|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: John MacArthur - 7/7/2007 11:35:30 AM
|
|
|
Decrease
Posts: 55
Joined: 5/28/2007
Status: offline
|
Collie,
This is highly appropriate for a thread on MacArthur because he has stood faithfully for the Gospel. Namely, the reason mormons and JW's are not Christians are centered on the following:
1. They deny the true nature and person of Jesus Christ. Denying that, you cannot have salvation
2. They deny the true nature of what the Gospel is. They could not say we are saved by Grace alone through Faith alone in Christ alone. Their understanding of Grace is not Grace, faith is not faith, and Christ is not Christ.
3. They deny the true nature of the Bible.
The Bible is clear who is and who is not saved. Historically the Church has affirmed that certain beliefs are required and cannot be denied for salvation. We are not Arianists (JW's) nor are we Modalists (Mormons) and they are not compatible with Christianity. You may not understand that last line, but they are condemned heresies of the Christian church.
_____________________________
Soli Deo Gloria
May I Decrease that He may Increase
http://www.thedickensfamily.org
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John MacArthur - 7/7/2007 5:56:48 PM
|
|
|
colliefan
Posts: 2749
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Raleigh, NC
Status: online
|
quote:
You may not understand that last line, but they are condemned heresies of the Christian church
I understand perfectly. The reason for my question is that many in today's church believe the bible is not the only truth. Some believe that Mormons are fellow believer's in Christ. Yet, their Christ is not the one of the Bible. Just to pick a nit, they are not modalists in the form of the UPC movement. They believe that Satan and Christ were brothers. How come to this conclusion is a mystery to me.
I am currently reading his book "Truth Wars" on the errors within the emerging church movement.
< Message edited by colliefan -- 7/7/2007 6:00:58 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John MacArthur - 7/7/2007 8:52:58 PM
|
|
|
BeesKnees
Posts: 242
Joined: 3/10/2007
Status: offline
|
Dubya said:" I don't think he is judgeing anyone but, rather, is urging us to judge ourselves."
I attend Grace Community Church, where John MacArthur is pastor, and I agree with "Dubya." ( and Decrease, and Earthless, etc)
He is only encouraging us to judge ourselves, before we face the judgement of God.
I don't know of anything else that could be more loving and caring than that -- it's Tough Love.
No, he is not infallible -- people are prone to error. That's why we need to check our Bibles. I've attended his church for 20 years, and he checks out ok, in my opinion.
< Message edited by BeesKnees -- 7/8/2007 1:03:22 AM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John MacArthur - 7/7/2007 10:12:18 PM
|
|
|
tony.nz
Posts: 289
Joined: 7/6/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: colliefan
quote:
For example, I do not believe that the belief systems of Mormons or JW's meet the requirements for salvation, and when I hear them expouse those opinions, I tend to the judgment that the particular person is not saved. That however is my opinion, and I have to acknowledge that the only opinion that matters, is Christ's
What criteria do you use to form your opinions? How does one know the follower of the JW and Mormon faith are NOT saved? How do we know it is not opinion but God's.
It is not appropriate to use this thread to discuss the validity of the JW or Mormon faiths. You however, missed my point. I have my opinion, based upon my interpretation of scripture. JW's and Mormons do not fall within my understanding of God's requirements for salvation. To say otherwise would be dishonest, in my view, they are sadly misled.
However (and this is the point I was making, using those examples), it is ultimately God's opinion that matters in regard to each individual, not mine. So, if I have misunderstood Him, then I have misunderstood. He sets the rules.
We, however, should not lack respect for those who with diligence and honesty present views that are different from our own, in regard to salvation. My understanding of the current debate is that it surrounds the value of "obedience', in regard to salvation. That is not a straightforward area, in that there are shades of understanding. I think, in regard to that, we should very careful of accusing others of presenting "another gospel".
No one is arguing (god forbid) that the gospel is a free licence to sin, and no one is arguing(I think) that you can achieve salvation by not committing sin. Between those two extremes, there are a number of different viewpoints, different shades of gray, as it where.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John MacArthur - 7/8/2007 12:01:42 AM
|
|
|
asker
Posts: 11
Joined: 7/2/2007
Status: offline
|
Rick4Him,
I did not call lordship salvation a false gospel. Go back and read my posts. I quote MacArthur in my new book and expound on his statement. I believe that New Covenant salvation is a relationship that is only available on the terms he offers and that the only terms He has ever offered anyone is unconditional surrender to His oft repeated claims of lordship rights over our lives. No Godly teacher in Scripture ever offered salvation on any other terms, although today preachers built large churches by offering God's salvation to practicing sinners.
God bless!
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John MacArthur - 7/8/2007 12:10:17 AM
|
|
|
asker
Posts: 11
Joined: 7/2/2007
Status: offline
|
Crankius, about this quote:
quote:
Note--I'm not calling MacArthur a false teacher--just want to be clear on that. He has taught many things well.
I've just seen the fruit of his seminary and some of his teachings, and they lacked grace.
In your own words, can you state a brief definition of grace and support it with verses of Scripture?
