Dake Bible Discussion Board ⇒ WHAT IS LORDSHIP SALVATION????

[Rocky]

Rocky what are you talking about?
Lordship as taught by everyone I'm aware of considers it a walk of sanctification. Each step from the first until death brings the believers life into more submission to the Lord Jesus Christ. No one that I'm aware of suggests that this magically occurs in a new believers life upon salvation but is a process that should take place as the believer matures in the Lord. But that it must occur!

This is why I said there needed to be a definition of terms so everyone would be on the same page.

Ok, But what do you mean what am I Talking about? what part did you not understand? I am talking about the theology of Lordship salvation. No one on this board as far as I know, accept for you is an adherent to this theology. But every time I bring its beliefs out In the open you seem to keep saying we need a definition. What in the world do you think I have been doing lol. You seem to want to censor or stifle or discredit anything I say on this for some reason or any things else I say,. You did this in our big Catholic discussion.

Rocky
I asked for a definition so we all would know what you are talking about. You gave a biased railing against something you don't agree with and but never a true definition.

I never use the word Lordship salvation so I have no idea what it is to you or anyone else on the this forum. Yet you tell me I'm an adherent and I have no idea of what it is that you are talking about.

I believe a Christian must make Jesus Lord of their life both in word and actions. It is a building process often called the Christian walk or known by some as the process of sanctification. I further believe that as a believe continues in the process the harder it becomes for them to willfully sin to the point that I believe a mature Christian does not willfully sin. They still sin but it is slip ups rather than willfully sinning.

Now it that makes me a bad person in you eyes, I am glad I'm me and not you, because...

I never use the word Lordship salvation so I have no idea what it is to you or anyone else on the this forum. Yet you tell me I'm an adherent and I have no idea of what it is that you are talking about.

If you do not know abut Lordship salvation then why are you trying to defend and discuss it? Ed sorry for railing that is really not my intention if I came across that way I apologize. I am also sorry for hitting on some of your sensibilities concerning this theology that you say you no nothing about. Maybe you could study Lordship salvation as a theology, then you may get what I am referring to or you can give us a definition as you understand it. But remember this is about a theology not just term. Apparently anything I say is not good enough for you, Its obvious that I have offended you, and Its is almost impossible to give a definition without laying it out. But in my opinion it is unbiblical and false for the reasons I laid out regardless, of you trying to censor or discredit my opinion that is the way I see it. Since according to Ed we should not have opinions maybe someone else could explain this in a way that does not offend Ed.

I wasn't defending "Lordship Theology" I was defending what I see as making Jesus Lord of our lives. Remember I asked for a definition of what everyone was calling Lordship salvation.

Rocky you say stuff that everyone knows is steeped in bias. You have have opinions and rather than present a balanced picture of something you always go to your dogmas. I have been trying to show you that.

I believe in every discussion there should be a balanced presentation of what is being discussed. Then people can offer their opinions. But to give biased definitions that then forge ahead as if the biased opinions are fact is nonsense.
I still don't know what you see as unbiblical in Lordship Salvation? In fact I know what you think Lordship salvation is except MacArthur teaches it and you hate MacArthur.

I have don't think I have ever understood your reasons for anything on this subject. It seems all you want to do is tell me I'm wrong or picking on you. I don't want to censor your opinion I want to censor the idea that your opinion is based on true definition of the matter.

Now why do you say I believe none of us should have opinions? Why make that statement?
We all have opinions. What we have to learn is there is opinion and there is fact. Our opinion does not change fact nor does opinion become fact because we argue it until everyone gives up.

Ok Ed ok. Were did I ever say I hate MacArther? The fact is I offended you about what I said about lordship salvation so I am sorry. I am over this no one is allowed to disagree with you or MacArther (that is were you are getting most of your theology from any way) If they do you attack and discredit them. You keep asking for a definition of it, and I keep stating what it is but you don't like what I say, Because it contradicts and goes against MacArther, you have a MacArther study bible, look it up for your self. You pulled this same stuff with me when we were discussing Catholic theology. " your problem not mine" But a least you now my position. I believe Lorship theoligy a false theology by false teachers. And yes your MacArther is a false teacher. I have a study bible by him, I use it as a door stop

[Justaned]

Rocky what are you talking about?
Lordship as taught by everyone I'm aware of considers it a walk of sanctification. Each step from the first until death brings the believers life into more submission to the Lord Jesus Christ. No one that I'm aware of suggests that this magically occurs in a new believers life upon salvation but is a process that should take place as the believer matures in the Lord. But that it must occur!

