tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post116115927061100135..comments2024-03-10T10:40:32.319-07:00Comments on Pyromaniacs: The AftermathPhil Johnsonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00649092052031518426noreply@blogger.comBlogger39125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1167911346696111812007-01-04T03:49:00.000-08:002007-01-04T03:49:00.000-08:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1162869605510744372006-11-06T19:20:00.000-08:002006-11-06T19:20:00.000-08:00Phil, Sorry for the late comment. I hope you read ...Phil, <BR/><BR/>Sorry for the late comment. I hope you read this and consider it. Mal Couch, in typical poison pen fashion, has put some incorrect info up on the web concerning Dr. MacArthur and the Lordship debate, which would be nice to see publicly challenged. Couch has a small following but he does publish a number of books. The link to comments he posted today about MacArthur can be found here: http://www.scofieldprophecystudies.org/Questions/Question29.htm. He specifically states that MacArthur coined the term "Lordship Salvation" and the teaching. If you or the guys at Pulpit Magazine get a chance to enter a post referring to and refuting Couch's accusation, that would be great. I appreciate you guys.The StogiEvangelisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00002114529941251963noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1161317413508416022006-10-19T21:10:00.000-07:002006-10-19T21:10:00.000-07:00Paul,You say:So helpful to know, H K, why we disag...Paul,<BR/><BR/>You say:<BR/><BR/><I>So helpful to know, H K, why we disagree with the interpretation your crowd puts on James 2. It's not that we've done honest exegesis; it's that we love works religion! Now I understand! We secretly hate biblical grace!</I><BR/><BR/>This is what I stated:<BR/><I>Mankind loves works religion and distorted by-faith salvation…</I><BR/><BR/>For the record, I consider you and your buds to be of the later category.<BR/><BR/>But, Paul, you again say that you’ve done exegesis on James, just like you stated on #7 of this series. As you may have noticed, I took the bate heavily then and at least twice asked you to expand on your views of James. Maybe you’ll expand at some point, and I’m not sure why your being so closed to the vest on James. I suppose your “honest exegesis” doesn’t include specifically examining what Hodges is arguing, like a Berean would. But I hope I’m wrong on this and you have done that.<BR/><BR/>My view is that there are several aspects to Hodges views on James that are blatantly superior than the model now embraced “by the masses”. And his overall understanding of its structure is light-years superior. So I’m with Hodges: "All of the major ways of reading this text are wrong. And not simply wrong, but seriously so. So incorrect are these views , that if James himself had heard them, he would have been both astonished and appalled!” (p.7 Dead Faith)<BR/><BR/>BlessingsAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14129403607163332340noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1161290283836827432006-10-19T13:38:00.000-07:002006-10-19T13:38:00.000-07:00>Now I understand! We secretly hate biblical grace...>Now I understand! We secretly hate biblical grace!<<BR/><BR/>I am now begining to wonder as you guy keep insulting these free gracers as small potatoe runts that are not worthy of your blogspace and repetoire'<BR/><BR/>If anything this whole deal has been eye opening for me. I used to have a little sympathy for MacArthurs camp but I remember old fundamental preachers warning me back in the 80's and 90's of the ecumenical tide in these publishers like Zondervan. I guess they were right after all. Is it possible that you guys are deeper into the New Evangelical movement than you realize and don't even know it when the signs come up out of the water and stare you in the face.<BR/><BR/>All the money and all the masses are not worth a mite when I have to stand before my Lord and give an account. Each day I am praising him for waking me up from this. I was buying into this intoxicating rationale'. If anything these posts have helped me realize something, even if the ones that ushered in these movements don't see it.<BR/><BR/>But one day God is going to give some of you all a loving reminder that you can't boast outside of his grace. We all need that reminder. We are so forgetful and yes, Jodie is correct...we love works religions and will retreat to them in a New York minute when given the opportunity to start boasting again.Bhedrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08091896907803479900noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1161276298232731352006-10-19T09:44:00.000-07:002006-10-19T09:44:00.000-07:00Phil,Thanks for the outstanding series. I apprecia...Phil,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for the outstanding series. I appreciated the history. Excellent writing and reading!