AI vs Lordship Salvation Pt 2

0:02 Looking at our world from a theological perspective. This is the Theology Central podcast making Theology Central. Good morning everyone. It is Sunday, January nineteenth, twenty twenty five. It is currently eleven eighteen am Central Time, and I am coming to you live from the Theology Central studio located right here in Abilene, Texas. Well. In the last hour, we had a pretty lengthy discussion about artificial intelligence and Isaiah chapter forty, verse eleven. And I know for this hour, if I was at church, we would be covering Isaiah chapter forty, verses nine through eleven. That's what I would typically be doing. That's what I would want to do.

0:48 But all of our verse by verse study of Isaiah forty from verse one all the way to verse nine has been done at the church in front of a live audience, so I didn't want it then all of a sudden go from Isaiah forty nine to eleven, switch it to more of a podcasting format that, oh, I like to kind of keep it consistent. If I start something in front of people, I want to kind of finish it there, and then if I start if I'm doing something on the podcast, I want to keep it here. So I was like, well, what what what can we do? Well, we've been having a very important conversation on the podcast that many many of the people listening this morning may not be familiar with her. I'm not even engaged in in any way, shape or form. So I'm going to do a little bit of a review, and then I'm going to try to move us forward, and hopefully this is going to have a very important A lot of very important philological ideas and concepts are about to be discussed, and hopefully everyone will catch up and be on the same page because this is very important all through twenty twenty five. Kind of the really starting in twenty twenty four, we started talking about it a lot, but as we've entered into twenty twenty five, I've decided, in fact, it created an entire series about artificial intelligence in the future of the church, because you've got to be you either just don't understand artificial intelligence, or you're just not paying any attention, or you're I don't know what is wrong if you don't understand artificial intelligence. And I'll just say this bluntly has made the church one thousand percent irrelevant.

2:17 You don't need it. It's just a waste of time. AI can do anything the church can do a million times better when it comes to the preaching and teaching of God's Word. Now, if your church is sacramental, well you need the church for the sacraments. But if you go to church for the teaching of God's Word an in depth study of scripture, AI can blow away any sermon. And we've demonstrated that already multiple times in twenty twenty five by placing AI versus specific sermons, and AI destroyed those sermons in every way possible and avoided all the errors and pointed out all the errors and the sermons. So we've been talking about that. So I came up with the idea, what if we instead of putting AI against a sermon, what if we put artificial intelligence against.

3:06 A philological system. Oh, that could be interesting, right, What if we had them go head to head artificial intelligence of versus how about artificial intelligence versus lordship salvation? Oh, that that could be what could happen? Well, we spent over an hour and part one of this taking it apart, so I'm gonna have to review quickly. And what's interesting is asked AI to help me in the review, I said, AI, get, how can I break everything down? I basically said, here's episode one. I gave it episode one, and I said, okay, here's the best way to remind everyone of what you discussed in part one so that you can move on in part two. And I'm like, thank you artificial intelligence because my reviews go way, way, way too long.

3:52 And artificial intelligence. So it's like, because you're a human and you don't know what to do. Okay, I'm okay, I didn't actually say that, but you get the idea. So let's remind everyone of what we did. So this is artificial intelligence versus lordship salvation. Now lordship salvation, whether people say they know what it is, even if they have ever heard of it, lordship salvation dominates the way most Christians believe about salvation. They may never have read MacArthur's book, doesn't matter. Church after church after church. They hold to a lordship salvation view, which I held to for most of my life. And what was the turning point for me. It's when I begin to study Catholicism and I realized lordship salvation is basically Catholicism, and then I begin to have a crisis of faith. Right, So we've talked about this and talked about this. So here's what we discussed in part one. Right, I basically asked everyone this question, what comes to mind when you hear the term lordship salvation. Now, some people support it, some people reject it, some people are neutral, some people have have no clue what they're talking about. No, What I find interesting is you ask some people about lordship salvation, they'll say, well, they may even say they disagree with it, they may even say they don't know what it is. Just start asking them questions about salvation.

5:12 Inevitably it sounds like lordship's salvation. Because I think this is the reality. We talked about this in a long gospel series. Our default position is a works based, law based system. How that's our default way to go? It just is. So I asked that question. Then I gave everyone kind of an overview of my own personal journey with lordship salvation. How I stumbled upon MacArthur's book The Gospel according to Jesus, how I did everything I could to try to defend and promote that system, and how I ultimately came to our crisis of faith by studying Catholicism and realizing how foolish I had been. So what I'm attempting to do here is I'm trying to give a critical exploration of lordship Salvation, utilizing my own experience with Lordship Salvation. But mainly I want to show you how artificial intelligence analyzes and critiques lordship Salvation and some of the conclusion it comes to, right, because I think that's fascinating. All right, So I talked about my so so here are some of the my philological shift I begin to change my view from Lordship Salvation.

6:28 And I kind of went through that entire history. I'm not going to go through all of that because many listening this morning, you've heard my entire story million times, so I'm not going to go through it all. So, but here is where I think things begin to get very very important here and to have this discussion. So here's what I'm going to do. I'm going to leave my notes here. I'm going to go back to AI here. I'm going to go back to AI. I'm going to go all the way back to the top here because this is where we started having to me, where things got very interesting. All right. So this is the way I approached it because I want to get everyone on the same pature.

7:09 This is so important theologically. Instead of saying, Ai, what do you think about lordship salvation? Because of my thilological understanding, I knew that the issue between lordship salvation and non lordship salvation is not really an issue between lordship salvation and non lordship salvation. Right. The issue isn't about. Oh, there will be a change. No, the issue is what do you believe about being saved by imputed righteousness versus being saved by an infused righteousness? So I asked Ai this question. Isn't it accurate to say that the major difference between Catholicism and non Catholic Christianity is Catholicism teaches a salvation based on infused righteousness and non Catholics, for the most part, teach salvation based on an imputed righteousness. Ay, I said, that is a key theological distinction between Catholicism and many forms of non Catholic Christianity. All right, here's the breakdown of the concepts. Now, I'm going to go back and do a lot of review on this because this is the foundation. See, the minute you start talking about lordship salvation, people start off oh, you easy believism, anti noomia. They start accusing you of everything other than what the real issue is, because if they get to the discussion of the real issue, the entire system falls apart because either you accept the Catholic view or you reject the Catholic view.