This is why I said there needed to be a definition of terms so everyone would be on the same page.

Ok, But what do you mean what am I Talking about? what part did you not understand? I am talking about the theology of Lordship salvation. No one on this board as far as I know, accept for you is an adherent to this theology. But every time I bring its beliefs out In the open you seem to keep saying we need a definition. What in the world do you think I have been doing lol. You seem to want to censor or stifle or discredit anything I say on this for some reason or any things else I say,. You did this in our big Catholic discussion.

Rocky
I asked for a definition so we all would know what you are talking about. You gave a biased railing against something you don't agree with and but never a true definition.

I never use the word Lordship salvation so I have no idea what it is to you or anyone else on the this forum. Yet you tell me I'm an adherent and I have no idea of what it is that you are talking about.

I believe a Christian must make Jesus Lord of their life both in word and actions. It is a building process often called the Christian walk or known by some as the process of sanctification. I further believe that as a believe continues in the process the harder it becomes for them to willfully sin to the point that I believe a mature Christian does not willfully sin. They still sin but it is slip ups rather than willfully sinning.

Now it that makes me a bad person in you eyes, I am glad I'm me and not you, because...

I never use the word Lordship salvation so I have no idea what it is to you or anyone else on the this forum. Yet you tell me I'm an adherent and I have no idea of what it is that you are talking about.

If you do not know abut Lordship salvation then why are you trying to defend and discuss it? Ed sorry for railing that is really not my intention if I came across that way I apologize. I am also sorry for hitting on some of your sensibilities concerning this theology that you say you no nothing about. Maybe you could study Lordship salvation as a theology, then you may get what I am referring to or you can give us a definition as you understand it. But remember this is about a theology not just term. Apparently anything I say is not good enough for you, Its obvious that I have offended you, and Its is almost impossible to give a definition without laying it out. But in my opinion it is unbiblical and false for the reasons I laid out regardless, of you trying to censor or discredit my opinion that is the way I see it. Since according to Ed we should not have opinions maybe someone else could explain this in a way that does not offend Ed.

I wasn't defending "Lordship Theology" I was defending what I see as making Jesus Lord of our lives. Remember I asked for a definition of what everyone was calling Lordship salvation.

Rocky you say stuff that everyone knows is steeped in bias. You have have opinions and rather than present a balanced picture of something you always go to your dogmas. I have been trying to show you that.

I believe in every discussion there should be a balanced presentation of what is being discussed. Then people can offer their opinions. But to give biased definitions that then forge ahead as if the biased opinions are fact is nonsense.
I still don't know what you see as unbiblical in Lordship Salvation? In fact I know what you think Lordship salvation is except MacArthur teaches it and you hate MacArthur.

I have don't think I have ever understood your reasons for anything on this subject. It seems all you want to do is tell me I'm wrong or picking on you. I don't want to censor your opinion I want to censor the idea that your opinion is based on true definition of the matter.

Now why do you say I believe none of us should have opinions? Why make that statement?
We all have opinions. What we have to learn is there is opinion and there is fact. Our opinion does not change fact nor does opinion become fact because we argue it until everyone gives up.

Ok Ed ok. Were did I ever say I hate MacArther? The fact is I offended you about what I said about lordship salvation so I am sorry. I am over this no one is allowed to disagree with you, if they do you attack and discredit them You keep asking for a definition of it, you have a Macarther study bible look it up for your self. You pulled this same stuff with me when we were discussing Catholic theology.

Rocky
You attacked me first and I simply defended myself. Go back and read the thread. I did say I didn't agree with your definition of Lordship and offered one I thought was more balanced but because it mentioned one aspect of Calvinism it was discredited in total.
Are you saying you don't hate MacArthur? Perhaps hate is too strong a word, perhaps I should have said you summarily discount anything MacArthur says. is that more to your liking?

As far as our Catholic discussion you gave you experience not the authorized teaching of the church. I rebute your experience with my experience and the authorized teaching of the church and you got mad. Sorry.

I'm not discrediting you. I am discrediting your railing about something that I don't think anyone one of us are talking about the same thing.

You don't offend me you offend the truth if you portray your opinion as the truth. If we are going to discuss Lordship Salvation then let us define it. Then you can give your opinion of what is wrong with it based on that definition and others can give their opinion based on the same definition. It is pointless to argue, debate, discuss something when everyone is talking about what they view the subject to be and each is different from the other. I saw this was beginning to happen in the the other thread and that is when I suggested we first define what we are discussing.

