes a journal article called The Subtle Danger of an Imprecise Gospel where evangelists are not using the biblical gospel message of believing in Jesus. People are wishy-washy, imprecise, using terms like "give your heart to Jesus", "you must sign up", "ask Jesus to be your Savior", "accept Jesus", etc. What do these things mean? A person could do all of these things and yet not believe that Jesus guarantees for them resurrection and eternal life.

The aforementioned was just people preaching confusing gospels, where there is great danger in people not undertanding the truth of the gospel, that it is only by grace through purposeful faith alone in Jesus Christ. Those of the LS are as great of a threat or worse, for they preach "costly gospel". Their gospel places contingency on the unbeliever, making the reception of eternal life "costly" to the recipient.

I have not stood in judgement of anyone's trust in Christ. Have I mentioned anyone's names and said they were unsaved? I have merely stated that some people preach a false gospel, and if any unsaved person believes that message, they remain unsaved. The Lordship Salvation crew has said as much about my beliefs, that FG is a false gospel.

Can't you remember recently someone who derided me and my theology state this:

With regards to Free Grace, it should be obvious that at the very heart of the gospel itself, we disagree

The people on the Lordship Salvation side and me all conclude that we aren't preaching the same gospel. It is those who are on the fence who cannot see that they are different and not the same. Therefore at least one of them is under the curse of preaching a false gospel.

I am not trying to alienate people from me. If someone tells me that they have eternal life by faith alone in Christ alone, apart from obedience, works, etc., I will consider them my brother. Yet if these same people continue to preach that forsaking sins, obedience, repentance, whole-hearted commitment, surrender of everything, perseverance until the end, and all the other strings and caveats, are necessary for eternal life, I will call them on their dissonance, for how can someone say that they have been saved by grace through faith alone in Christ but yet heap all these other conditions upon the unsaved? There is a disconnect somewhere and on many different levels, this is dangerous ground.

If people do not see the gospel the same way as I do, how could they consider me their brother? Why would I expect them to, unless it was merely for the benefit of our cordial coffee and doughnut fellowship?

I have one thing to say to SUSAN. Susan, you have been giving me a hard time. Did you give Daniel a hard time when he called my gospel false? When he actually targeted me and held me in contempt? You were the first one to comment on his horrid post about me when you said this:

"Thanks for your respectful and gracious introduction to such wonderful things."

Yet he later had this to say about the same post:

First and foremost Antonio I applaud and thank you for taking me to task on this... I am sorry that I made my post personal...You have my earnest, honest apology for making you the "target" of my post... in hindsight I honestly regret having been so calloused.

It is interesting Susan that you had such a gracious response to Daniel's obvious contempt for me in the personal nature of his post, yet, me, who hasn't made any personal accusations, you give me such grief. Please pardon me if I find this a bit of a double-standard, and competely partial. Daniel's post was anything but respectful and gracious. My post doesn't name names but merely talks about my convictions about theology and their ramifications.

My last few posts have been on theology and not attacks on people at all. They are targeted on doctrine and truth. If I have sinned against anyone, please bring my sin to my attention in order that I may repent of it. If I have sinned, please convict me of it.

I have not looked in anyone's heart nor deemed anyone particular person unsaved, yet so many people seem to have indicated that I have. None of my last 2 posts have been personal, but doctrinal. I have sought to make one point and one point only: the false gospel of Lordship Salvation does not save.

Antonio da Rosa
Lakeside, CA
2/11/06