John MacArthur, please remove the plank from your eye

[Reynolds]

Let's take a look at another of Dr. John MacArthur's doctrines claimed to be based on scripture:


Here we find the false doctrine individuals were chosen by God before the foundation of the world. This is based on Ephesians 1:4 which clearly says God chose us in Him before the foundation of the world. The issue of course is whether this election was corporate, in choosing Christ as His Redeemer, God corporately choose all those His Redeemer would redeem, or was an individual election as taught by Calvinism and John MacArthur.

Why the individual election view is precluded by scripture should need little explanation. 1 Peter 2:9-10 says (NASB95)


Since everyone individually chosen by God (our election for salvation) was once "not a people" chosen by God, and once "had not received mercy" we were chosen individually after we lived as "children of wrath."

Off topic.
I think it's disgraceful to call Calvinism "false doctrine."

 

[Iconoclast]

Off topic.
I think it's disgraceful to call Calvinism "false doctrine."

Sadly it is so. An inability to welcome truth is a major red flag.
I hold a different end-time view from JM>but in no way question his ethics or character.
The amount of excessive hubris being displayed is shameful.

 

[Van]

Asking someone that is badmouthing a Christian preacher to offer one that is not a 'false teacher' as they claim is not hurling insults. Try to cease the false accusing of the saints.

Why do folks hurl endless false charges? Posting truth is not "bad mouthing." But calling it that is calculated to change the subject from his bogus doctrine to me. Pathetic.

And note the old switcheroo, he first asks me to cite a preacher without faults, and now wants me to name a specific non false teacher. Since Calvinism is false doctrine, then those advocating for Calvinism are in a sense "false teachers" but since they all just seem to regurgitate the same bogus claims, perhaps a more loving title would be "false copy and posters."

 

[Van]

Off topic.
I think it's disgraceful to call Calvinism "false doctrine."

As you did not point out why Calvinism is not obviously false doctrine, we can only assume your mind is made up.

 

[dad2]

Why do folks hurl endless false charges? Posting truth is not "bad mouthing." But calling it that is calculated to change the subject from his bogus doctrine to me. Pathetic.

And note the old switcheroo, he first asks me to cite a preacher without faults, and now wants me to name a specific false teacher. Since Calvinism is false doctrine, then those advocating for Calvinism are in a sense "false teachers" but since they all just seem to regurgitate the same bogus claims, perhaps a more loving title would be "false copy and posters."

So do tell us who you recommend we listen to preaching.That is not a false charge but a simple request to see what you are trying to say. People that accuse saints may think it is truth, but evidence must be produced. If some poster claims JM is false they need to show why. I responded to one poster who tried, and they ran off or something.

 

[Van]

So do tell us who you recommend we listen to preaching.That is not a false charge but a simple request to see what you are trying to say. People that accuse saints may think it is truth, but evidence must be produced. If some poster claims JM is false they need to show why. I responded to one poster who tried, and they ran off or something.

Yes, do tell us why you listen to those advocating Calvinism when you know it is unbiblical?
And folks, the claim I have not shown that some of JM's doctrines are false and unbiblical are in denial.

 

[dad2]

Yes, do tell us why you listen to those advocating Calvinism when you know it is unbiblical?
And folks, the claim I have not shown that some of JM's doctrines are false and unbiblical are in denial.

I already explained that I cannot find ANY preachers I agree with 100%! I bet if you had the guts to list 2 preachers you recommend, that I would rate them less than I would rate how much I agree with JM! There is something called not having to agree on everything to be able to get along. I can listen to worship music I find inspiring without needing to pull up a dossier on each band member and see if they believe in anything I might find 'unbiblical'.

 

[Van]

I already explained that I cannot find ANY preachers I agree with 100%! I bet if you had the guts to list 2 preachers you recommend, that I would rate them less than I would rate how much I agree with JM! There is something called not having to agree on everything to be able to get along. I can listen to worship music I find inspiring without needing to pull up a dossier on each band member and see if they believe in anything I might find 'unbiblical'.

