Gordon H. Clark, On Sanctification, "Can We Say Lordship Salvation" Part 1 of 2

[rofyle]

It is impossible for one to be saved in Arminianism. I know the opposite has become popular among some Calvinists, but that's because they're lost too. ONE CANNOT BE SAVED BY A FALSE GOSPEL. You have not yet been brought to professed you believed a lie.

The gospel is the fact Christ satisfied the law on behalf of His elect. He perfectly obeyed it, and He satisfied the death it required. As such, the law now demands the salvation of His elect. Arminians do not believe this.

[callednchosen]

As a converted Jew, I am astonished how the Gentiles like to develop terms and them force these terms onoto others. ---->still looking for the term "Lordship salvation". The last video made me lol. "this is not according to the teachings of Calvin", BIG DEAL! Do you also support Calvin's position on Roman Catholic paedo sprinkling? How Conveeeeenient!

[RedBeetle]

1689Baptist,

You don't understand Gordon H. Clark--LOL!

Did Clark say the Gospel in its saving sense was the preaching of repentance--a call to obedience? No. So, Clark does not hold to the heresy of Lordship Salvation. Clark's chapter is titled "On Sanctification." Now the Gospel causes sanctification, but Lordship Salvation's false gospel cannot sanctify anyone!

[1689Baptist]

@RedBeetle

Thats all I believe those God justifies He also sanctifies. You are the one that twists Lordship Salvation into saying something it does not say.

[RedBeetle]

@1689Baptist,

You wrote: "Thats all I believe those God justifies He also sanctifies."

What in the world are you trying to say?

I speak and read English, not incoherent babbling.

[Haukman66]

@RedBeetle Strawman, Monty. Enough of your name calling, and insults. Where are the fruits of the Spirit in you? I understand why BlogRich doesnt want to have anything to do with you anymore.

[RedBeetle]

@Haukman66,

LOL, wrong again. According to BlogRich, he agrees with my doctrine, which implies Lordship Salvation is heresy. Don't you hold to Lordship Salvation?

[1689Baptist]

@RedBeetle

Sad that you wont let us comment on your channel but I let you on mine.

[skintightpotato]

@1689Baptist

It's called "Hypocrisy." Monty is an expert by trade.

[Haukman66]

@RedBeetle LOL, yeah, he agrees with most of your doctrine, however, he is against the way you treat people. Nice to see he has finally realized it. And in answer to your question, yes, I believe in Lordship, as you already know. However, I dont believe it the way you portray it.  I wont waste my time, repeating myself again to you. I just love seeing more and more people come to realize, how proud and arrogant you are!!!

[1689Baptist]

@RedBeetle

"It is a psychological impossibility to trust in Christ's shed blood and to want to continue in sin." Gordon H. Clark 9:09

[RedBeetle]

@1689Baptist,

And you think this quote from Clark proves what?

Clark is discussing the Christian life (remember, the chapter is titled "On Sanctification"); Clark is not defining the Gospel in its saving sense.

[rofyle]

@1689Baptist RedBeetle is correct about the fact sanctification cannot save, nor is sanctification evidence of salvation. The evidence of salvation is knowledge of the gospel, the factual gospel. It is to know the facts about Christ, to know the facts of what He did and for whom He did it for. To know things like that since Christ satisfied the law on behalf of the elect, the law now demands the elect's salvation. Gordon Clark was lost. As such, he must be read through a strainer.

[1689Baptist]

@rofyle I wouldn't tell Beetle Clark was lost if I were you!

BTW, I like Clark and have every confidence he was saved.

[rofyle]

@1689Baptist If you have every confidence he was saved, then I have little confidence you are. He confessed to believing that at least some Arminians are saved. Arminians believe a different gospel. Can a man be saved by a different gospel? He also confessed to believing that no knowledge of the atonement was necessary. Or in other words, that no knowledge of the gospel is necessary. Do you believe this too? Do you believe the gospel is not the power unto salvation?

[1689Baptist]

@rofyle I was saved in Arminianism.

What do you mean by "He also confessed to believing that no knowledge of the atonement was necessary." I would like to see the context in which it was said.

[rofyle]

@1689Baptist I gave the quote earlier, but I will do so again.

From Clark's book, Faith and Saving Faith, pg 1, "The thief on the cross said, 'Lord, remember me;' and Jesus replied, 'Today thou shalt be with me in paradise.' After a life of crime, this thief received assurance of heaven. He could hardly have known much about Jesus. He had no notion of saving faith, let alone of the Trinity, the Atonement, or the second advent. Yet, on the authority of Jesus, we know that he was saved"

[1689Baptist]

@rofyle Are you saying the thief was not saved?

[rofyle]

@1689Baptist No, I am not saying the thief was not saved. I am saying Clark is wrong to say the thief had no notion of the atonement. People who have no notion of the atonement are not saved. Clark tries to argue they are.