[Rocky]

Ed: I'm not discrediting you. I am discrediting your railing about something that I don't think anyone one of us are talking about the same thing.

Ed you know exactly what Lordship Salvation is. Why are you playing dumb? Are you trying to manipulate me or something?

[Justaned]

Ed: I'm not discrediting you. I am discrediting your railing about something that I don't think anyone one of us are talking about the same thing.

Ed you know exactly what Lordship Salvation is. Why are you playing dumb? Are you trying to manipulate me or something?

First I think this thread is the first and only time I ever used the word. I had heard it mentioned in passing but never paid any attention to it. Basically because I'm for anything that makes Jesus Lord of our lives and gets us away from easy believism. That said
I gave a definition of Lordship Salvation that was faulted because it was written by a person with a Calvinistic background.
However apart from the mention of the perseverance of the saints I didn't see a problem with it.

You then started to attack me on how did I expect a convert to Christianity to fulfill all aspects of the this immediately after salvation. I answered by saying I didn't think they should and where in the definition I gave or you gave suggested such a thing. Then you got mad and have been having me for lunch ever since. All I have be doing is responding to you telling me how bad I am.

[Rocky]

Ed: I'm not discrediting you. I am discrediting your railing about something that I don't think anyone one of us are talking about the same thing.

Ed you know exactly what Lordship Salvation is. Why are you playing dumb? Are you trying to manipulate me or something?

First I think this thread is the first and only time I ever used the word. I had heard it mentioned in passing but never paid any attention to it. Basically because I'm for anything that makes Jesus Lord of our lives and gets us away from easy believism. That said
I gave a definition of Lordship Salvation that was faulted because it was written by a person with a Calvinistic background.
However apart from the mention of the perseverance of the saints I didn't see a problem with it.

You then started to attack me on how did I expect a convert to Christianity to fulfill all aspects of the this immediately after salvation. I answered by saying I didn't think they should and where in the definition I gave or you gave suggested such a thing. Then you got mad and have been having me for lunch ever since. All I have be doing is responding to you telling me how bad I am.

Well that is why I was addressing some of its teaching because the thread asked what the theology was before you started complicating things lol
And I am sorry for attacking you bro. sorry for doing that I admit I do get frustrated. Now I am not against Jesus being lord Because that is what he is. But it my opinion Lordship salvation is a works based salvation. and needs to be avoided. Also the theology does not believe in Backsliding because of the election aspect of it unless you are an Arminian you drop that part and just believe a true Christian cannot backslide because Jesus wont let him. It just that in the bible nowhere is it stated to get saved you make Jesus lord. I am for free grace through faith, because the sinner cannot do this with without faith. Again I am not talking about Jesus being the Lord because he is, I am against telling the unbeliever you must to this or that to be saved, because salvation is offered as a free gift through faith. If you have to do something to attain it is it free? Like you have to unlock some kind of rubix cube to get saved, and the rubix cube is making jesus lord it sound like you have t to have a magic key or unlock some treasure chest,which really has no clear definition. The theology to me seems Gnostic in nature because you need this hidden knowledge to obtain salvation. When from a simple biblical aspect of this is accepting Gods Gift through faith. Do you understand where I am coming from???

[branham1965]

a new classic rivalry. Rocky vs. Reved .....

The Rock likes to debate like Ed does.

Both of these worthy gladiators sure do know how to duke it out.

[Justaned]

Ed: I'm not discrediting you. I am discrediting your railing about something that I don't think anyone one of us are talking about the same thing.

Ed you know exactly what Lordship Salvation is. Why are you playing dumb? Are you trying to manipulate me or something?

First I think this thread is the first and only time I ever used the word. I had heard it mentioned in passing but never paid any attention to it. Basically because I'm for anything that makes Jesus Lord of our lives and gets us away from easy believism. That said
I gave a definition of Lordship Salvation that was faulted because it was written by a person with a Calvinistic background.
However apart from the mention of the perseverance of the saints I didn't see a problem with it.

You then started to attack me on how did I expect a convert to Christianity to fulfill all aspects of the this immediately after salvation. I answered by saying I didn't think they should and where in the definition I gave or you gave suggested such a thing. Then you got mad and have been having me for lunch ever since. All I have be doing is responding to you telling me how bad I am.