Sir, claiming since I do not play your foolish games reflects poorly on me is just more evidence of the bankruptcy of your view.

 

[Van]

Let's take a look at one of Dr. John MacArthur's doctrines claimed to be based on scripture:

We teach that in Adam’s sin of disobedience to the revealed will and Word of God, man lost his innocence, incurred the penalty of spiritual and physical death, became subject to the wrath of God, and became inherently corrupt and utterly incapable of choosing or doing that which is acceptable to God apart from divine grace. With no recuperative powers to enable him to recover himself, man is hopelessly lost. Man’s salvation is thereby wholly of God’s grace through the redemptive work of our Lord Jesus Christ (Genesis 2:16-17; 3:1-19; John 3:36; Romans 3:23; 6:23; 1 Corinthians 2:14; Ephesians 2:1-3; 1 Timothy 2:13-14; 1 John 1:8).
​

Does the statement highlighted in "Red" say "apart from divine IRRESISTIBLE GRACE?" Nope. But is that the hidden message? You bet. Thus the carefully crafted statement can be taken as absolutely true, God's grace being His "General and Special Revelation."

Do any of the cited verses actually say anything about "Irresistible Grace?" Nope Recall the words of scripture, false teachers secretly introduce destructive heresies.

 

[Van]

Here are six verses I often cite to demonstrate John MacArthur has a log in his eye.

1) Ephesians 2:8: "For by grace you have been saved by means of Christ's faithfulness, thus the gift is not based on you, but on God."

2) 1Corinthians 2:14: "But an unspiritual man does not accept the solid food things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.

3) Romans 3:11 THERE IS NONE WHO UNDERSTANDS,
THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS FOR GOD when sinning:

4) Acts of the Apostles 13:48: When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had accepted direction to eternal life believed.

5) James 2:5: Listen, my beloved brethren: did not God choose the poor to the world, yet rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him?

6) 1 John 2:2 and he is the means of salvation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the whole of humanity.

There are several more I frequently cite, Matthew 19:23, Matthew 23:13, Romans 9:16, 2 Thessalonians 2:13, 1 Timothy 2:4, 1 Timothy 2:6, 1 Peter 2:9-10, 2 Peter 2:1, Revelation 13:8 and 1 Corinthians 3:1.

Basically JM's view ignores verse after verse, passage after passage because he is probably blinded by the power of presupposition.

[

 

[Van]

Let's take a look at another of Dr. John MacArthur's doctrines claimed to be based on scripture:

Election. We teach that election is the act of God by which, before the foundation of the world, He chose in Christ those whom He graciously regenerates, saves, and sanctifies (Romans 8:28-30; Ephesians 1:4-11; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; 2 Timothy 2:10; 1 Peter 1:1-2).​

Here we find the false doctrine individuals were chosen by God before the foundation of the world. This is based on Ephesians 1:4 which clearly says God chose us in Him before the foundation of the world. The issue of course is whether this election was corporate, in choosing Christ as His Redeemer, God corporately choose all those His Redeemer would redeem, or was an individual election as taught by Calvinism and John MacArthur.

Why the individual election view is precluded by scripture should need little explanation.

1 Peter 2:9-10
But you are A CHOSEN RACE, A royal PRIESTHOOD, A HOLY NATION, A PEOPLE FOR God’s OWN POSSESSION, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; for you once were NOT A PEOPLE, but now you are THE PEOPLE OF GOD; you had NOT RECEIVED MERCY, but now you have RECEIVED MERCY.
​

Since everyone individually chosen by God (our election for salvation) was once "not a people" chosen by God, and once "had not received mercy" we were chosen individually after we lived as "children of wrath." Ephesians 2:3

 

[Reynolds]

As you did not point out why Calvinism is not obviously false doctrine, we can only assume your mind is made up.