[rofyle]

@RedBeetle From Clark's book, Faith and Saving Faith, pg 1, "The thief on the cross said, 'Lord, remember me;' and Jesus replied, 'Today thou shalt be with me in paradise.' After a life of crime, this thief received assurance of heaven. He could hardly have known much about Jesus. He had no notion of saving faith, let alone of the Trinity, the Atonement, or the second advent. Yet, on the authority of Jesus, we know that he was saved"

Saved even though having no knowledge of the atonement?

[Blogrich55]

@rofyle Of course the thief was saved!

1. He could NOT have believed in Jesus without the Father drawing him. John 6:44

2. Jesus said "I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live: And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?" John 11:25-26 He did believe!

3. How do YOU know Clark was lost? Have you got a "peep stone" in your hat like Joe Smith? Or did you check the Book of life out of God's library.

[rofyle]

@Blogrich55 You're not very good at reading comments, are you? I never said the thief wasn't saved. I said Clark was wrong to assume the thief had no notion of the atonement. People who have no notion of the atonement are not saved. Clark tries to argue that they are.

[rofyle]

@Blogrich55

1. I agree.

2. I agree, but what does it mean to believe in Him? See John 8:30-44 to see children of Satan believing in Jesus.

3. I know Clark was lost based upon the gospel he preached. Are antichrists also lost? How do you know? Have you got a peep stone in your hat like Joe Smith, or did you check the book of life out of God's library?

[rofyle]

@RedBeetle In Clark's book, What Do Presbyterians Believe?, he wrote"

"An Arminian may be a truly regenerate Christian; in fact, if he is truly an Arminian and not a Pelagian who happens to belong to an Arminian church, he must be a saved man. But he is not usually, and cannot consistently be assured of his salvation. The places in which his creed differs from our Confession confuse the mind, dilute the Gospel, and impair its proclamation."

I like Clark on some stuff, but he was lost.

[Blogrich55]

@rofyle I agree with Clark on this! There enough propositions of the gospel to be saved in the truncated gospel the Arminian preaches. It is like a starving child in Africa who are so emaciated they are practically bones. YET they are alive! Compared with a chubby, healthy, baby that is well nourished and running about, they seem virtually "dead" but are NOT. Arminianism is an anemic, God dishonoring travesty of the truth BUT contains sufficient saving propositions. Clark is right!

[rofyle]

@Blogrich55 The truncated gospel? Oh my. Armi's believe they had at least in part entered into salvation by their own free will. They deny God's sovereignty in salvation. They do not believe the truth of the atonement, they do not believe men are saved only by the gracious imputation of Christ's righteousness, and they most certainly do not believe God only imputes that righteousness to His elect. That is not a truncated gospel. That is a false gospel.

[rofyle]

@Blogrich55 The gospel is not about sufficient saving propositions. The gospel is about the correct saving propositions. You say Arminianism is a "dishonoring travesty of the truth". Do you believe God glorifies His name through travesties of truth?

Time and again in the gospel of John, John introduces us to people of whom he says, "they believed in Him." In almost instance however, these same people are shown to be of the non-elect. For instance, 8:30-44. I suggest you read it.

[KarensFaith]

AWESOME!!!!

[DoctrinesofGraceBapt]

Wow, Isn't this exactly what we have been saying all along? I wonder if Monty will declare his anathema on Clark now? Maybe he will just say we still don't understand him. Whatever? Good vid.

God Bless

[TheologyMatters101]

"It is a psychological impossibility to trust in Christ's shed blood and to want to continue in sin." Gordon H. Clark 9:09

[skintightpotato]

Good post :) Thanks so much for sharing!

[Haukman66]

LOL!! Jeff, you just dont know how to "listen" to Clark!! You cant understand what he is saying!! LOL. Good job!

[1689Baptist]

@Haukman66

LOL this is becomming crazy, LOL

[dkshotwell]

@Haukman66 Lol and lol, because you LOL, lol'ing and lolness. Lol.

[1689Baptist]

@dkshotwell

What do you mean?

[dkshotwell]

@1689Baptist Oh, sorry, i was just having a bit of fun with "LOL". Nothing meant by it, just being silly.

[1689Baptist]

@dkshotwell

Ok, I thought you were against us when you have A. W. Pink on you page.

I dont see how anyone can read Pink and be against Lordship Salvation.

[dkshotwell]

@1689Baptist To deny Lordship salvation is to reject Christ. We're on the same page brother :)

[1689Baptist]

@Haukman66 Chech it out, Beetle said it. 

[Haukman66]

@1689Baptist Just like clockwork!!! I suppose he is the authority on Clark!! NOT!

[October31st1517]

Amen. My brother. You beat me to it. Gordon Clark was a Lordship Salvationist.

[1689Baptist]

@October31st1517

I am still waiting for part2 to upload I hope there is no problems with it.

God Bless

[TheologyMatters101]

@October31st1517 I have read Gordon H. Clark on Sanctification, Evangelism, The problem of Evil, and I have commentaries by him. Monty Collier is the one who does not understand who he reads. It is AMAZING!