I used to believe that salvation by grace was God's way of making up the difference in my ongoing misbehavior and His requirements but the only verse I have been able to find for it is in II Nephi 25:23, in the book of Mormon. I'm not Mormon.
One important point: When Scripture says we are not saved by works, it means the works of the Law of Moses, not the works of the Law of Christ (Galatians 6:2). The works of the Law of Christ are repentance (turn from sin and commit our lives to God) and love.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John MacArthur - 7/8/2007 10:55:34 AM
|
|
|
crankius
Posts: 4504
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Eph 2:4-5 But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved)
quote:
Romans 3:20-28 Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin. But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference; for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? Of works? No, but by the law of faith. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law.
Our works play NO part in our justification before the Lord, because it is only the blood of Christ which can atone for our sins. My works cannot in any way atone for my sin. As a dead person, I cannot do anything of value. All my works are filthy rags.
I am completely redeemed by Christ. I am not capable of redeeming myself, even a little bit.
God is both the just and the justifier for those who have faith in Jesus, and yet even your faith is a gift (Eph 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God). This is grace—that God provided the one and only way for us as dead people to be in fellowship with Him.
Not one of us can boast about salvation.
_____________________________
Do not be overly righteous, Nor be overly wise: Why should you destroy yourself?
Ecclesiastes 7:16
SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John MacArthur - 7/8/2007 1:58:24 PM
|
|
|
brotherbrian
Posts: 290
Joined: 3/6/2007
Status: offline
|
I read somewhere recently that McArthur doesn't believ that God still works miracles today--is that true?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John MacArthur - 7/8/2007 2:57:58 PM
|
|
|
colliefan
Posts: 2749
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Raleigh, NC
Status: online
|
quote:
I read somewhere recently that McArthur doesn't believ that God still works miracles today--is that true?
Yes, he is a cessionist and is one of the areas where I disagree with his teachings. He, like many others use I Corn. 13 as proof text of their end and claim they ceased when the canon was completed.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John MacArthur - 7/8/2007 3:21:24 PM
|
|
|
brotherbrian
Posts: 290
Joined: 3/6/2007
Status: offline
|
Well, me and Johnny differ there too.
I guess it just goes to show that no one man's "got it all right".
I guess he didn't read the part where Jesus told the disciples that they would do "even more than these" in coming times.
Why would anyone believe the God that is the "same today, yesterday, and tomorrow" would change so?
< Message edited by brotherbrian -- 7/8/2007 3:26:42 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John MacArthur - 7/8/2007 6:16:04 PM
|
|
|
gmax
Posts: 153
Joined: 8/21/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: colliefan
Yes, he is a cessionist and is one of the areas where I disagree with his teachings. He, like many others use I Corn. 13 as proof text of their end and claim they ceased when the canon was completed.
Incorrect, Dr. MacArthur believes the to telion (the perfect) of 1Cor 13:10 is the eternal state. He does not claim that it is the cannon. Also, he doesn't claim that all miracles have stoped. Clearly, everytime a single soul comes to a saving knowledge of the truth, it is a miracle. He does however believe that the sign gifts, like healing, and tongues have ceased, but he builds his argument off of other texts, not 1Cor. 13.
Check out his book Charismatic Chaos if your interested.
< Message edited by gmax -- 7/8/2007 6:18:22 PM >
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John MacArthur - 7/8/2007 6:28:32 PM
|
|
|
bride48
Posts: 5529
Joined: 4/12/2005
From: Near Boston
Status: offline
|
MacArthur's preaching has challenged me to make sure I'm really saved. I appreciate that. Serious soul-searching never hurt anyone!
_____________________________
Joyfully,
DebbieLynne
And Paul Smith Is Such A Non-Descript Name... (my latest blog entry)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John MacArthur - 7/8/2007 7:40:51 PM
|
|
|
earthless
Posts: 6119
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: where pigeons are wearing sweaters....
Status: offline
|
gmax is correct... he believes in miracles but not the ones that many are fanatical about even to the point of discarding sound doctrine in other crucial areas. His book 'Charismatic Chaos' is an EXCELLENT read for anyone that claims to be a believer.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John MacArthur - 7/8/2007 11:58:07 PM
|
|
|
MensWriter
Posts: 13
Joined: 3/20/2007
Status: offline
|
Odd how someone can choose which miracles to believe in. Over the past thirty years, the stories I could tell of how I've seen God in bold action...
Oh well. As the above-poster stated, Dr. MacArthur rips us pretty mercilessly in his book. But since at the core of all it's all about Jesus, and His saving grace, I count him as a brother in the Lord. We lift him prayer, and may God grant his ministry increase.
< Message edited by MensWriter -- 7/9/2007 12:01:34 AM >
_____________________________
John Robinson
writer of suspense
www.johnrobinsonbooks.com
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John MacArthur - 7/9/2007 7:07:40 AM
|
|
|
GrahamCracker
Posts: 1854
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Dallas, TX
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: MensWriter
Odd how someone can choose which miracles to believe in. Over the past thirty years, the stories I could tell of how I've seen God in bold action...