8:36 And if you reject the Catholic view, your lordship salvation crumbles in front of you if you are leaving remotely honest. So what is the issue? The issue is infused righteousness versus imputed righteousness. So what are the concepts of infused righteousness? This is the Catholic view, you're ready. Catholic theology teaches that righteousness is infused into the believer. Now, this is what would make Catholic Catholicism a little different through the sacraments, because they're sacramental Baptism obviously in a particular way, and it is sustained and increased through cooperation with God's grace, good works, and participates.

9:18 Participation in the sacramental life. Salvation involves both God's grace and the believer's cooperation with that grace. It's a synergistic system. Right, Hey, God does this. But you have to do this and then it works together for salvation. This view, now listen, this is the key phrase. It's the key paragraph. The infused righteous view emphasizes an internal transformation where the person truly becomes righteous in a practical way over time. So in an infused righteousness, you are in fused with righteousness, so you become righteous in a practical way. It is about transformation. Please put that down. If you believe in infuse righteous you believe in transformation. You will be changed, You will be different. Why, because you've been infused with righteousness you have to be different.

10:21 And then they see justification and sanctification as being interconnected. Wait, wait, what if there's no sanctification, then there was no justification. Why because sanctification proves your justification Because in justification you were infused with righteousness, so therefore it should be demonstrated in your sanctification. Please note that, because if you listen to that, that sounds just like Lordship's salvation right now. The actual Protestant view imputed righteousness non Catholic Christians, especially within supposedly reformed churches whatever, Okay, supposedly within reformed churches. Clearly in Lutheran churches, they teach that a righteousness. That righteousness is.

11:03 Imputed to the believer. This means that the righteousness of Christ is credited to the believer's account through faith alone, not because of any inherent transformation or works. It's not about transformation, it's not about works. It's about God's righteousness is accredited to my account. It does not change me. It does not transform me, It does not do anything practically. It just changes my position before God. And now I'm declared to be that which I am not. In this view, salvation is viewed as a monargistic God alone accomplishes it, and justification is a one time declarative act of God where the believer is declared righteous even though they remain a sinner and practice.

11:54 Let me state that again. If you believe in imputed salvation, a righteous based off in imputed righteousness. If you truly believe that, not just theoretically, but you truly believe that, then this is what you believe. A believer is declared righteous even though they remain a sinner and practice. If you believe in imputed righteousness, someone is declared righteous but they are still a sinner and practice. Now I know lordship will be like well, you'll sind less. How do you want to how do you measure that sin less? According to what? If you're guilty at one point of the law, you're guilty of all. So how do you mant I sin less? I'm guilty of all points of the law at all times. Be holy as God is holy?

12:39 Are you ever doing that? No? Therefore you're in a perpetual status sin. Like if you believe in imputed righteousness, you know that you are in a perpetual state of sin. Trying to say you sin more or sin less is a subjective measurement based on you creating a list of which sins you can and can't commit, which is basically going back to Catholicism with a list of mortal and venial sins and just think, and I'll go ahead and say this, and imputed righteousness. Make it very clear, sanctification cannot prove imputed righteousness. Nothing can prove imputed righteousness because it's imputed. It's simply credited to your account. If someone believes you can't prove imputed righteousness because it doesn't produce righteousness, it just declares you to be that which you were not. All right, So that is the big difference there. That is the big distinction.

13:41 We have to emphasize that. Okay, so I wanted to spend time definitely reviewing that. I want to definitely take the time to take that apart. All right, So here is some kind of a and I'm going to go through this quickly. I'm going to go through this fast. You've got to make sure you know that. So make sure you just know imputed versus infused. And I will argue if you believe and imputed. If the Lordship Salvation begins to start, you already start having problems. You're going to have to play a lot of silly verbal games to try to make it work because you're going to really revert back to an infused righteous understanding. So we kind of gave in the last episode kind of a philological analysis of Lordships Salvation. We talked about infused versus imputed, righteousness infused Catholicism, righteousness is infused, Salvation is syenergicent.

14:30 We talked about all of that. Okay, Now, Lordship Salvation's contradictions are contradiction. Lordship claims to affirm imputed righteousness, and this is what AI says, but it emphasizes works as a proof of salvation, effectively aligning itself with infused righteousness. I want you to hear that again. AI says. That lordship salvation they claim, they claim to emphasize to affirm imputed right or infused righteous or imputed righteousness. Let me state that again, lordship claims to affirm imputed righteousness.

15:12 If you talk to anyone who holds to lordship salvation, anyone who goes to a lordship salvation type church, or even if they don't go to a lordship salvation type church, you hear them talk about salvation, it's very a lordship way of thinking. They will affirm you. Are saved by imputed righteousness. However, they will then emphasize that, how do you prove someone's salvation by works? The minute they say someone's salvation is proved by works, they effectively, this is what AI says, effectively. Aligns themselves with infused righteousness. AI knows that the minute you say, oh, works prove someone's salvation, you are denying imputed righteousness and you're returning to an infused righteous idea, which is Roman Catholicism. That's why I forget what AI says. I have said it or forget what I say, listen to AI. Whichever one you want to listen to. AI knows better than I do.

16:11 But I have been saying. Way before AI that look, if you're going to go to and a lordship idea, then why go to some fake Catholic church. Go to a Catholic church. Don't go to some Protestant church where you're like, oh, we believe in reform theology. No, you don't. You are denying the very Reformation, and you're going back to the very enemy of the Reformation, which is the Catholic Church, because you're holding to. An infused righteous view. So then I asked AI to critique lordship salvation. First, it says lordship salvation is guilty of circular reasoning. Lordship says works don't save you, but they prove your salvation, which creates a functional dependence on works. Hey, works don't save you, but you have works to prove your salvation, meaning I have to have works in order to be saved.