<BR/><BR/>JasonJasonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09751681838914706341noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1161267783831402352006-10-19T07:23:00.000-07:002006-10-19T07:23:00.000-07:00djp said: That many dispensationalists also, in co...<B>djp said: That many dispensationalists also, in contradiction to their own stated approach to Scripture, adopt this approach, is a heartache and a shame.</B><BR/><BR/>My point exactly. The hermeneutic we both profess <I>does</I> lead, not <I>should</I> lead, to the lordship position. The hermeneutic which ostensibly leads to dispensationalism <I>and</I> no-lordship salvation is plain quirky.<BR/><BR/>calvdispy: Come now. This blog is nothing if not a place of propositional statements of what the <I>commentors</I> (not the blog hosts) all think they believe, minus the chapters and footnotes of explanation. However, I <I>am</I> making the connection in a paper I am writing. After 14 years of gathering background information from as many original sources as I can, I started compiling (a little over a year ago) that research on the various proponents of dispensationalism, their expressed hermeneutic, their soteriological leanings, what they teach concerning the doctrine of sanctification, what they teach eschatologically, and a few other things. Just as you <I>"knew something was amiss in the teaching but couldn't put [your] finger on it with much precision"</I> (regarding salvation), I also believed something was amiss in the logical progression of the dispensational hermeneutic. I can now say that I see the connection with increasing precision. (I so wish that a certain man, to whom "The Gospel According to Jesus" was dedicated, had not died a couple of years ago. He was on the right track in all of this.) Send me your e-mail and I will send you a draft when it is ready for your critical review. But to give a brief answer, the connection between dispensationalism and soteriology is made by Ryrie himself in chapter 6 of "Dispensationalsm" (Moody, 1995). It is also made by Blaising and Bock in "Progressive Dispensationalism" (Victor, 1993, pp. 112-ff; 244). The connection is also made by Larkin, most notably in "Rightly Dividing the Word" (Larkin, 1920, chs. 15-18). Same with McClain, Hoyt, James Boyer, Walvoord, Pentecost, Showers, LaHaye, Ice...David Mohlerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05586107161513106957noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1161264704905058582006-10-19T06:31:00.000-07:002006-10-19T06:31:00.000-07:00Hey Phil,Now that I’ve read your review of Hodges ...Hey Phil,<BR/><BR/>Now that I’ve read your review of Hodges James commentary, I look forward to engaging you on the topic of James when Pulpit resumes, since you’ve premised this series with that invite. “<I>Our friend Antonio and others who want to engage me on that subject can take it over to Pulpit.</I>” The Carson quote, which you use on Amazon, channels the spirit of Charles the 5th: "It is certain that a single monk must err if he stands against the opinion of all Christendom." <BR/><BR/>This is the Free Grace argument: mankind is corrupt. Mankind loves works religion and distorted by-faith salvation so much that it has throughout church history rejoiced in a badly distorted misreading of James. His original readers however did not make that mistake. And this can be shown by looking carefully at the text of James.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14129403607163332340noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1161262696350839302006-10-19T05:58:00.000-07:002006-10-19T05:58:00.000-07:00Hey Phil and Paul,I’d recommend choosing between F...Hey Phil and Paul,<BR/><BR/>I’d recommend choosing between Free Grace as the panacea to the masses and Free Grace as the despised and homeless loner, appealing to both only works for the initiated. The latter is closer to the truth so I’d stick with that.<BR/><BR/>These self-published books are major to plow-boys everywhere.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14129403607163332340noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1161262566744100412006-10-19T05:56:00.000-07:002006-10-19T05:56:00.000-07:00Phil,Thanks for sharing that review at Amazon. Goo...Phil,<BR/><BR/>Thanks for sharing that review at Amazon. Good thoughts.mark piersonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13882538938829765324noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1161229914069568812006-10-18T20:51:00.000-07:002006-10-18T20:51:00.000-07:00H K Flynn:No one—no one—outside the no-lordship gh...