Donations for the month of April


We have received a total of "0" in donations towards our goal of $175.


Don't want to use PayPal? Go HERE


Forum Search
Member Spotlight
Tom
Tom
Kelowna, British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 4,528
Joined: April 2001
Forum Statistics
Forums30
Topics7,787
Posts54,918
Members974
Most Online732
Jan 15th, 2023
Top Posters
Pilgrim 14,457
Tom 4,528
chestnutmare 3,324
J_Edwards 2,615
John_C 1,866
Wes 1,856
RJ_ 1,583
MarieP 1,579
gotribe 1,060
Top Posters(30 Days)
Tom 15
Pilgrim 12
John_C 2
Recent Posts
Jordan Peterson ordered to take sensitivity training
by Anthony C. - Wed Apr 17, 2024 5:57 PM
David Engelsma
by Pilgrim - Tue Apr 16, 2024 7:00 AM
1 Cor. 6:9-11
by Tom - Sun Apr 14, 2024 12:00 AM
The Jewish conservative political commentators
by Tom - Thu Apr 11, 2024 10:54 AM
The United Nations
by Tom - Fri Apr 05, 2024 5:04 PM
Did Jesus Die of "Natural Causes"? by Dr. Paul Elliott
by Pilgrim - Sun Mar 31, 2024 11:39 PM
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Hop To
Page 1 of 2 1 2
#25076 Thu May 12, 2005 2:34 PM
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 277
doulos Offline OP
Enthusiast
OP Offline
Enthusiast
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 277
Hey Pilgrim you mentioned somewhere that John MacArthur was Dispy-lite. This saddens me as I've invested a great deal in his commentary. I knew guy once that tried to shove Dispensationalism down my throat...couldn't handle it. Jesus is coming back someday is a lot simpler.

Anyway, just what makes you say that and how is it different from regular old dispensationalism (just typing that makes my fingers sore).


Josh
"...the word of God is not bound."--2 Timothy 2:9
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,457
Likes: 57
Head Honcho
Offline
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 14,457
Likes: 57
doulos,

There is a GREAT deal of difference between the "Dispy-Lite" eschatology of John MacArthur and the full-blown classical "Dispensationalism" of men like Charles Nelson Darby and C.I. Scofield, which is also being taught to varying degrees in many fundamentalist churches even today. Again, I do not agree with MacArthur's unique view, but it is far more palatable than the latter. How about if I let "fredman" answer your question? <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/evilgrin.gif" alt="" /> Why? Because my good friend Fred works with John MacArthur and thus he is far more qualified to give you an accurate answer; much better than I could.

If Fred doesn't catch this thread in the next day or so, you could PM him and ask if he would jump in here. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

In His Grace,


[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 416
Addict
Offline
Addict
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 416
Quote
John MacArthur (b. 1939) - Reformed dispensational evangelical pastor of Grace Community Church since 1969, a Baptist church affiliated with the Independent Fundamentalist Churches of America. He is also founder of The Master's Seminary, and host of the radio program Grace to You. MacArthur is the primary advocate of Lordship salvation among dispensationalists and has also written in defense of young-earth creationism. With verse-by-verse expository preaching, he opposes the infiltration of liberalism, secular psychology, deliverance ministries, and empty worship forms into the church. Titles: Anxiety Attacked; Ashamed of the Gospel; The Battle for the Beginning; Charismatic Chaos; A Faith to Grow On; Found: God's Will; The Glory of Heaven; The God Who Loves; The Gospel According to Jesus; The Gospel According to the Apostles; Hard to Believe; Introduction to Biblical Counseling; The Master's Plan for the Church; The Murder of Jesus; O Worship the King (Ed.); Onward Christian Soldiers' Rediscovering Expository Preaching; Safe in the Arms of God; Saved Without a Doubt; Terrorism, Jihad, and the Bible; Twelve Ordinary Men; and the MacArthur New Testament Commentary series. He also produced the MacArthur Study Bible and a series of Bible studies.


I personally have several books by Big Mac and I also have his study bible. I have enjoyed it all. There is in my opinion much to benefit by reading his works. However, I find that he can be a little of a hard liner and while this I believe is needed, it can tend to effect your attitude if you aren't careful. At least for me, so I'm careful to read his works along with others. I have also found that I don't agree with dispensationalism. I have found that I'm really starting to focus on teachers from Westminster Theological Seminary. I now have spent most of my time reading from Vos, Machen, Van Til and Murray. Throw in Sproul, Horton, Berkhof, Ryken and Packer and I find myself reading MacArthur less. I have also found that most of the authors I have just mentioned have printed the same material that Big Mac covers in his books. There's "Getting the Gospel Right" by Sproul, "Made in America" and "City on a Hill" by Horton and Ryken and so on. So I wouldn't say MacArthur is essential reading.

But I enjoy having his books for reference. I'm a Presbyterian though, through and through and so I've sort of pulled away from Baptist authors Like MacArthur and James White. But this is just a preference of mine, thats all. So anyway... that's my 2 cents worth. I use my MacArthur study bible along side my Reformation Study bible and I strongly recommend that everyone own his book "Charismatic Chaos." Also there's "keys to spiritual growth", "Pillars of Christian Character", "Ashamed of The Gospel", "Hard To Believe", and "The Gospel According to Jesus." are all very good books. Ohhh and "How to Meet The Enemy" is also good. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" /> I've also listened to a audio series of his on the bible which is very good.