17:01 So it's a works based system and it's circular reasoning in the which is a logical fallacy. It undermines assurance by making salvation contingent on a subjective performance. How can you know you're saved? Well, you got to do this and you got to do that. Well, how do I know if I've done enough? How many works? What kind of works? When do I know I've done enough? I can't even be sure until I get all the way to the end of my life and hopefully I can look back and I've got enough works that proved that I was saved. Well, that's subjective. That means you can never know for sure if you're saved. It blurs the line between law and gospel. The lordship Salvation treats the Gospel as a new form of law. By tying assurance to obedience, it destroys the Gospel. It takes the Gospel and turns it into a law. Hey, if you believe you'll do this, and you'll do this, and you'll do this, and you do this and you don't do this, then you didn't believe. Therefore you're not saved. Therefore you have to do this in order to be saved. Lordship Salvation will claim monargism. However, the emphasis on works makes salvation feel contingent on human effort. Not only that, it's similar to Catholic theology conditional assurance and the intertwining of justification and sanctification is Catholicism. It merges justification and sanctification because sanctification becomes the proof of justification. You can't really have assurance because you don't know if you're going to have

18:33 enough works to prove that you're saved. Basically, it's Roman Catholicism disguised. So Ai then AI affirm the critique of lordship salvation. It recognized its practical alignment with Catholicism. AI recognize lordship's practical alignment with Catholicism. AI highlighted the inconsistency between lordship's and imputed righteousness. Ai Ai raised the following points that Protestant sermons emphasized transformation, resembling infused righteousness. Every Protestant sermons talks about being transformed, being changed, being a new creature. All of that is infused righteousness. AI pointed out that assurance is tied to works, which leads to doubt and a performance based mentality. And AI pointed out a proper understanding of imputed righteousness focuses entirely on Christ's work, not human effort. So AI pointed out all of that right, so AI then gave some discussion questions. I'm not going to go into those right now. AI then provided some challenges for lordship salvation for people who believe it. AI asked the question, this is these are questions AI asked as if someone as if it was talking to someone who.

19:55 Believes in lordship salvation. If imputed righteousness declares believers righteousness despite their sin, how can works prove salvation? I've only been asking that question for I don't know ten years, but uh, hey, AI figures that out. Hey, if it imputed righteousness declares to someone to be righteous, then how can works prove salvation? Your works can't prove anything because you were declared righteous because of an imputed righteousness. How do you reconcile ongoing sin and believers with the claim that transformation is necessary evidence for salvation? AI's like, Hey, how do you reconcile the fact that we all continue to sin be holy as He is holy?

20:39 You never do that. You're in a perpetual stat of sin. So how can then you say transformation is the proofs of salvation? Because then transformation would have to require almost some level of perfection or it would never approve anything. It would become subjective. AI then asked this question, how many works, what kind of works? How many and. What kind are sufficient to prove your salvation. AI then asked this question number four. Does tying assurance to work contradict the Reformation's emphasis on faith alone? If you would tie your assurance based on what you do or don't do, you're destroying faith alone, You're denying the entire Reformation. Then AI says, can you demonstrate a clear distinction between justification and sanctification and lordship salvation theology? If you hold the lordship salvation? Can you truly draw a distinction between justification and sanctification? And remember we talked about this, and I pointed out countless times that in practice we merge justification and sanctification just like Catholics do. Remember I talked about this, So remember I raised the question, maybe we should just go be Catholic since we already destroy the distinction between justification and sanctification. Because you destroy the distinction between justification and sanctification the minute you say sanctification is proof of your justification. You cannot prove justification by sanctification if you

22:12 are justified by an imputed righteousness so therefore you've got to draw a distinction between the two. Now, so that's kind of just putting it all back together. That's putting it all back together, and that's not even a great review. I didn't even follow AI's outline from my review, because there was Ai even gave me too much to review. Probably there I skipped most of it. So I then started continuing to talk to Ai. I continue to talk to Ai about Lordship Salvation, and AI went on to say this, it would be fair and it would be accurate to describe Lordship's Salvation as a non Catholic form of Catholicism. AI says, hey, Lordship Salvation is a non Catholic form of Catholicism.

23:12 That's the words it used. And they say it is true in this sense in terms of its functional theology. In other words, in theory, it may try to be as different as Catholicism is. Maybe sometimes when they preach, they'll try to show how different they are from Cathology, from Catholicism. But in there in it's practical, outworking. The theology is no, it's just simply Catholicism. It says, Lordship Salvation maintains Protestant terminology and denies Catholic doctrines explicitly. But the way it the way it ties works to salvation, resembles Catholic theology in several ways.

24:01 And here's why this description works. So AI is going to justify saying that lordship salvation is a non Catholic form of Catholicism. This is AI say, I'm going to justify why this is an accurate description. Number one similarities and the role of works. Catholicism teaches that works, empowered by grace are necessary for salvation. Justification is a process involving faith, works and sacraments. That's what Catholicism teaches. Let me say it again, that works. It teaches that works are empowered by grace and they are necessary for salvation.

24:47 Justification is a process involving faith, works and sacraments. Now you said, well, how does that How is that similar to lordship? Well, let's let AI tell us how it's similar. AI says, lordship denies that work save and it insists that works are necessary evidence of genuine faith, making them essential for assurance of salvation. So just like you have to have works in order to be saved in Catholicism. Well, in lordship salvation, you have to have works in order to prove your saved, meaning you have to have these works in order to be saved. It's the same thing.

25:33 And both systems. Works are functionally indispensable, whether as a part of earning it or as proof of having it. But if you have to prove, if you have to have works in order to prove you have salvation, then you have to have works in order to be saved. So it's you're just playing a semantics game. You're just playing a verbal game. So the similarities when it comes to works and guess what, why do you have these works and lordship salvation. I mean, AI doesn't even get into this. But if you have to have these works, where where do the works arise from? Well, lordship salvation, even though they may not use the term, it's because of an infused righteousness. You would have to have an infused righteousness for the good works to show up. Right, the whole thing begins to fall apart. Conditional assurance, So this is a second problem. Catholicism teaches that assurance of salvation is conditional and tied to the believer's cooperation with grace, avoiding mortal sin, and remaining in a state of grace.