<B>H K Flynn:</B><BR/><BR/>No one—<I>no one</I>—outside the no-lordship ghetto would agree that the books you named are significant. I've already read most of them and I'm not aware of anyone who has no agenda to promote no-lordship antinomianism who has recommended them as either helpful or important.<BR/><BR/>By the way, I just noticed that <A HREF="http://www.amazon.com/Epistle-James-Character-Testament-Commentary/dp/0964139200/ref=pd_sim_b_5/002-8121173-9440024?ie=UTF8" REL="nofollow">my review of Hodges' <I>James</I> is at Amazon.com.</A> I think that's the only review I have ever contributed there.Phil Johnsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00649092052031518426noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1161228379922445042006-10-18T20:26:00.000-07:002006-10-18T20:26:00.000-07:00The whole controversy over "lordship salvation" be...<I>The whole controversy over "lordship salvation" began to diminish shortly after Faith Works was published. Neither Hodges nor Ryrie has written any more major books on the subject.</I><BR/><BR/>Forgot to comment on this. Clearly Hodges book on repentance, <A HREF="http://www.faithalone.org/bookstore/harmony.html" REL="nofollow"><I>Harmony with God A Fresh Look at Repentance</I></A> is major in terms of new ground. In fact, it is significantly more ground breaking than <I>Absolutely Free</I>. His commentary on <A HREF="http://www.faithalone.org/bookstore/james.html" REL="nofollow">James</A> and <A HREF="http://www.faithalone.org/bookstore/1-3John.htm" REL="nofollow">1 John</A> are also major works. And I would include Rene Lopez's book on Romans, <A HREF="http://www.faithalone.org/bookstore/ru.html" REL="nofollow"><I>Romans Unlocked</I></A>, as a major new FG book.<BR/><BR/>Also of importance is Bob Wilkin's books, <A HREF="http://www.faithalone.org/bookstore/ss.html" REL="nofollow"><I>Secure and Sure</I></A>, on assurance, and <A HREF="http://www.faithalone.org/bookstore/reward.html" REL="nofollow"><I>The Road to Reward</I></A>. And Hodges' <A HREF="http://www.faithalone.org/bookstore/secrets.html" REL="nofollow"><I>Six Secrets of The Christian Life</I></A> is indispensable because it collapses the idea the FG has an inadequate theology of the new birth.<BR/><BR/>These are the books that establish FG as a self-examination theology that puts the warnings of the NT on center stage.<BR/><BR/>Frankly, Phil, I see these as significantly more important than Absolutely Free. So I am afraid you have some research to do before you become up to date on the literature!<BR/><BR/>God bless!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14129403607163332340noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1161228128017713902006-10-18T20:22:00.000-07:002006-10-18T20:22:00.000-07:00This series has been great Phil. Thank you.This series has been great Phil. Thank you.Janethttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10750326357523605368noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1161227054127572972006-10-18T20:04:00.000-07:002006-10-18T20:04:00.000-07:00I never knew a time when God worked and gave honor...I never knew a time when God worked and gave honor via strength of flesh or even once gave place to a shade of mammon. <BR/><BR/>Playing the private didn't know sir? You sure thats going to hold water at the judgment Seat of Christ? Did you guys pick up that check by the way?<BR/><BR/>The bottom line is that you really can't say that God gets the glory for your debate as Zondervan's saleman tactics have thrown in their mite. So Zondervan by your own admission will have the boast in the matter.<BR/><BR/>Remember God winnowed Gideons men down to 300. He doesn't like men to boast in numbers or strength of flesh...certainley He likes to be clear of money. The Apostle Paul went out of his way to do so.<BR/><BR/>I really wonder if God is celebrating of rather if he weeps over this.<BR/><BR/>Come out of her people. It seems were building Empires...Not the Kingdom of God.Bhedrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08091896907803479900noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1161222416042234282006-10-18T18:46:00.000-07:002006-10-18T18:46:00.000-07:00To All:Knowing this is partly a shameless plug, he...To All:<BR/><BR/>Knowing this is partly a shameless plug, here goes...<BR/><BR/>My new book <I>In Defense of the Gospel:Biblical Answers to Lordship Salvation</I> addresses the problems with John MacArthur's Lordship Salvation from a unique perspective.<BR/><BR/>I do not come to the debate from the positions of Hodges and Ryrie.