Free Grace Theology vs. Lordship Salvation

[Humble_Disciple]

The free grace vs. Lordship salvation debate largely took place in American Baptist circles, between those who held to dispensationalism (the free grace side) and those who held to Calvinism (the Lordship salvation side).

Lordship salvation controversy - Wikipedia

Which side, Lordship salvation or free grace, is closer to what Martin Luther originally taught? This question is intended for traditional Lutherans, rather than modernists who endorse things like same-sex marriage and universalism.

These quotes from Martin Luther seem to be consistent with the free grace position, that our assurance of salvation should be found in the promises of scripture, rather than whether or not there are visible fruits in our Christian life:

Let us not fail to thank God for delivering us from the doctrine of doubt. The Gospel commands us to look away from our own good works to the promises of God in Christ, the Mediator. The pope commands us to look away from the promises of God in Christ to our own merit. No wonder they are the eternal prey of doubt and despair. We depend upon God for salvation. No wonder that our doctrine is certified, because it does not rest in our own strength, our own conscience, our own feelings, our own person, our own works. It is built on a better foundation. It is built on the promises and truth of God.
Martin Luther and Assurance of Salvation

Then what? Is the Law useless for righteousness? Yes, certainly. But does faith alone, without works, justify? Yes, certainly. Otherwise you must repudiate Moses, who declares that Abraham is righteous prior to the Law and prior to the works of the Law, not because he sacrificed his son, who had not yet been born, and not because he did this or that work, but because he believed God who gave him a promise. In this passage no mention is made of any preparation for grace, of any faith formed by works, or of any preceding disposition. This, however, is mentioned: that at that time Abraham was in the midst of sins, doubts, and fears, and was exceedingly troubled in spirit. How, then, did he obtain righteousness? In this way: God speaks and Abraham believes what God is saying.
A Return to Rome: Lordship Salvation’s Doctrine of Faith – Grace Evangelical Society

https://faithalone.org/journal-articles/a-return-to-rome-lordship-salvations-doctrine-of-faith/

These quotes are from the Augsburg Confession:

“Also they [our churches] teach that men cannot be justified before God by their own strength, merits, or works, but are freely justified for Christ’s sake, through faith, when they believe that they are received into favor, and that their sins are forgiven for Christ’s sake, who, by His death, has made satisfaction for our sins. This faith God imputes for righteousness in His sight. Rom. 3 and 4.” [Article IV: Of Justification]

“Also they [our churches] teach that this faith is bound to bring forth good fruits, and that it is necessary to do good works commanded by God, because of God’s will, but that we should not rely on those works to merit justification before God. For remission of sins and justification is apprehended by faith, as also the voice of Christ attests: When ye shall have done all these things, say: We are unprofitable servants. Luke 17, 10. The same is also taught by the Fathers. For Ambrose says: It is ordained of God that he who believes in Christ is saved, freely receiving remission of sins, without works, by faith alone.” [Article VI: Of New Obedience]
Lordship salvation – WELS

This is John Calvin on justification by faith alone:

For as regards justification, faith is something merely passive, bringing nothing of ours to the recovering of God's favor but receiving from Christ what we lack.
Faith is Simply Believing

Instead of denigrating the role of good works in Christian life, free grace advocates insist that good works should result from gratitude for our salvation, rather than fear that we will otherwise be unsaved.

 

[GOD Shines Forth!]

The free grace vs. Lordship salvation debate largely took place in American Baptist circles, between those who held to dispensationalism (the free grace side) and those who held to Calvinism (the Lordship salvation side).

Free grace or bust!

I guess it makes sense why I eventually gravitated towards right division/dispensationalism (though I don't agree with every single thing every single dispensationalist believes).

 

[Humble_Disciple]

Free grace or bust!

I guess it makes sense why I eventually gravitated towards right division/dispensationalism (though I don't agree with every single thing every single dispensationalist believes).

Martin Luther and John Calvin wouldn't be described as dispensationalists today because they were amillenialists, but I think that at least Luther would be more toward the free grace side if he were alive today. I don't know where Calvin would stand on it.

 

[Humble_Disciple]

If Lordship salvation is true, then a majority of Christians living today are going to hell. This is Lordship salvation advocates in their own words:

This gives the impression that Lordship salvation advocates are modern-day Pharisees.

 

[Tigger45]

One of my favorite aspects about confessional Lutheranism is it’s useage of Law & Gospel.