26:43 Lordship salvation assurance is conditional, tied to a believer's visible fruit and obedience. If sufficient evidence of transformation is not present, doubts about salvation are warranted. And guess what, Hey, you've got to have enough works and guess what, lordship salvation will Hey, hey, you've got to prove your safe. And guess what. Some sins don't call into question your salvation. Ry, some sins don't some sense call into question your salvation. Oh wait, does that not sound like mortal and venial sin? Oh? Someone a teenager who saved? Who who struggles with heterosexual pornography or struggles with a fornication? Okay, that doesn't necessarily disprove their saved. But if that teenager struggles with homosexuality, Oh, then immediately they're not saved.

27:35 Well what just happened? Well, because this one's mortal, these are venial. In that convenient. Lordship plays the same game. It's like, no those sins, Oh, pride, arrogance, self righteous, judgmental condemning. Oh that's okay. Oh, but if you commit this sin or this sin or this sin, you proved you were never saved, so just so who get At least in the Catholic Church, the church claims to have the authority to give you what is a mortal and venial sin? I guess. Within the Protestant lordship world, I guess each believer gets to determine what are the mortal and venial sins. The whole system is subjective and it's ridiculous. Next, another problem is the blurring of justification and sanctification and Catholicism, justification and sanctification are part of the same process where the believer becomes progressively righteous through cooperation with grace, lordship salvation. Though it claims to distinguish justification at one time act from sanctification a process, the heavy emphasis on obedience and transformation as evidence of salvation conflates the two end practice. See the minute you say your transformation proves your justification, then you are making justification sanctification and you're making scentification a proof of justification, which would mean your justification has to be based off an infused righteousness and not an imputed righteousness. You destroy the

29:08 distinction between justification and sanctification, and for all practical purposes, you basically are a Catholic. The practical blurring undermines the Protestant doctrine of justification by faith alone, where righteousness is fully imputed to the believer apart from works. Remember, the Protestant. Teaching is God imputes your righteous his righteousness to your account apart from works. Works don't earn it, works don't prove it. Next philological and pastoral implications. Both systems risk leading believers into introspection and fear as they constantly evaluate their works and obedience to determine their standing before God.

29:57 This focus shifts from the sufficiency of Christ's work to the believer's performance, creating a workspace mentality, even if it's unintentional. Well, because what are you looking to? You're not looking to the finished work of Christ. And you get these questions all the time in Protestant churches. How do I know I'm saved? How do I know I'm saved? How do look to Christ? That's how you know you're saved? Well, I do this, and I do this, and I struggle with this. None of that matters, because you're saved by what Christ did, not by what you do. What you do doesn't prove it. What you do doesn't earn it, what you do doesn't change it. You are either saved by the finished work of Jesus Christ or you are not.

30:39 And if you're saved by the finished work of Jesus Christ, you look to his imputed righteousness and everything else is irrelevant as far as your salvation is concerned, as far as spiritual growth, as far as practical implications of sin and consequences, all of that has practical implications, but as far as your justification, you're justified because of what Christ. Did, not on the basis of what you do. And Christians love to sit around, well, I don't know if that person is saved because they did this and they did and I don't know if that person is saved, Yeah, because you think you're so wonderful and perfect because they're committing the mortal sins while you sit around in your self righteous, condemning attitude and you don't even see your own sin. So AI goes on to say, now I'm skipping some things because I'm trying to make us cover as much ground as possible. AI says this, This is a direct quote from artificial intelligence. The issue for lordship salvation is not Antiinomianism. The issue for lordship salvation is not easy believism. The issue for lordship salvation is not cheap grace, but rather the doctrine of salvation and by imputed righteousness. Lordship salvation will try to argue the problem is Antinomianism. The problem is easy believism. The problem is

32:09 cheap grace and ais like no, no, no, that's not your problem. Your problem is the doctrine of imputed righteousness. Let me state it again. Lordship salvation is the enemy of the doctrine of justification by imputed righteousness. It is the enemy. It denies imputed righteousness. It fights against the doctrine. It takes you away from looking to the imputed righteousness as assurance, so that you have to look to your stink and self to somehow prove if you're saved by if you're good enough. And the only way you're good enough is you've got to go along with whatever lordship salvation people tell you you're supposed to do, and if you do what they tell you you're supposed to do, you're good enough. But they don't determine it. God determines it. And if you're going to look to works. God demands perfection, You're never gonna be it. So stop listening the Lordship Salvation because as they literally are the enemies of the doctrine of imputed righteousness.

33:04 They are the enemy. They are no different than Catholicism. If you're gonna condemn Catholicism, you have to condemn lordship Salvation. There is no neutrality here. If you accept lordship salvation, then do not condemn Catholicism. Don't tell me Catholics aren't saved. Then if your Lordship Salvation friends are saved, then Catholics are saved. Because it's the same system. No nobody's going to like that, but it is the same system in every practical way.

33:44 Here's what Ai said. Imputed righteousness contradicts the core of lordship salvation. The doctrine of imputed righteousness teaches that the believer is declared righteous before God solely on the basis of christ righteousness, which is credited to their account by faith. Lordship salvation insists that salvation must be accompanied by a life of visible obedience and works to validate that faith. This shifts the focus from the sufficiency of Christ imputed righteousness to the believer sanctification as evidence of justification. The problem is is that lordship salvation struggles to fully accept that justification is a complete and final act at the moment of faith, regardless of the believer's subsequent works or level of sanctification.

34:29 At the moment of faith, you are declared perfectly righteous. It's done, it's finished. There's no going back saying wait, wait, wait, wait, you didn't do this, you're not doing this, you're doing this, you're struggling with this. None of that matters because you were declared righteous at the moment of faith. You can't come back and say, well, I know you believed, but you didn't do this and this and this and this, and if you really would have believed, then this would have changed. Well why would have this had changed the moment I believed unless I was infused with righteousness. But I wasn't infused with righteousness because I was declared to be that which I'm not, which is the entire doctrine of imputed righteousness. So imputed righteousness contradicts the core of lordship salvation. I can't state that enough. It literally contradicts the core of lordship salvation. Contradicts imputed righteousness. Number two.