I am a Classical Arminian. I disagree with Calvinism, but it's not a false doctrine. It is an accepted doctrine that can in it's current form be traced back to the Reformation. Many church fathers adhered to doctrine consistent with it long before it was formally organized.

 

[Reynolds]

Let's take a look at another of Dr. John MacArthur's doctrines claimed to be based on scripture:

Election. We teach that election is the act of God by which, before the foundation of the world, He chose in Christ those whom He graciously regenerates, saves, and sanctifies (Romans 8:28-30; Ephesians 1:4-11; 2 Thessalonians 2:13; 2 Timothy 2:10; 1 Peter 1:1-2).​

Here we find the false doctrine individuals were chosen by God before the foundation of the world. This is based on Ephesians 1:4 which clearly says God chose us in Him before the foundation of the world. The issue of course is whether this election was corporate, in choosing Christ as His Redeemer, God corporately choose all those His Redeemer would redeem, or was an individual election as taught by Calvinism and John MacArthur.

Why the individual election view is precluded by scripture should need little explanation.

1 Peter 2:9-10
But you are A CHOSEN RACE, A royal PRIESTHOOD, A HOLY NATION, A PEOPLE FOR God’s OWN POSSESSION, so that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; for you once were NOT A PEOPLE, but now you are THE PEOPLE OF GOD; you had NOT RECEIVED MERCY, but now you have RECEIVED MERCY.
​

Since everyone individually chosen by God (our election for salvation) was once "not a people" chosen by God, and once "had not received mercy" we were chosen individually after we lived as "children of wrath." Ephesians 2:3

Corporate election sounds great. Only problem is that it does not come from Scripture.

 

[Reynolds]

Here are six verses I often cite to demonstrate John MacArthur has a log in his eye.

1) Ephesians 2:8: "For by grace you have been saved by means of Christ's faithfulness, thus the gift is not based on you, but on God."

2) 1Corinthians 2:14: "But an unspiritual man does not accept the solid food things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually appraised.

3) Romans 3:11 THERE IS NONE WHO UNDERSTANDS,
THERE IS NONE WHO SEEKS FOR GOD when sinning:

4) Acts of the Apostles 13:48: When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had accepted direction to eternal life believed.

5) James 2:5: Listen, my beloved brethren: did not God choose the poor to the world, yet rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him?

6) 1 John 2:2 and he is the means of salvation for our sins; and not for ours only, but also for the whole of humanity.

There are several more I frequently cite, Matthew 19:23, Matthew 23:13, Romans 9:16, 2 Thessalonians 2:13, 1 Timothy 2:4, 1 Timothy 2:6, 1 Peter 2:9-10, 2 Peter 2:1, Revelation 13:8 and 1 Corinthians 3:1.

Basically JM's view ignores verse after verse, passage after passage because he is probably blinded by the power of presupposition.

[

Actually your view ignores more Scripture. What translation you using?

 

[Van]

Corporate election sounds great. Only problem is that it does not come from Scripture.

You can say taint so till the cows come home, I provided scripture which precludes your view. You provided nothing...

 

[Van]

Actually your view ignores more Scripture. What translation you using?

Your view ignores scripture.

 

[Van]

I am a Classical Arminian. I disagree with Calvinism, but it's not a false doctrine. It is an accepted doctrine that can in it's current form be traced back to the Reformation. Many church fathers adhered to doctrine consistent with it long before it was formally organized.

You simply ignore the evidence and make baseless proclamations. Have at it...

 

[Salty]

Six hour warning
This thread will be closed no sooner than 7 am EDT / 4 am PDT

 

[Reynolds]

You can say taint so till the cows come home, I provided scripture which precludes your view. You provided nothing...

You provided Scripture that proved nothing. It actually supports individual election

 

[Reynolds]

Your view ignores scripture.

You seriously think your mutt view has more Scriptural support than High Calvinism?