Statement of Scriptural and Confessional Principles - The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod

 

[renniks]

Free grace or bust!

I guess it makes sense why I eventually gravitated towards right division/dispensationalism (though I don't agree with every single thing every single dispensationalist believes).

What is the connection there? I never really understood dispensationalism I guess.
Free grace seems obvious, though.

 

[GOD Shines Forth!]

What is the connection there? I never really understood dispensationalism I guess.
Free grace seems obvious, though.

I understood free grace before I came across "right division", but the dispensationalist teachers I’ve settled into are all grace believers. I noticed the connection in the OP and thought, "Hmm."

Apparently, "dispensationalism" has a lot of baggage to some. I’m not wrapped up in end times aspects, just the practical side of going to the Word and understanding who is being addressed and when and how before grabbing everything for myself (pretty basic, but lots of preachers misapply the Word). Cleared up a lot of confusion in my Bible studies.

 

[d taylor]

One of the best free grace teachers is Zane Hodges excellent teacher.

Free grace vs Lordship is 99%, what must a person do to receive Eternal Life. Dispensationalism rarely factors into the debate.

 

[d taylor]

What is Lordship Salvation
From a Free Grace perspective.

 

[Humble_Disciple]

One of my favorite aspects about confessional Lutheranism is it’s useage of Law & Gospel.


Statement of Scriptural and Confessional Principles - The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod

As far as I know, Luther taught that the primary intent of the law is to make us realize our own inadequacy before God, so that we will turn to the cross as our only refuge.

 

[Humble_Disciple]

What is Lordship Salvation
From a Free Grace perspective.

Thank you for sharing this video.

From what I know and observe about free grace advocates like Charles Ryrie, Zane Hodges, Robert Wilkin, Charlie Bing, etc., is that, even though they don't believe that good works are required for salvation, they do good works anyway because of how grateful they are to Jesus for their salvation and how much they love Jesus. These seem like genuinely kind people, showing grace to others in gratitude for the grace Christ showed them.

One problem with this approach is that it asks of an unregenerate sinner a very “Christian” decision. Not having experienced God’s grace, how can we expect an unsaved person to respond in gratitude, submission, surrender, and commitment?

We must preach commitment, but only on the basis of the grace that brings salvation. In Rom 12:1 Paul appeals to Christians to surrender their lives on the basis of God’s merciful dealings with them in salvation.

Another problem with the commitment gospel is that it detracts from the only proper object of faith, the Lord Jesus Christ and His work on the Cross.

Instead of looking to Him to fulfill His promises, those who are taught that commitment is needed will likely look to the amount of their commitment for assurance of salvation. They will live in doubt about whether they have committed themselves enough.
Lordship Salvation’s Good Intentions Are Not Enough – Grace Evangelical Society

 

[Tigger45]

As far as I know, Luther taught that the primary intent of the law is to make us realize our own inadequacy before God, so that we will turn to the cross as our only refuge.

Here is how the Book of Concord distinguishes the uses and/or purposes of the law.


The three uses of the Law are:

1. Curb - Through fear of punishment, the Law keeps the sinful nature of both Christians and non-Christians under check. This does not stop sin, since the sin is already committed when the heart desires to do what is wrong, yet it does stop the open outbreak of sin that will do even further damage.
2. Mirror - The Law serves as a perfect reflection of what God created the human heart and life to be. It shows anyone who compares his/her life to God's requirement for perfection that he/she is sinful.
3. Guide - This use of the law that applies only to Christians. The law becomes the believer's helper. Empowered by the gospel truth of forgiveness and righteousness in Christ, the believer's new self eagerly desires to live to please the Triune God.

 

[Humble_Disciple]

Here is how the Book ok Concord distinguishes the uses and/or purposes of the law.


The three uses of the Law are:

1. Curb - Through fear of punishment, the Law keeps the sinful nature of both Christians and non-Christians under check. This does not stop sin, since the sin is already committed when the heart desires to do what is wrong, yet it does stop the open outbreak of sin that will do even further damage.
2. Mirror - The Law serves as a perfect reflection of what God created the human heart and life to be. It shows anyone who compares his/her life to God's requirement for perfection that he/she is sinful.
3. Guide - This use of the law that applies only to Christians. The law becomes the believer's helper. Empowered by the gospel truth of forgiveness and righteousness in Christ, the believer's new self eagerly desires to live to please the Triune God.