35:23 Another problem is it misdiagnoses. The problem see Antiinomianism is the rejection of moral law. Easy believism and cheap grace are often used as straw men by Lordship Salvation advocates. These terms imply that any teaching emphasizing salvation by grace alone through faith alone will inevitably lead to moral laxity or a disregard for holiness. However, the doctrine of imputed righteousness does not lead to antinomianism. It teaches that good works flow from at a gratitude for God's grace, not as a requirement to prove salva. The real tension for lordship Salvation is that imputed righteousness renders any demand for works or obedience as proof of salvation unnecessary and philologically inconsistent.

36:15 Believing in imputed righteousness does not make you an Antinomian. Believing a salvation by imputed righteousness does not make you someone who believes in easy believism or believes in cheap grace. And anyone who says that it's. Just a lie, it's just a straight up life, it's a mischaracterization. It's a straw man. It's attacking people on the basis of complete ignorance. No, you know what it is, it's actually attacking people. You're not attacking people, You're attacking the doctrine of imputed righteousness. That's your issue. Take it up with imputed righteousness now again. I got no problem if you want to say, hey, we need to reevaluate the doctrine of imputed right now, I'm willing to have this conversation. Let's see if the doctrine of imputed righteousness is wrong, maybe the Bible actually teaches infused righteousness, So maybe we need to reject the entire Reformation, reject imputed righteousness, return to an infused righteous mindset.

37:12 And if you can prove that, then I'll be like, you know what I think at this point, we just go back to Catholicism and we'll just go join a Catholic church and be good Catholics. I'm not going to go play games in your little fake Catholic church claiming to be a Protestant church when you're no more Protestant than the pope. Lordship Salvation reintroduces a works based framework by making works a necessary proof of salvation. Lordship Salvation undermines the very nature of imputed righteousness, which declares the believer fully righteous in Christ, regardless of their personal performance.

37:54 Make sure you if you believe in imputed righteousness, you are perfectly righteous. It doesn't matter what you do, it doesn't change the imputed right it was imputed to your account. You're perfectly righteous no matter what you do. I know Christians hate hearing that, but if you believe in imputed righteousness, that's the way it works. See, the demand for works effectively shifts the focus from christ righteousness to the believer's behavior. And this reintroduces a functional works based element into salvation. And that's exactly what happens. You end up in a works based system. So AI says, Hey, look, lordship salvation is basically the problem with lordship salvation is not Antiinomianism.

38:47 It's not any of these other things. The issue with lordship salvation is imputed righteousness. Why is this so Because imputed righteousness contradicts the core of lordship salvation. Because lordship salvation misdiagnoses the problem when it's not Antinomianism. It is not any of this issue. It's imputed righteousness. Lordship Salvation reintroduces a workspace framework which is at odds with imputed righteousness. Number four, Assurance becomes dependent on sanctification. The doctrine of imputed righteousness provides assurance because it rests solely on Christ's finished work see imputed richness. My assurance is Christ's perfection the end. What's your assurance in Salvation?

39:28 Christ? What's your assurance that you're going to heaven? Christ? What's your assurance you're not going to hell? Christ? What's your assurance that you're saved? Christ? Well? What about these passages that say works? Christ? Did those works for me? If that's not my proof, and I have to start looking to myself, I'm going to hell. You're going to hell if you're even remotely honest with yourself unless you create a mortal venial list. Lordship. Salvation ties assurance to the believer's sanctification, specific their ability to demonstrate fruit and obedience. This creates a subjective and unstable foundation for assurance, which is at odds with objective reality of imputed righteousness. See It objectively denies the reality of imputed righteousness by saying this, prove this, prove this.

40:18 Here's the test here's the test. Here's the test, meaning then the imputed righteousness becomes it doesn't even matter anything in a practical sense. AI says, the real issue, here's the real issue. The real issue is a failure to trust Christ's work. Lordship's salvation is ultimately uncomfortable with the radical nature of grace. It seeks to safeguard holiness by adding conditions are proofs, but in so doing so, it undermines the sufficiency of Christ imputed righteousness.

41:04 The doctrine of imputed righteousness declares that salvation is entirely a gift received by faith, and it cannot be measured or proven by the believer's performance. This is a stumbling block to lordship salvation. It falls apart, ladies and gentlemen. Lordship salvation is based off an infused righteousness mentality. It just is, and imputed righteousness destroys it. And the issue with lordship salvation it's not Antinomianism. It's not all the accusations they throw. At people, usually believism, cheap grace.

41:46 Oh, while you picked up some cliches, you picked up some slogans. I'm so glad you can repeat slogans. But it's nowhere. Your issue is imputed righteousness. So AI goes on to say, this Lordship Salvation operates on certain assumptions, and it assumes that believers. Now this is an assumption built into Lordship Salvation that a believer has the ability to live in obedience to God's commands, which can be problematic when you examine this biblically and when you examine this in light of reality. Here's a breakdown of the core assumptions and why they should raise theological concerns. So now Ai is going to be like, look, if you look at if you look at Lordship Salvation, it has a basic assumption, and the basic assumption is.

42:49 You can do it. You can obey the law, you can keep it. You can do it. And AI's like, when you look at this biblically, that doesn't make any sense. And when you look at it reality, come on, even AI knows that we don't keep the law. Even AI knows you, come on, you don't keep the law of God. You're out of your mind. So here's the first assumption, Ai says, Lordship Salvation teaches that Christians can keep the law. Lordship Salvation's assumption believe believe assumption says that believers can obey God's law sufficiently to demonstrate their salvation. Now, please note the game Lordship Salvation plays there. It doesn't say that you can obey the law perfectly. Lordship Salvation will try to play the game. You can obey the law sufficiently to prove your salvation. But what is the sufficient amount to prove yourselfage sont Ai. Lordship Salvation knows well, ultimately, you can't keep the law perfectly, but you can keep it sufficiently.