<BR/><BR/>Throughout my book I avoided the frothy rhetoric that sometimes enters into the debate to provide objective and balanced scriptural answers. I have presented and defended the historic position on the gospel that has been held throughout church history. I have sought to bring clarity to the issue.<BR/><BR/>None of my work should be taken as a personal attack on any advocate of the Lordship position. I have treated the Lordship advocates with dignity and respect. The debate is focused on the doctrine of the gospel. Personality is not the issue!<BR/><BR/>LM<BR/><BR/>www.indefenseofthegospel.blogspot.comLou Martuneachttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08683967904677815711noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1161222071012678432006-10-18T18:41:00.000-07:002006-10-18T18:41:00.000-07:00Phil,I have very much appreciated these articles! ...Phil,<BR/><BR/>I have very much appreciated these articles! I am very thankful for you brother.<BR/><BR/>djp, I share your conviction of what the dispensational hermeneutic should produce. Indeed it does! It is regretable that dispensationalism was packaged together early on by Chafer (both in his systematic theology and in seperate articles), with a non-reformed soteriology. This indeed cracked open the door which is even now blown wide open to this peculiar teaching of a non-lordship salvation.Paul Ehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16680036111909848869noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1161219633444793052006-10-18T18:00:00.000-07:002006-10-18T18:00:00.000-07:00(OK -- Blogspot gave me html insanity. Sorry the l...(OK -- Blogspot gave me html insanity. Sorry the links have to be ham-fisted!)<BR/><BR/><B>Preface</B> -- this blog's focus is not dispensationalism, up or down. Other blogs can obsess about the CT/dispensationalism cage match if they like. I may foment some more focused articles sometime over at my blog.<BR/><BR/>http://bibchr.blogspot.com<BR/><BR/>But not here.<BR/><BR/>Having said that, some brief responses to questions/comments.<BR/><BR/><B>Jo Anne</B> -- for a little something about dispensationalism, check this out:<BR/><BR/>http://bibchr.blogspot.com/2006/02/what-dispensationalism-isnt.html<BR/><BR/><B>breformed</B> -- that's just silly, and it's a slander.<BR/><BR/>The sort of hermeneutic --<BR/><BR/>http://www.bibchr.com/sobr.html<BR/><BR/>--that produced dispensationalism is the conviction that we should take every word of Scripture in its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning, unless the facts of the immediate context, studied in the light of related passages and fundamental and axiomatic truths, clearly indicate otherwise.<BR/><BR/>There is no honest, sane, rational way that the application of that hermeneutic would produce the gutless grace position. It is its opposite. In fact, it is its antidote.<BR/><BR/>That many dispensationalists also, in contradiction to their own stated approach to Scripture, adopt this approach, is a heartache and a shame. But, as I mentioned before, imagining a <I>necessary</I> connection between the two is like saying that if you're a 5-point Calvinist, you <I>must</I> believe in attaching religious significance to spattering water on babies, just because many who affirm the former also embrace the latter.<BR/><BR/>The two are incidental to each other, at best.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1161213548963803382006-10-18T16:19:00.000-07:002006-10-18T16:19:00.000-07:00Breformed:Make the connection for us, just don't s...Breformed:<BR/>Make the connection for us, just don't state that there is one. We need proof of your proposition.MSChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05419145542442539462noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1161212229410173512006-10-18T15:57:00.000-07:002006-10-18T15:57:00.000-07:00Phil,I agree with your treatment of the rapture ob...Phil,<BR/><BR/>I agree with your treatment of the rapture obsessed culture, which saw the gospel debate as an upsetting of the apple cart. <BR/><BR/>Eschatologically speaking, it is the fearful expectation of the Judgment Seat of Christ that I see in the NT, not an over focus on the rapture. That focus profoundly lights the burners under our willingness to examine ourselves and our willingness to apply the Scriptures. <BR/><BR/>But your model fails under close examination. The FG model has its foundations explicitly taught in the NT, yours very much has to be assumed as being implied. I hope your readers explore the Pulpit series with a Bible open.<BR/><BR/>Your offensive use of the blatantly inaccurate "no-lordship" is a disservice to Christ. We extol radical obedience to Christ and His word.<BR/><BR/>Blessings.