John MacArthur - We are Not Saved by The Blood Of Jesus Christ!

[SavedByGrace]

Clip is dated 28 Mar 2018

 

[Reynolds]

Clip is dated 28 Mar 2018

This is UNBIBLICAL HERESY

Mac is spot on correct. Don't see what problem you have with what he said.
If all it took was some blood, a finger prick would have been much easier than death on the cross.

 

[Aaron]

Clip is dated 28 Mar 2018

This is UNBIBLICAL HERESY

You are not truthfully representing what MacArthur said.

 

[Scarlett O.]

I edited out the claim of heresy.

He's not saying what you think he is - that Jesus' blood is irrelevant. He is saying it is the death of Christ [and resurrection, I'll add] that saves. Just the blood as a fluid without the death is not enough.

Yes, he should have made himself a little more clear, but he is not a heretic. I felt like he was back-tracking, but he was not claiming what you said he was.

When the Bible speaks of the blood of Jesus saving us, in my mind, it includes the death and resurrection.

• Ephesians 1:7 = "In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace,"
• Acts 20:28 = "Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood."
• 1 Peter 1:18-19 = "Knowing that you were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your forefathers, not with perishable things such as silver or gold, but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot."

 

[SavedByGrace]

Mac is spot on correct. Don't see what problem you have with what he said.
If all it took was some blood, a finger prick would have been much easier than death on the cross.

The Blood of Jesus Christ that He shed on the cross, is what Atones for the sins of those who put their faith in Him for their salvation. The Lord's Supper has two elements, the bread, which represents the Body of Jesus Christ, and the wine, His Blood, and as Jesus Himself says in Matthew 26:27-28, "He took the cup, gave thanks, and gave to them, saying, “All of you drink it, for this is my blood of the new covenant, which is poured out for many for the remission of sins".

JM is trying to show that the actual Blood that Jesus shed on the cross, does not save any sinner, which is not what the Bible Teaches. Listen to the clip again

 

[SavedByGrace]

I edited out the claim of heresy.

He's not saying what you think he is - that Jesus' blood is irrelevant. He is saying it is the death of Christ [and resurrection, I'll add] that saves. Just the blood as a fluid without the death is not enough.

Yes, he should have made himself a little more clear, but he is not a heretic. I felt like he was back-tracking, but he was not claiming what you said he was.

When the Bible speaks of the blood of Jesus saving us, in my mind, it includes the death and resurrection.

• Ephesians 1:7 = "In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of our trespasses, according to the riches of his grace,"
• Acts 20:28 = "Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood."
• 1 Peter 1:18-19 = "Knowing that you were ransomed from the futile ways inherited from your forefathers, not with perishable things such as silver or gold, but with the precious blood of Christ, like that of a lamb without blemish or spot."

the Mods on here are too quick to edit/delete comments that they don't even understand! There is a HUGE difference between, someone who teaches "heresy", and someone who is a "heretic". IF I used the term heretic, then I would be saying that JM is not saved! You overreacted to what you don't really understand.

The Lords Supper is the BODY and BLOOD, and the BLOOD ALONE is that what Atones for our sins, as Hebrews says, "And by the law almost all things are purged with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no remission" (9:22); and Leviticus 17:11, "For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul". Tbis is talking about the ACTUAL blood.

JM is trying to be clever, and add to what the Bible says!

 

[SavedByGrace]

You are not truthfully representing what MacArthur said.

yeah? then show how? JM is the one who is here misrepresenting what the Bible teaches on the Blood that Jesus Christ shed on the cross. It is clear from many verses in the Bible, that it is the ACTUAL BLOOD that Atones for sins, and not the body!

 

[Dr. Bob]

This is old nonsense and truly thought most here above the hatred for MacArthur that this implies. Bob Jones University pushed this attack for years, much to their shame.

It was picked up by the KJVonly sect since many of modern translations supposedly "hate" the blood of Christ. Shows unreal hatred.

 

[AustinC]

Sbw, your ignorance of passover, the priesthood, and the new covenant is showing in this thread. Therefore, you cannot comprehend what John MacArthur is saying. Note that there are people in this thread who are all telling you, you're wrong...and these people disagree on many issues. That should be enough for you to quit fighting, shut up, and listen to what people are telling you.
So, first things first. Go back and read the covenants and in particular, read Hebrews. Then re-listen to what MacArthur is saying. If you have grasped the message to the Hebrews, you will then begin to grasp what MacArthur is alluding to.
Your position is wrong because you don't understand what MacArthur is actually saying.

 

[SavedByGrace]

This is old nonsense and truly thought most here above the hatred for MacArthur that this implies. Bob Jones University pushed this attack for years, much to their shame.