43:53 So there's a sufficient amount of things you must do in order to prove your safe But this is a problem. Right. I'll give you two passages that show you this as a problem. First, John chapter three, Nicodemus. He's described as a righteous man, a man that would meticulously try to keep the law. He would have been outwardly righteous, didn't prove his salvation, meaning you can have a certain level of outward righteous righteousness even though you're not saved. Right, when we go to John chapter three and we read about Nicodemus, there was a man, there was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews.

44:40 And when you learn about Nicodemus, and you learn about the Pharisees. They were meticulous and trying to keep every letter of the law, every jot and tittel. Do this, don't do this, don't go here, don't eat this, don't do this, don't do this, don't do that. They had an outward form of righteousness, meaning that a lost person, a completely unredject, de generate person, can have a certain level of morality outwardly that can be achieved without salvation. Therefore, then, out then, how are you going to then prove that the outward works prove salvation when there's a certain level of outward morality that even a lost person can achieve Matthew Chapter seven, Lord Lord, didn't we do this? Didn't we do this? Didn't we do this? Depart from me?

45:25 I never knew you outward proof? No? So then so then a lordship is like, well, you can't do it perfectly, but you can do it sufficiently. So how much outward works then is sufficient to prove salvation? Why is it? Why is it? Why? Why are we watering down the requirement? God demands be holy as I am holy. God demands be perfect ause I am perfect? Why does lordship, come along a wall. You know you can. You can keep the law. You can't keep it perfectly, but you can keep it sufficiently to prove your salvation. So in efficient obedience, it's proof of salvation. That makes no sense. If you're going to make proof required, then if you're going to make works as proof, then you would have to demand perfect works.

46:15 The whole thing falls apart, all right, and again to obey the law sufficiently. I don't even know what that means. Ai says. Scripture is clear that even after salvation, believers continue to struggle with sin. The law reveals our inability in a meet God's standard, driving us to rely on Christ righteousness not around. So even Ai says, look, the Bible clearly demonstrates that we're still going to be living in sin even as a believer. If perfect this is what Ai says, If perfect or near perfect lawkeeping were possible, there would be no need for christ imputed righteousness. If you can do it, then you don't need imputed righteousness. Now, the fact that lordship believes that you can even do near you can do sufficient works to prove it, then they have to believe in infused righteousness, because how else are you able to produce these works? Unless you're just saying anybody can produce a near sufficient level of works. Well, if you can produce a near level sufficient a level of works even without an infused righteousness, then meaning you can do it on your own or is it God doing it in you? And if God's doing it in you, then why can't God get you to perfection?

47:33 So the whole thing. Falls apart Logically, if God is the one getting you to near sufficient works to prove your salvation, why would God only get you to near sufficient or sufficient? Why would he not get you to perfection? Then that means God doesn't want you to be perfect. If God doesn't want you to be perfect, then why do you get upset when people say because God is the one who doesn't want someone to be perfect? The whole thing because they just fall up. It makes no sense. And the more you it's like the more you pull one string, it just everything begins to unravel. The second assumption that let Lordship's Salvation makes is that Christians can love God with all their heart, soul, and mind. Lordship Salvation teaches that believers can love God fully and without reservation, demonstrating their salvation by their devotion. AI says, here's the problem.

48:29 The Greatest Commandment sets an impossibly high standard that no believer fulfills perfectly. Even the most devout Christian falls short and loving God as they should. This is why salvation must rest on Christ's perfect love for the Father, not on our love for the Father. AI knows we can't do it. Why does Lordship Salvation believe. That we can. You've got to be delusional. The third assumption Lordship Salvation makes is that Christians can be holy as God is holy. Believers can achieve a level of personal holiness that reflects God's holiness and prove their salvation.

49:12 That's what Lordship Salvation teaches, as that believers can achieve a level of personal holiness that reflects god holiness and prove their salvation. The problem, according to AI, is the command to be holy as I am holy reflects God's perfect standard, which no human being can achieve in this life. While sanctification evolves growth, believers will always fall short. AI says, hey, we can't do AI says, you can't do it. Lordship says you can. AI's like you're out of your mind. It's amazing. That AI can be more honest. A fourth assumption that Lordship Salvation makes is that works can be pure and uncorrupted enough to prove salvation. Lordship self assumes the works of a true believer are sufficiently pure and untainted by sin to serve as evidence of salvation. Here's the theological problem. Even the best works of believers are still imperfect and tainted by sin Isaiah sixty four to six, Romans seven eighteen. The idea that human works can prove salvation misunderstands the ongoing presence of sin and the believer's life, and elevates human effort over God's grace. AI's like, look, even your best works are tainted, even your good works are corrupted. So how could your works have reproved salvation?

50:37 Because your works are never pure. Lordship Salvation says, your works are pure enough to prove your salvation. That's ridiculous. That means you almost have to deny the existence of You cannot say that and believe that people. Here's ultimately what Lordship Salvation is going to do. You've got to reject imputed righteousness, and you've got to reject the idea that a Christian still has a sinful nature, because if you believe that Christians still have a sinful nature, then you would have to assume that every work that we do is corrupted in some way, shape or form by that sinful nature. Since our works arise from within us. Unless you're saying now, just an external work, without even being connected to an internal reality, can prove your salvation, the whole thing falls apart. Ai said, here's the flaw and these assumptions, these assumptions overestimate the believer's ability to meet God's standard in this life. They shift the focus from christ finished work and imputed righteousness to the believer's end, perfect and incomplete sanctification. By holding believers to a standard they cannot meet. Lordships, salvation inadvertently reintroduces a form of work's righteousness, undermining the doctrine of justification by faith alone.

51:54 And here's what Ai says, here's a biblical perspective. Salvation is entirely based on Christ's perfect obedience, death, and resurrection, which are credited to the believer by faith. I want you to hear that again. Ai says, salvation is entirely based on Christ's perfect obedience, death, and resurrection. And this is credited to the believer. While good works and growth. In holiness are evidence of God's ongoing work in a believer's life, they are not the basis or proof of salvation. Good works are great, Good works are about growth. Good works may be showing what God may or may not be doing inside a believer, because even then trying to understand those works. But they are not proof of salvation.