Well that is why I was addressing some of its teaching because the thread asked what the theology was before you started complicating things lol
And I am sorry for attacking you bro. sorry for doing that I admit I do get frustrated. Now I am not against Jesus being lord Because that is what he is. But it my opinion Lordship salvation is a works based salvation. and needs to be avoided. Also the theology does not believe in Backsliding because of the election aspect of it unless you are an Arminian you drop that part and just believe a true Christian cannot backslide because Jesus wont let him. It just that in the bible nowhere is it stated to get saved you make Jesus lord. I am for free grace through faith, because the sinner cannot do this with without faith. Again I am not talking about Jesus being the Lord because he is, I am against telling the unbeliever you must to this or that to be saved, because salvation is offered as a free gift through faith. If you have to do something to attain it is it free? Like you have to unlock some kind of rubix cube to get saved, and the rubix cube is making jesus lord it sound like you have t to have a magic key or unlock some treasure chest,which really has no clear definition. The theology to me seems Gnostic in nature because you need this hidden knowledge to obtain salvation. When from a simple biblical aspect of this is accepting Gods Gift through faith. Do you understand where I am coming from???

Rocky
Salvation is free but it requires the person's life. And that is something too many are forgetting these days. Faith is great but as James said there is more to faith than simply confessing Jesus is Lord.
I don't see how anyone can claim Jesus is Lord in their lives if they refuse to give Him control. I'm not saying Jesus will control us down to when we should be brushing our teeth but He has given us commandments that we must follow, tasks to do if we really believe in Him. We are called to go into the world and make disciples yet very few ever even attempt to do this today. Jesus said crucify the flesh and follow me. That means put Jesus before our flesh.

You said this theology seems almost Gnostic in nature because to you it seems like you need hidden knowledge. Right there is the problem I cite with the church today. No one is making disciples, making Jesus Lord of our lives should not be seen by someone like you as hidden knowledge it should be something that every mature Christian that has come into you life has shared with you as part of fulfilling the command to make disciples. But that isn't happening in the churches anymore. In fact over 90% of what is discussed on this forum should be common knowledge by every Christian that has been in the church for over a year. Instead People are told to come in find a comfortable seat, sit back and listen to a message designed to give them warm fuzzys or tinge of guilt and told to make sure when the offering plate is passed they put in their tithe. That is what is destroying the church today.

People have got to learn that Christianity is a lifestyle that requires the believer's very life. That yes Jesus must be Lord of our lives. Not from the instant we are saved but more so each day of our salvation.
There is no way for a person to be a true and mature Christian and not to have Jesus as Lord of their life. It can not happen. That is fact.

Now we can debate how much such a person is able to commit willful and deliberate sin but this fact is true Jesus must be Lord of your life. No exception.

[Rocky]

Ed: I'm not discrediting you. I am discrediting your railing about something that I don't think anyone one of us are talking about the same thing.

Ed you know exactly what Lordship Salvation is. Why are you playing dumb? Are you trying to manipulate me or something?

First I think this thread is the first and only time I ever used the word. I had heard it mentioned in passing but never paid any attention to it. Basically because I'm for anything that makes Jesus Lord of our lives and gets us away from easy believism. That said
I gave a definition of Lordship Salvation that was faulted because it was written by a person with a Calvinistic background.
However apart from the mention of the perseverance of the saints I didn't see a problem with it.

You then started to attack me on how did I expect a convert to Christianity to fulfill all aspects of the this immediately after salvation. I answered by saying I didn't think they should and where in the definition I gave or you gave suggested such a thing. Then you got mad and have been having me for lunch ever since. All I have be doing is responding to you telling me how bad I am.

Well that is why I was addressing some of its teaching because the thread asked what the theology was before you started complicating things lol
And I am sorry for attacking you bro. sorry for doing that I admit I do get frustrated. Now I am not against Jesus being lord Because that is what he is. But it my opinion Lordship salvation is a works based salvation. and needs to be avoided. Also the theology does not believe in Backsliding because of the election aspect of it unless you are an Arminian you drop that part and just believe a true Christian cannot backslide because Jesus wont let him. It just that in the bible nowhere is it stated to get saved you make Jesus lord. I am for free grace through faith, because the sinner cannot do this with without faith. Again I am not talking about Jesus being the Lord because he is, I am against telling the unbeliever you must to this or that to be saved, because salvation is offered as a free gift through faith. If you have to do something to attain it is it free? Like you have to unlock some kind of rubix cube to get saved, and the rubix cube is making jesus lord it sound like you have t to have a magic key or unlock some treasure chest,which really has no clear definition. The theology to me seems Gnostic in nature because you need this hidden knowledge to obtain salvation. When from a simple biblical aspect of this is accepting Gods Gift through faith. Do you understand where I am coming from???