It was picked up by the KJVonly sect since many of modern translations supposedly "hate" the blood of Christ. Shows unreal hatred.

I don't hate JM at all and listen to a lot of his teachings.

What he says in the video clip is unbiblical nonsense and misrepresents the clear teachings of the Bible

No one can justify trying to make the actual Blood that Jesus Christ shed as unimportant which is what JM is doing

 

[Dr. Bob]

Glad no one video'd my sermon on Rom 5:10 "we shall be saved by His life" (KJV) or they would think that I didn't believe in the cross and call me an unbeliever.

 

[AustinC]

I don't hate JM at all and listen to a lot of his teachings.

What he says in the video clip is unbiblical nonsense and misrepresents the clear teachings of the Bible

No one can justify trying to make the actual Blood that Jesus Christ shed as unimportant which is what JM is doing

Let's restate this.
It's biblical nonsense...to you.
Everyone can see you don't make sense of what MacArthur is saying. You have a significant ignorance in your understanding and therefore what MacArthur is saying is truly nonsense to you.
Note: The problem is with you, not MacArthur.

 

[SavedByGrace]

Glad no one video'd my sermon on Rom 5:10 "we shall be saved by His life" (KJV) or they would think that I didn't believe in the cross and call me an unbeliever.

So the very clear references in the Bible that says that the actual Blood that Jesus shed is that which atones which is what the OT also teaches, is all wrong?

What you are doing is taking verse out of the context or on their own as JM is doing and using this to push your theories

 

[SavedByGrace]

Can anyone show ONE verse from the entire Bible that says that Atonement for sins is not in the actual blood shed?

 

[Reynolds]

The Blood of Jesus Christ that He shed on the cross, is what Atones for the sins of those who put their faith in Him for their salvation. The Lord's Supper has two elements, the bread, which represents the Body of Jesus Christ, and the wine, His Blood, and as Jesus Himself says in Matthew 26:27-28, "He took the cup, gave thanks, and gave to them, saying, “All of you drink it, for this is my blood of the new covenant, which is poured out for many for the remission of sins".

JM is trying to show that the actual Blood that Jesus shed on the cross, does not save any sinner, which is not what the Bible Teaches. Listen to the clip again

If simply shedding an amount of blood on the cross is all that is required to stone for sin, Why did Jesus not call 10,000 angels after the first hammer strike on the first spike? The shedding of blood is symbolism for the death of Christ.

 

[SavedByGrace]

If simply shedding an amount of blood on the cross is all that is required to stone for sin, Why did Jesus not call 10,000 angels after the first hammer strike on the first spike? The shedding of blood is symbolism for the death of Christ.

SHOW ONE verse from the Bible that says that the shedding of Jesus' Blood is symbolic. Or the equivalent in the Old Testament

Don't take away from the Bible what God has put there, or add to it

 

[Reynolds]

the Mods on here are too quick to edit/delete comments that they don't even understand! There is a HUGE difference between, someone who teaches "heresy", and someone who is a "heretic". IF I used the term heretic, then I would be saying that JM is not saved! You overreacted to what you don't really understand.

The Lords Supper is the BODY and BLOOD, and the BLOOD ALONE is that what Atones for our sins, as Hebrews says, "And by the law almost all things are purged with blood, and without shedding of blood there is no remission" (9:22); and Leviticus 17:11, "For the life of the flesh is in the blood, and I have given it to you upon the altar to make atonement for your souls; for it is the blood that makes atonement for the soul". Tbis is talking about the ACTUAL blood.

JM is trying to be clever, and add to what the Bible says!

You called him a heretic. By definition a person who teaches or practices a religious heresy is a heretic. You can't say someone teaches heresy without calling them a heretic.

 

[Reynolds]

SHOW ONE verse from the Bible that says that the shedding of Jesus' Blood is symbolic. Or the equivalent in the Old Testament

Don't take away from the Bible what God has put there, or add to it

Look at the Old testament sacrifices. They shed blood and died. Jesus had to die. The death is the atonement.
You have yet to tell me, if what you believe is actually true, why Jesus didn't prick His finger and avoid death.

 

[SavedByGrace]

You called him a heretic. By definition a person who teaches or practices a religious heresy is a heretic. You can't say someone teaches heresy without calling them a heretic.

Learn the English language and then post back on here

 

[SavedByGrace]

Look at the Old testament sacrifices. They shed blood and died. Jesus had to die. The death is the atonement.
You have yet to tell me, if what you believe is actually true, why Jesus didn't prick His finger and avoid death.

You are taking complete RUBBISH