52:43 They are not because you can't prove imputed righteousness. I've been saying this a million times. Third thing Ai says is a biblical perspective. Believers are called to strive for holiness, but the striving is always a company by an acknowledgment of dependent on God's grace and an ongoing acknowledgment that we still sin and will continue to sin. I cannot stress enough. I'm fat and this and just to remind everyone, and I talked about this in part one.

53:28 The fascinating thing about this is this the way we ended up in this way I ended up in. This conversation, are we now since you're a part of it. This conversation with Ai in regards to this subject is Ai was reviewing a sermon on James two fourteen through twenty six and AI was kind of like, uh, there's some problems here, right, And as soon as it started describing the problems, I was like, whoa wait a minute, AI is arguing against lordship salvation. Is this fascinating? So then I'm was like, okay, well, before I can have AI critique lordship Salvation, we have to first draw a distinction between infused imputed righteousness. Now this is where my theological knowledge helps me have the conversation with AI, because you've got to know the difference between infused and imputed righteousness. And I think if you talk to a lot of Christians, they say they believe in imputed righteousness, but then when they start talking, they clearly believe in an infused righteousness. I think most Christians are completely confused over the difference.

54:33 Now, once you establish that difference. Here's infused, here's imputed. Once you understand that difference, then lordship Salvation is in trouble. And what ticks me off is, well, I believed in Lordship's salvation. This really just irritates me to know when when I believed in lordship salvation, I criticize Catholicism. I condemn Catholicism well, I believed a system that was more in line with Catholicism. But I was condemning Catholicism based off all the stuff that you know, you always hear you're supposed to condemn Catholicism about right, you know, the magisterium, people infallibility, you know Mary, you know the Merriam dogmas, you know all these different things, purgatory praying to the saints, just on all that typical stuff that we condemn, you know, Catholicism for.

55:29 Right. Oh well, it's Catholicism is ancient Babylonian religion brought back all the stuff you want to just say. That's that's where I went. And then finally I started realizing some of those claims, some of the claims were already a little fraudulent or questionable. And then when I'm like, well, I'm going to study Catholicism so that I can better critique Catholicism. Then I had no idea that what I was walking into was really a critique of lordship salvation, because I found myself going, wait a minute, this is lordship salvation to the letter. If you believe in imputed righteousness, lordship salvation falls apart now if you believe infused righteousness, lordship salvation makes perfect sense. Lordship salvation is the enemy of imputed righteousness. Even though their supporters would say no, no, no, no, no, no no, but I'm telling you it doesn't work. If someone is declared righteous by faith alone, and they are declared righteous because God credits his perfection to that person, there's no proof of that. There's no way to challenge that.

56:43 There's no way to question that. The issue is do you believe? Are you trusting in Christ alone? Because action can't prove that. I can't show you imputed righteousness. Show me your imputed righteousness, can't show you if you want, I guess I could do this. Show me your imputed righteousness. Here's a Bible, and go read everything about Jesus. He was tempted in all points, yet without sin, he was holy, he was perfect, he was righteous, he was obedient, he fulfilled the Father's will, he loved God. There's my imputity if you want, if you want proof of my imputed righteousness, go look at Jesus. Everything he did is now credited to me. Therefore, that's the only proof I can get.

57:37 I can't give you proof on what I do because Christ doing all of those things and crediting it to my account, don't it doesn't make me do those things. And I know that goes against everything the Evangelical, Protestant, fundamentalist world. It's all about change, change, change, it's all about moralism. Do this, don't do this, do this, don't do this, do this, don't do this, do this, don't do this, do this, don't do this. Do more of this. Read your Bible more, pray more, go to church more, get more money, do this, do that, do this, do that, do this. It's all about that. And so if you if you emphasize imputed righteousness, that kind of scares them.

58:19 Oh cheap grace easy believe is the anti nomian. Oh oh oh you don't care, You don't care about living out the Christian life, because they panic, They don't. They don't know what to do with that. But if the whole thing falls apart, and isn't it fascinating that AI is able to point out all of these errors, That to me is the reason we're We've talked about a lot of this stuff. But what I want you to see from all of this is that AI is able to go this whole thing falls apart, whole thing is inconsistent. If if now, if I asked Ai to defend and give me the arguments from salvation, if we accept infused righteousness as the right way of thinking, well then it will be able to defend lordship salvation.

59:17 But it knows that lordship salvation is really incompatible with an imputed righteous view because it contradicts it. It's inconsistent with it, it's incompatible with it. And even Ai acknowledges that basically lordship salvation is a non Catholic form of Catholicism, and I know that makes everyone so mad. Ai goes on to say, we don't have time to get into this now. Ai goes on to say, lordship Salvation fails to maintain a proper distinction between law and gospel, which is a crucial principle in biblical theology. And remember when I got into the whole discussion about long Gospel. That's when people get really in servis. But you maintain a proper distinction between law and gospel. I think the only way you can even understand your Bible if if you're going to view it from a Protestant perspective, from an imputed.

1:00:14 If you believe in imputed righteousness, you have to maintain the law gospel distinction. Because when I see a passion that says do this, do this, do this, do this, it's telling me to do this to show me that I can't do it. So then I run to Christ, which did it? Law says do? Gospel says done. Now if I destroy that proper law gospel distinction, now the law is like, do this to prove you're saved. Do this to prove you're saved. If you don't do this, you proved you're not saved. If you don't do this, you prove you're not saved. Well, how much of it do I have to do? Do I have to do it perfectly? Well, you just got to do it sufficiently sufficiently?

1:00:54 Well, what does that even mean? And then it becomes subjective. And then ultimately, if you're even remotely honest with yourself, if you're going to hold the lordship salvation, here's a conclusion you should come to. You're not saved. Why be holy as God is holy? Do you ever do that? That means you're in a perpetual state of sin. Twenty four hours a day, seven days a week, huh. Love God with all your heart, my body, and soul. Even Ai says you can't do that. Hmm, well that would mean you're in a perpetual state of sin. Love your neighbor as yourself. Do you do that? No? You fall? How about do all things without. Complaining and grumbling. How about I go no bitterness, no one forgiveness, No this, no that. No.