Rocky
Salvation is free but it requires the person's life. And that is something too many are forgetting these days. Faith is great but as James said there is more to faith than simply confessing Jesus is Lord.
I don't see how anyone can claim Jesus is Lord in their lives if they refuse to give Him control. I'm not saying Jesus will control us down to when we should be brushing our teeth but He has given us commandments that we must follow, tasks to do if we really believe in Him. We are called to go into the world and make disciples yet very few ever even attempt to do this today. Jesus said crucify the flesh and follow me. That means put Jesus before our flesh.

You said this theology seems almost Gnostic in nature because to you it seems like you need hidden knowledge. Right there is the problem I cite with the church today. No one is making disciples, making Jesus Lord of our lives should not be seen by someone like you as hidden knowledge it should be something that every mature Christian that has come into you life has shared with you as part of fulfilling the command to make disciples. But that isn't happening in the churches anymore. In fact over 90% of what is discussed on this forum should be common knowledge by every Christian that has been in the church for over a year. Instead People are told to come in find a comfortable seat, sit back and listen to a message designed to give them warm fuzzys or tinge of guilt and told to make sure when the offering plate is passed they put in their tithe. That is what is destroying the church today.

People have got to learn that Christianity is a lifestyle that requires the believer's very life. That yes Jesus must be Lord of our lives. Not from the instant we are saved but more so each day of our salvation.
There is no way for a person to be a true and mature Christian and not to have Jesus as Lord of their life. It can not happen. That is fact.

Now we can debate how much such a person is able to commit willful and deliberate sin but this fact is true Jesus must be Lord of your life. No exception.

Ed I agree with what you said here. But this is not lordship salvation, the name of this theology is deceptive, the stuff you are saying I see really nothing wrong with it. What Lordship salvation teaches is for the unbeliever to make him lord before he can be saved and according to the bible this is not the case. The book of James is for Christians not unbelievers. The sinner can not have good works enough to attain salvation, nor make Jesus lord. Lordship salvation confuses this in a way and makes it an effort. Its doing something when Jesus already did it. Now when one gets saved by grace through faith then the book of James is applicable, you must obey the condition of the gospel, you follow me?

[Justaned]

Ed: I'm not discrediting you. I am discrediting your railing about something that I don't think anyone one of us are talking about the same thing.

Ed you know exactly what Lordship Salvation is. Why are you playing dumb? Are you trying to manipulate me or something?

First I think this thread is the first and only time I ever used the word. I had heard it mentioned in passing but never paid any attention to it. Basically because I'm for anything that makes Jesus Lord of our lives and gets us away from easy believism. That said
I gave a definition of Lordship Salvation that was faulted because it was written by a person with a Calvinistic background.
However apart from the mention of the perseverance of the saints I didn't see a problem with it.

You then started to attack me on how did I expect a convert to Christianity to fulfill all aspects of the this immediately after salvation. I answered by saying I didn't think they should and where in the definition I gave or you gave suggested such a thing. Then you got mad and have been having me for lunch ever since. All I have be doing is responding to you telling me how bad I am.

Well that is why I was addressing some of its teaching because the thread asked what the theology was before you started complicating things lol
And I am sorry for attacking you bro. sorry for doing that I admit I do get frustrated. Now I am not against Jesus being lord Because that is what he is. But it my opinion Lordship salvation is a works based salvation. and needs to be avoided. Also the theology does not believe in Backsliding because of the election aspect of it unless you are an Arminian you drop that part and just believe a true Christian cannot backslide because Jesus wont let him. It just that in the bible nowhere is it stated to get saved you make Jesus lord. I am for free grace through faith, because the sinner cannot do this with without faith. Again I am not talking about Jesus being the Lord because he is, I am against telling the unbeliever you must to this or that to be saved, because salvation is offered as a free gift through faith. If you have to do something to attain it is it free? Like you have to unlock some kind of rubix cube to get saved, and the rubix cube is making jesus lord it sound like you have t to have a magic key or unlock some treasure chest,which really has no clear definition. The theology to me seems Gnostic in nature because you need this hidden knowledge to obtain salvation. When from a simple biblical aspect of this is accepting Gods Gift through faith. Do you understand where I am coming from???

