have you read Grace Awakening by Chuck Swindoll?
No. I'll look into it.
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
have you read Grace Awakening by Chuck Swindoll?
I think John and Chuck could learn from each other on this!No. I'll look into it.
do a google on "MacArthur and the blood of Christ".I just do not see it as being lord of all or Lord of none black and white!
What is his teaching on blood of Christ?
There are others who say that there’s something magical in the blood, there’s something in the blood itself that washes sin away, when the Scripture teaches it was the death of Christ that atoned for sin, and He shed His literal blood in sacrificial evidence of the pouring out of His life for sin. But there was nothing magic about that blood itself that could wash sin. And so, this heresy has begun to develop, strangely enough.
1 John 1:7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
Revelation 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,
Revelation 7:14 And I said unto him, Sir, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they which came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.
i totally disagree - without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin.MacArthur cites all these passages also. The disagreement is regarding what scripture means by the shedding of blood. He says it a metonym for death, and I agree with him. Bloodshed is not referring to simply bleeding which can happen without death. It's a term that means death by killing.
Take Genesis 9 for instance, regarding the death penalty for bloodshed.
"Whoever sheds man’s blood, By man his blood shall be shed..."
Does this mean if one kills another by strangulation, but doesn't spill any blood he's exempt? Of course not. The passage is speaking of murder. Whoever kills the innocent, will be killed himself. Killing and bloodshed are synonymous.
In fact, I would say MacArthur is right, it's borderline heresy to understand bloodshed as merely bleeding. If you believe all that's needed is the blood and the blood has some magical quality, then Christ didn't need to die. He just needed to donate some blood.
i totally disagree - without the shedding of blood there is no remission of sin.
both of you are wrong....
i DID NOT USE THE WORD MAGIC OR MAGICAL you and MacArthur did PLEASE STOP PUTTING WORDS IN MY MOUTH.MacArthur believes this and so do I. With out the shedding of blood (Christ's death on the cross), there is no remission of sins.
What we disagree with is that this is a reference to blood apart from death. That there is something in the blood that's magical. It's about Christ's death. I agree with Mac on this. I think you're dead wrong.
i DID NOT USE THE WORD MAGIC OR MAGICAL you and MacArthur did PLEASE STOP PUTTING WORDS IN MY MOUTH.
The correct word for referring to the qualitative value of the blood of CHRIST is the word PRECIOUS
[Luk 1:68 ESV] 68 "Blessed be the Lord God of Israel, for he has visited and redeemed his people
[Heb 9:12 ESV] 12 he entered once for all into the holy places, not by means of the blood of goats and calves but by means of his own blood, thus securing an eternal redemption.
Praise be to God. I have been redeemed by the shed blood of Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God.
not by me he doesn't - I'm waiting for him to retract his error.I agree. MacArthur does too.
not by me he doesn't - I'm waiting for him to retract his error.
You can know. MacArthur pr seaches this truth. 1 John is the key to this whole subject. He says toward the end of the epistle, "These things I have written to you.....that you may know that you have eternal life..."
Security is always real and never changes. Assurance can change when one falls into sin. Paul said, "test yourselves" whether you being the faith. Does your life show a change?
There is an antinomian movement in the Church the promotes past profession security, that one can be assured of salvation based on profess that doesn't produce fruit. That's what James warned about. That's what MacArthur is rightly warning about.
"These things I have written to you.....that you may know that you have eternal life..."
Security is always real and never changes. Assurance can change when one falls into sin.
There is an antinomian movement in the Church the promotes past profession security, that one can be assured of salvation based on profess that doesn't produce fruit.
ive only accused him of being wrongNothing to retract, or prove. He's been preaching the blood of Christ for years. On the link I provided, he offered clips proving this. He's beyond reproach.
It's you that has to prove your accusation. You haven't done so yet.
And surely you don't disagree with him, that his bloodshed is referring to his death and not merely his blood alone? There are wackos promoting the idea that there's something intrinsic in the blood itself, apart from the death it caused. This is the cultic idea he was addressing.
ive only accused him of being wrong
but i guess I'm a "wacko".
ah yes an ad hominem, that certainly proves you are right,
1John 4:15: "Whoever confesses that Jesus is the Son of God, God remains in him, and he in God".
Faith is the assurance one has eternal life.
Those who trust in their works to be assured, have a false assurance of their security.
Romans 10:9: "that if you will confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved".
Is your fruit sinless?
yes i do as do consider the blood of Christ special distinct from His death as do the scripture as has been shown.You said it not me. Now you're falsely accusing me like you are MacArthur. He has always preached the blood of Christ. You still have not proven he doesn't.
And I never said you were wacko (I was referring the heretics MarArthur was referring to in the link). But if you believe there's something special in the blood and it's not about his death, you're flat-out wrong.
yes i do as do consider the blood of Christ special distinct from His death.....