1:01:36 If you just even real after a. While, you'd be like, you know what, this stuff doesn't with This stuff is trash, it doesn't work. You would just throw it to the curb. But no, no, no, Lordship salvation convince themselves that they do it. Other people don't. I thank the Lord that I'm not like all of these people. I think the God that I'm not like all of these people. In fact, let's let's we'll end with that. The parable, I think? Is it the parable? Had always call it a parable. Let's look for that text of the unrighteous?

1:02:24 Is that tax collector of the Is it a tax collector? I think maybe? And the Pharisee. I think it's the tax collector and the Pharisee. Let me see here, Yeah, it's Luke eighteen. I think it's Luke eighteen. I think it's Luke eighteen. The pharisee and the publican. All right, here we go.

1:03:06 Luke eighteen verse nine. And he spaked this parable unto certain which trusted in themselves that they were righteous, and despised others. Luke eighteen nine. Trusted in themselves that they are righteous. Lordship salvation is all about, look at how righteous. Now. They may try to say, God gave me the righteousness. They may try to give God the credit, but it's like, look, I do all of these things. This is how I know I'm saved. I know I'm saying because I do this, I do this, I do this, I do this. They're trusting in a righteousness that is somehow manifested in their life as proof that they're saved by an imputed righteousness, which just logically makes no sense. But that's okay. They look at that and guess what they tend to do.

1:03:50 They despise others. That person's not saved. Well, that person's not sayd well, I don't know if that person can say, are you sure that person can be saying? Can a person really be saved? And do this? They're always wanting the use their lordship salvation as there, I guess their ability to critique and judge everyone else's salvation because. You know them, they are good, but the other people aren't. Well, then how does the story go? Well, two men went up into a temple to pray, the one a pharisee and the other a publican. The pharisee stood and prayed, thus, I thank THEE that I'm not as other men are. I'm not an extortioner. And I'm adding here I'm not an, I'm not unjust, I'm not an adulterer. I'm not or I'm not even as this publican. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess. Hey, I'm righteous, and all of those things that he said. We would be looking at that pharisee going, you've got to be saved because your work's proved that you're saved. You fast, you give money, you're not an adulterer, you're not an extortioner, You're.

1:04:53 Not like this other center. You are the saved one, because Lordship Salvation says your works prove it. And then what would what would Lordship Salvation say to this guy? And then the publicans standing far off would not even lift up so much his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. He doesn't even he doesn't even go into what all of his sins are. He's just like, Hey, I know, I'm a sinner. I'm not I'm not worthy of anything. Have mercy. All I can do is ask for mercy. And guess what when you when you cry out to God for mercy, and by faith you believe in what Christ has done, his righteousness is imputed to you. But guess what. You still are a sinner, and you will continue to be a sinner, and you will continue to sin, and even your so called good works are corrupted by sin.

1:05:56 And how does the story end? I tell you this man went down which man, and the publican the sinner? He went down to his house justified rather than the other. For everyone that exalted himself shall be a based, and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted as Luke eighteen nine through fourteen. Now, some people may just see this as. Oh, well, you just don't like lordship salvation. Now this is about you're missing the whole point. If your criticism of this is you just don't like lordship salvation and who cares? I would rather do something else. Well, you can criticize it, but here's the reality. This is about imputed righteousness versus infused righteousness. This is the literally the whole thing the Reformation was about. This is the reason you're not a Catholic. This is the heart of what you claim to believe. You should be greatly interested in it. And what should really fascinate you is that we now have entered into a era where artificial intelligence can literally challenge a philological system and point out it's inconsistency, it's logical fallacies, how it's incompatible with a like, hey, if you hold a lordship, well you can't hold to imputed righteousness because they're incompatible. AI can point that out.

1:07:16 Never in the ten done before it would just be. People pointing it out. Now you have artificial intelligence going, oh, you know, it doesn't really work. Now it's that gonna How does that impact the church and theology moving forward? I don't know. I don't think people care. People won't care that AI disagrees with them. They don't care because. They think they're smarter than everything. They think they're smarter than other people. They think they're smarter than pastors, they think they're smarter than theologians. They think they're basically God, so they won't care what Ai has to say. But I think we should pause when Ais like, hmmm, I don't know if that actually works. I think there's a problem there, just like we did in the first hour where Ai was like, I think there's a problem with Isaiah forty eleven in baptism.

1:08:01 That's what we have to That's what we need to take from this is that. We've entered in it. Theologically, we've entered into a new era. That's number one. Number two, we have ahiological system that has completely infiltrated all of Christianity, that completely denies what our entire theological system is supposed to be about, which is imputed righteousness that doesn't bother you. And why is it that we have such a law based mentality, because that's our natural way of thinking, because grace is we don't get it. Wait, a person can just be declared righteous and still be a sinner. That seems not right. You got to do something.

1:08:45 No, I don't have to do anything, since Christ did everything. You can't say that, Well, then believe it infused righteousness, and then I'm all with you, all right, we'll start it there twenty six. We went sixty nine minutes. We had to do a lot more review than I typically wanted. I wanted to just move right on to part two. But yeah, this was the only choice really to do Isaiah forty would have just been it had just messed up the whole everything that we're doing. So hopefully next Sunday Isaiah forty nine to eleven. But we did cover We did cover Isaiah forty nine through eleven in the first hour. So really you've gotten hours two, You've got almost two and a half hours of teaching today, and you have the stuff we did yesterday I think, which was two hours two and a half hours yesterday. So it's about five six hours of content and two days.

1:09:38 So thanks for listening, and well we'll do more. Talk about basically what AI has done. It's basically written a book. Really, I've just basically asked it to create a book on the problems with lordship salvation according to AI, and it basically I've got an entire book here. I'm still edited, I'm still asking it to edit and change somet but when it's all said and done, I'm basically going to have a full blown book on all the problems with lordship salvation according to artificial intelligence, and then I'm going to probably try to put it in a PDF file and then I'll try to make it available to everyone. And AI is helping put it together, which is crazy.

1:10:19 All right, Thanks for listening everyone, Have a great day. God bless