<BR/><BR/>JodieAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14129403607163332340noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1161194520493478432006-10-18T11:02:00.000-07:002006-10-18T11:02:00.000-07:00If someone were to clarify what a dispensationalis...If someone were to clarify what a dispensationalist is at this blog, I think it's only fair that a dispensationalist be allowed to state what he believes it is, as opposed to someone from the opposite perspective claiming to be an expert in it's theological persuasion.<BR/><BR/>(Just a thought)Jo Annehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00654526725671791173noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1161192680849120942006-10-18T10:31:00.000-07:002006-10-18T10:31:00.000-07:00Perhaps I miss your point, djp, but I disagree. Th...Perhaps I miss your point, djp, but I disagree. The hermeneutic that produces dispensationalism <I>reinforces</I> the gutless grace position. That hermeneutic has no capacity to kill the gutless grace position.<BR/><BR/>Having been raised in the Grace Brethren fellowship, arguably as much a force in the development of dispensational teaching as DTS, I was, for years, a product of the logical conclusions dispensationalism leads to: gutless grace and gutless eschatology.David Mohlerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05586107161513106957noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1161187764221244242006-10-18T09:09:00.000-07:002006-10-18T09:09:00.000-07:00Perhaps I didn't say it loudly enough. The same he...Perhaps I didn't say it loudly enough. < clearing throat ><BR/><BR/><B>The same hermeneutic that produces dispensationalism should be the death of the gutless grace position.</B><BR/><BR/>Connecting the two makes precisely as much sense as saying that, if you're a 5-point Calvinist, you must believe in attaching religious significance to spattering water on babies. Lots do, none necessarily.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1161186777955551142006-10-18T08:52:00.000-07:002006-10-18T08:52:00.000-07:00As an avid reader there are few books that I can s...As an avid reader there are few books that I can say have been life transforming; however, <I>Faith Works</I> has been at the very top of the list. <BR/><BR/>For several years I had been dismayed and confused by my understanding of the gospel as I had been taught it having sat under several DTS pastors. I knew something was amiss in the teaching but couldn't put my finger on it with much precision. I had heard of MacArthur and vaguely perceived him to promote a legalistic works-salvation based on the naive comments of DTS types floating around in those days.<BR/><BR/>Then I secured a copy of <I>Faith Works</I> and it changed my world; affirming, clarifying and expertly articulationg for me what made Biblical and logical sense. That book was also instrumental in my decision to train at TMS. I thank God for the clarity of MacArthur's teaching and preaching.<BR/><BR/>I love - "No, I'm a fruit EXPECTOR"!MSChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05419145542442539462noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1161183670938059972006-10-18T08:01:00.000-07:002006-10-18T08:01:00.000-07:00Well the evolution of Dispensationalism has been v...Well the evolution of Dispensationalism has been very interesting to me. It seems to be (IMHO) that the "classic" view of Darby, Scofield, and Chafer has been dying the death of a thousand qualifications. If Progressive Dispensationalism keeps "progressing", it may eventually end up somewhere near classic CT, with only some differences in EMPHASIS.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14416549612706591718noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1161182429680594172006-10-18T07:40:00.000-07:002006-10-18T07:40:00.000-07:00Re: "The editor there was somewhat cavalier about ...Re: "The editor there was somewhat cavalier about the whole matter, retorting that John MacArthur would thank them when he got his royalty check."<BR/>How much royalties have there been from the book?Peter M. Headhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03379103292621457026noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-21212024.post-1161181939147547122006-10-18T07:32:00.000-07:002006-10-18T07:32:00.000-07:00This was very interesting and I knew nothing of al...This was very interesting and I knew nothing of all of this in the 1990's. I was just a blundering Arminian with little theological understanding. I would like to see a series of posts on Dispensationalism and Covenantal positions.<BR/><BR/>I also did not realize that there was progressive dispensationalism, etc. Maybe someone can explain a little what defines these particular understandings of dispensationalism.candyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06088593538648596769noreply@blogger.com