Rocky
Salvation is free but it requires the person's life. And that is something too many are forgetting these days. Faith is great but as James said there is more to faith than simply confessing Jesus is Lord.
I don't see how anyone can claim Jesus is Lord in their lives if they refuse to give Him control. I'm not saying Jesus will control us down to when we should be brushing our teeth but He has given us commandments that we must follow, tasks to do if we really believe in Him. We are called to go into the world and make disciples yet very few ever even attempt to do this today. Jesus said crucify the flesh and follow me. That means put Jesus before our flesh.

You said this theology seems almost Gnostic in nature because to you it seems like you need hidden knowledge. Right there is the problem I cite with the church today. No one is making disciples, making Jesus Lord of our lives should not be seen by someone like you as hidden knowledge it should be something that every mature Christian that has come into you life has shared with you as part of fulfilling the command to make disciples. But that isn't happening in the churches anymore. In fact over 90% of what is discussed on this forum should be common knowledge by every Christian that has been in the church for over a year. Instead People are told to come in find a comfortable seat, sit back and listen to a message designed to give them warm fuzzys or tinge of guilt and told to make sure when the offering plate is passed they put in their tithe. That is what is destroying the church today.

People have got to learn that Christianity is a lifestyle that requires the believer's very life. That yes Jesus must be Lord of our lives. Not from the instant we are saved but more so each day of our salvation.
There is no way for a person to be a true and mature Christian and not to have Jesus as Lord of their life. It can not happen. That is fact.

Now we can debate how much such a person is able to commit willful and deliberate sin but this fact is true Jesus must be Lord of your life. No exception.

Ed I agree with what you said here. But this is not lordship salvation, the name of this theology is deceptive, the stuff you are saying I see really nothing wrong with it. What Lordship salvation teaches is for the unbeliever to make him lord before he can be saved and according to the bible this is not the case. The book of James is for Christians not unbelievers. The sinner can not have good works enough to attain salvation, nor make Jesus lord. Lordship salvation confuses this in a way and makes it an effort. Its doing something when Jesus already did it. Now when one gets saved by grace through faith then the book of James is applicable, you must obey the condition of the gospel, you follow me?

Rocky
I don't doubt that is what you believe but where are you getting this from? Since this thread has started I have been reading up on Lordship Theology and I haven't found one teaching that lines up as you state it. Again I'm not challenging you, accusing you, mocking you, or anything of the kind but you evidently read this somewhere and I would like to read the article myself.

My understanding of MacArthurs view of Lordship theology is much like I stated above. Of course he does blend in a thread of perseverance of the saints but that point aside, unless I'm reading him all wrong he sees this as a progression or maturing of the Christian that must take place. A baby Christian hasn't had the training or discipleship to know how to allow Jesus to be his Lord but as he walks the walk of a Christian this should build within him. If you have seen something by MacArthur or others that disagree with this please tell me where so I can see what they are saying.

I have never seen anyone suggest or even hint that something magical or unknowable outside of scripture must take place in a person's life. Nor have I seen anyone suggest it is a shield from all sinning. Many believe as I that once Jesus is Lord of your life willful or deliberate sin should not be a factor in your thought process. That if it is then Jesus isn't truly Lord in your life.

Please let me know where you are getting your information.

[Rocky]

Hi Ed, It would be hard for me to compile all of the study I have done on this theology over the past years. I studied both sides of those that are for it and those that are against it.. Nothing wrong with a believer maturing or discipleship. How ever Lordship Salvation is the idea that an unbeliever must commit all areas of his life to Christ as a condition for being saved. Ok let me try to say this without sounding bias. And I will state facts for the most part if I can help myself lol. At its core the theology is not so much about living as a christian as it is about what conditions have to be met in order to obtain salvation, not conditions that have to be met When one becomes a believer as the book of James and the sermon on the mount and other scripture that define what it is to be Christians. Ok another aspect of this is like saying to change one's behavior in order to come to Christ. This is a soteriological Theology not a discipleship theology, I know that is a big word which simply means salvation or how to obtain it. Arminian are against it because of the calvinistic influences and other reasons that would be pointless to get into here. . Baptist are against because of the works aspect of it, Pentecostal are against it because Lordship salvationists are also cessationist . This theology is mainly popular with Calvinist circles, so this should be a red flag. Another Factor is that this theology was invented by modern day Calvinists, which should raise another red flag..