I can't speak for MacArthur, but the claims for what people take for miracles are legion. So, yeah. I am very picky myself.
_____________________________
Larry
Sure we're under the law, everybody knows that!
When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear. (Heb 10:13)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John MacArthur - 7/9/2007 3:42:35 PM
|
|
|
brotherbrian
Posts: 290
Joined: 3/6/2007
Status: offline
|
I'm not trying to thread-jack here, but if he's "right", why even bother praying for a physically sick brother or sister at all as James instructs?
I'd have thought James would have included an expiration date on the whole praying thing.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John MacArthur - 7/9/2007 4:20:44 PM
|
|
|
GrahamCracker
Posts: 1854
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Dallas, TX
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: brotherbrian
I'm not trying to thread-jack here, but if he's "right", why even bother praying for a physically sick brother or sister at all as James instructs?
I'd have thought James would have included an expiration date on the whole praying thing.
I have a different take on James. I believe the James passage is taken out of context. First of all, it is not a catch-all scripture that gives us a carte blanc recipe for all desired healing. If you believe it applies to you, then you must accept the premise that your sickness is the direct result of sin. That's its context.
The trouble is, not all sickness is the result of sin.
_____________________________
Larry
Sure we're under the law, everybody knows that!
When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear. (Heb 10:13)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John MacArthur - 7/9/2007 4:48:16 PM
|
|
|
brotherbrian
Posts: 290
Joined: 3/6/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: GrahamCracker
quote:
ORIGINAL: brotherbrian
I'm not trying to thread-jack here, but if he's "right", why even bother praying for a physically sick brother or sister at all as James instructs?
I'd have thought James would have included an expiration date on the whole praying thing.
I have a different take on James. I believe the James passage is taken out of context. First of all, it is not a catch-all scripture that gives us a carte blanc recipe for all desired healing. If you believe it applies to you, then you must accept the premise that your sickness is the direct result of sin. That's its context.
The trouble is, not all sickness is the result of sin.
I never said it was, Graham.
My problem is with McArthur; not James.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John MacArthur - 7/9/2007 5:28:42 PM
|
|
|
GrahamCracker
Posts: 1854
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Dallas, TX
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: brotherbrian
I never said it was, Graham.
My problem is with McArthur; not James.
Maybe I should have added that I don't necessarily agree with Mcarthur on this point.
_____________________________
Larry
Sure we're under the law, everybody knows that!
When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. But whatever is becoming obsolete and growing old is ready to disappear. (Heb 10:13)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John MacArthur - 7/9/2007 5:29:22 PM
|
|
|
brotherbrian
Posts: 290
Joined: 3/6/2007
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: GrahamCracker
quote:
ORIGINAL: brotherbrian
I never said it was, Graham.
My problem is with McArthur; not James.
Maybe I should have added that I don't necessarily agree with Mcarthur on this point.
:)
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John MacArthur - 7/10/2007 8:49:32 AM
|
|
|
TheosCentric
Posts: 1904
Joined: 2/26/2006
Status: offline
|
I like MacArthur on just about everything except his dispensationalism. I was extremely disappointed when I found out he was dispensationalist. Btw, I do believe his church is SBC. Someone mentioned him contributing to SBC literature, so that would make sense. If it's not, what's he affiliated with, or is he independent.
I believe his Lordship salvation controversy stirred up the church in the '80s because churches and people didn't want to give up their sinning. He called their version of grace -> "cheap grace". MacArthur's version is the true grace. If you want more on what true grace is, you should also listen to John Piper at www.DesiringGod.org
Anyway, I stopped reading or listening to MacArthur when I found out about his dispie stance. Until he realizes the truth of that stance, he can't have credibility with me.
Btw, while Charismatic Chaos was pretty dead on about a lot in the movement, I believe it should have been titled TBN Heretics. It seemed to be more directed at those guys than anything, but I guess that's because they broadcast all the heretics, with the exception of D. James Kennedy and, I believe, MacArthur himself. Don't they broadcast Kay Arthur too? She's a dispie too, though.
_____________________________
"Missions exists because worship doesn't." -- John Piper, Let the Nations be Glad
God at the Center - Latest post - John 3:16 conference?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John MacArthur - 7/10/2007 10:53:30 AM
|
|
|
crankius
Posts: 4504
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
John MacArthur is not SBC.
_____________________________
Do not be overly righteous, Nor be overly wise: Why should you destroy yourself?
Ecclesiastes 7:16
SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY
|
|
|
|
|
RE: John MacArthur - 7/10/2007 11:56:02 AM
|
|
|
Ps103
Posts: 11667
Joined: 4/16/2005
From: Here, now
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: crankius
John MacArthur is not SBC.
He's non-denominational. HERE.
_____________________________
Fasten your seatbelts...it's going to be a bumpy night.
|
|
|
|
 New Messages |
 No New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/ New Messages |
 Hot Topic w/o New Messages |
 Locked w/ New Messages |
 Locked w/o New Messages |
|
 Post New Thread
Reply to Message
Post New Poll
Submit Vote
Delete My Own Post
Delete My Own Thread
Rate Posts |
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
