A very poor way that hinders the Christian from seeing the whole connection of God's word as one.No. It's a way of understanding The Bible.
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!
A very poor way that hinders the Christian from seeing the whole connection of God's word as one.No. It's a way of understanding The Bible.
How did he get it wrong, other than you saying he did?Who said he did? You are posting, but who knows why....
Sir, are you trying to be obscure? What did Dr. MacArthur get wrong?How did he get it wrong, other than you saying he did?
Maybe it hinders you.A very poor way that hinders the Christian from seeing the whole connection of God's word as one.
You disagrees with Mac saying the blood cleansed the sins of only the elect.I have been trying to understand what point Mr. Reynolds is trying to make, in his 7 posts addressed to me.
He says "Mac is right" and I am wrong. Ok, got that, a taint so post. But seven?
He says I suggested Christ's death "cleansed the sins of the non-elect?" But of course Christ's death did not cleanse anyone not elect. When an individual is placed in Christ they undergo the washing of regeneration, and the resulting "new creation" has been cleansed of sin, past, present and future.
Does Mr. Reynolds equate "ransom" with "redemption?" Who knows....
Fiction without quote. A smear, A falsehood, a waste of space....You disagrees with Mac saying the blood cleansed the sins of only the elect.
If you find fault with what Mac said, then you must equate the two as meaning the same.Fiction without quote. A smear, A falsehood, a waste of space....
Does Mr. Reynolds equate "ransom" with "redemption?" Who knows....
Will Mr. Reynolds answer the question? Who knows....
LOL, I do not equate ransom with redemption. That is unbiblical nonsense. Note now Mr. Reynolds charges me with equating the two, but does not indicate his view. Go figure....If you find fault with what Mac said, then you must equate the two as meaning the same.
No, but dispensationalism definitely hinders Christians in fully understanding the whole of the Kingdom.Maybe it hinders you.
Hinders neither Mac nor me.No, but dispensationalism definitely hinders Christians in fully understanding the whole of the Kingdom.
You have no idea about John MacArthur. However, it seems you may have an unhealthy affection for John MacArthur. Do you think Jesus may correct him when God calls him home? I think so. After all, MacArthur is equally a sinner and thus is flawed by his own sinful nature.Hinders neither Mac nor me.
I am actually not a tremendous fan of MacArthur.You have no idea about John MacArthur. However, it seems you may have an unhealthy affection for John MacArthur. Do you think Jesus may correct him when God calls him home? I think so. After all, MacArthur is equally a sinner and thus is flawed by his own sinful nature.
As for you, I believe you are hindered by dispensationalism, which is why you have biblical blindspots.
Well, I guess all the saints before the 1800s were foolish. [emoji849]I am actually not a tremendous fan of MacArthur.
His Biblical understanding and my Biblical understanding have far less blind spots than yours.
It is foolish to look at Scripture and not see dispensations as you choose to call them.
You see no difference in "The age of Innocence" and today?
Where does MacArthur miss the forest? Where do I miss the forest?Well, I guess all the saints before the 1800s were foolish. [emoji849]
Dispensationalism misses the forrest for the trees. It creates false narratives by claiming dispensations that don't exist, except in the mind of the dispensationalist who is making them up as he reads.
Reynolds, it was created in the 1800s by people like Scofield who were attempting to break down the Bible as though they were scientists observing a bug.Where does MacArthur miss the forest? Where do I miss the forest?
Dispensationalism was not invented in the 1800's. Named maybe, but not invented.
They named it. They did not create it. God does not change, but His covenants with men have changed.Reynolds, it was created in the 1800s by people like Scofield who were attempting to break down the Bible as though they were scientists observing a bug.
You miss the beautiful flow of grace from God's covenant with Adam all the way to God's new covenant with his elect. Instead, you insist on God changing at different times and seasons...even though God never changes.
I grew up dispensational, I saw how it missed the puzzle because it kept focusing on individual pieces and then attempted to mash pieces together despite the fact they don't fit.
Take, for instance, the misguided teaching of the rapture as a pretrib removal from trouble. It's entirely fabricated, yet most dispensationalists have bought it hook, line and sinker.