I am somewhat familiar with what Luther taught about the three uses of the law. When preaching to people who are not yet Christians, people who are in need of salvation, wouldn't he primarily be speaking about the second use of the law?

 

[Humble_Disciple]

This might be Jesus' warning against Lordship salvation preachers:

But woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men: for ye neither go in yourselves, neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in. Matthew 23:13

Not only do they limit the call of salvation to just the "elect," they confuse justification with sanctification, turning away anyone as unsaved whose life hasn't yet brought visible fruits.

 

[Tigger45]

I am somewhat familiar with what Luther taught about the three uses of the law. When preaching to people who are not yet Christians, people who are in need of salvation, wouldn't he primarily be speaking about the second use of the law?

I can see that although as #1 starts off with I would think the fear of punishment (primarily that of Hell) would also play a part. It seems that only #3 is directed towards Christians.

 

[Humble_Disciple]

I can see that although as #1 starts off with I would think the fear of punishment (primarily that of Hell) would also play a part. It seems that only #3 is directed towards Christians.

Here's Luther's presentation of the three uses of the law:

“What purposes does the Law then serve?”

First, the Law helps to control violent outbursts of sin and keeps order in the world (a curb).

Second, the Law accuses us and shows us our sin (a mirror).

Third, the Law teaches us Christians what we should and should not do to live a God-pleasing life (a guide). The power to live according to the Law comes from the Gospel.”
The Three Uses of the Law (Luther’s Catechism)

The first use of the law seems primarily to do with civil government.

 

[d taylor]

Thank you for sharing this video.

From what I know and observe about free grace advocates like Charles Ryrie, Zane Hodges, Robert Wilkin, Charlie Bing, etc., is that, even though they don't believe that good works are required for salvation, they do good works anyway because of how grateful they are to Jesus for their salvation and how much they love Jesus. These seem like genuinely kind people, showing grace to others in gratitude for the grace Christ showed them.

They are

And the many who are against free grace, falsely accuse free grace believers of promoting sin all you want to, just as long as a person believes.

But the reality is they have never promoted a life style of sin. They teach very Biblical, that for a believer sin has bad consequences in the life of a believer and loss of rewards at the judgment seat of The Messiah.

 

[Humble_Disciple]

They are

And the many who are against free grace, falsely accuse free grace believers of promoting sin all you want to, just as long as a person believes.

But the reality is they have never promoted a life style of sin. They teach very Biblical, that for a believer sin has bad consequences in the life of a believer and loss of rewards at the judgment seat of The Messiah.

Charles Ryrie was the most well-known advocate of free grace, while John MacArthur was the most well-known advocate of lordship salvation. Nonethless, when MacArthur visited Ryrie's seminary, Ryrie let him borrow his car for a week:

This is someone who didn't believe good works are required for salvation, allowing another person who wrote an entire book attacking his theology borrow his car, worth thousands of dollars, and not expecting anything in return.

Good works are certainly possible when you allow gratitude, rather than fear of punishment, to motivate your Christian life.

 

[Tigger45]

Charles Ryrie was the most well-known advocate of free grace, while John MacArthur was the most well-known advocate of lordship salvation. Nonethless, when MacArthur visited Ryrie's seminary, Ryrie let him borrow his car for a week:

This is someone who didn't believe good works are required for salvation, allowing another person who wrote an entire book attacking his theology borrow his car, worth thousands of dollars, and not expecting anything in return.

Good works are certainly possible when you allow gratitude, rather than fear of punishment, to motivate your Christian life.

I would hope that would invoke #1. Curb. I mean bringing back the guy’s car with scuffed tires just isn’t cool.

 

[Humble_Disciple]

Another thing worth mentioning is that after Charles Ryrie's wife divorced him, he remained celibate for the rest of his life, because he didn't believe the Bible allowed for remarriage, even though his theology taught he would have gone to heaven anyway if he had remarried.

Zane Hodges, the other leading advocate of free grace theology, lived as a celibate his entire life. Hodges also spent a great deal of time ministering to Latin American immigrants, without making a distinction in regards to their immigration status.

We've heard lots of stories of people who talked holier-than-thou, whose lives turned out to be licentious, but how often do we hear about people who taught that God's grace is absolutely free and yet chose to live a holy life anyway? I guess the second option doesn't sell as many newspapers.