Y.B.I.C,

Dave.


Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. - Galatians 2:16
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 969
Old Hand
Offline
Old Hand
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 969
Dave where did you pull that quote from?


Peter

If you believe what you like in the gospels, and reject what you don't like, it is not the gospel you believe, but yourself. Augustine of Hippo
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 193
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 193
I'm a Reformed Baptist but I also find myself reading more Presbyterians than anything else. I just think they have a stronger tradition and emphasis in theology; whereas Baptists have excelled more in producing great preachers and evangelists (IMO). And that is what MacArthur is above all else --- a great preacher. I do not believe he is a great theologian, but his theology is SOUND, and in the pulpit I wouldn't trade him for anyone else alive.
Our pastor was trained at the Master's Seminary and it is amazing to me the kind of preachers and teachers they are producing --- he is a marvel of maturity, sound doctrine, biblical counsel, and preaching.

I'm looking forward to Fredman's account/defense of MacArthur's dispensationalism <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/excitedgrn.gif" alt="" />. I really hope to learn something.


In Christ,

Brad Hammond

Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,528
Likes: 13
Tom Offline
Needs to get a Life
Offline
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,528
Likes: 13
Personally, I wouldn't let big Mac's dispensationalism spoil your reading his books, or listening to his sermons.
Like all men of faith, he isn't perfect. But his uncompromising attitude towards God and his ministry to the world should not be questioned.

One thing I have learned over the last few years is no matter how much you enjoy a certain author or preacher; sooner or later you are going to find areas where you disagree with that person.
If I let that stop me from reading them, I would be missing a great deal.
So my advice is to use discernment when reading or listening to any human. I am sure even big Mac, would agree with this. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/read.gif" alt="" />

Tom

Joined: May 2004
Posts: 416
Addict
Offline
Addict
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 416
Quote
Boanerges asked?
Dave where did you pull that quote from?

Realms of Faith

Dave.


Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified. - Galatians 2:16
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 406
Addict
Offline
Addict
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 406
Quote
Hey Pilgrim you mentioned somewhere that John MacArthur was Dispy-lite. This saddens me as I've invested a great deal in his commentary. I knew guy once that tried to shove Dispensationalism down my throat...couldn't handle it. Jesus is coming back someday is a lot simpler.

Anyway, just what makes you say that and how is it different from regular old dispensationalism (just typing that makes my fingers sore).

(Fred) This is a frequent question asked of John. His "Dispensationalism" differs from Classic Dispensationalism in many areas. For example, Classics divide up dispensations into 7 epochs. John doesn't see that, at least as rigidly as Classics have defined the 7 dispensations of man. (I am thinking of the Clarance Larkin/Scofieldian ideas of 7 dispensations). John's primary concern is maintaining a distinction between Israel and the Church. There is an appendix about this near the end of his book "Faith Works" now retitled "The Gospel According to the Apostles." Here is an extended answer John gave during a Q and A session at our church defining his dispensationalism. I will let him answer for himself.

www.biblebb.com/files/macqa/70-16-9.htm

Like Tom stated, I hope his dispensationalism, regardless of how mild we think it is or isn't, will not spoil your learning from him. I can recall asking the late James M. Boice about who his favorite authors were and the men of the past who shaped his spirituality. With out skipping a beat he told me Harry Ironsides, the fundamentalist dispensationalist of the early 20th century. That is remarkable coming from the pastor of 10th Presbyterian Church in Philly. Regardless of John's non-Presbyterian/covenantal views, I believe he is worth your time to hear and read. Obviously, I come from a position of bias because I work for him, but he is one of the most consistent exegetical and expositional preachers in the U.S. today. Rarely do men preach like he does from the pulpit - verse by verse, book by book for 50 minute stretches, 3 times on Sunday - and rarely do congregation suffer such men.

Fred


"Ah, sitting - the great leveler of men. From the mightest of pharaohs to the lowest of peasants, who doesn't enjoy a good sit?" M. Burns
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 193
Member
Offline
Member
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 193
Fred,
Just curious, Pilgrim referred to John's views as "unique," and I was wondering if that's true (I know he probably didn't mean "totally" unique or eccentric). Is there no one else who shares MacArthur's non-progressive but "lite" dispensationalism? I'm curious because I'd like to go a little bit deeper than the tantalizing hints MacArthur has thrown out over the years. I would imagine it's the closest I could ever come to dispensationalism myself.


In Christ,

Brad Hammond

P.S. I know Grace is a huge church and this is probably a stupid question for that reason, but do you know Chris Riser? He completed his Divinity and Biblical Counseling degree last year at The Master's Seminary. While at Grace he was the Sunday Evening Children’s Ministries Director, Children’s Preschool and Elementary School Sunday School Director, Home Group Bible Study Shepherd, and Short Term Ministries Team Leader.

Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 406
Addict
Offline
Addict
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 406
Quote
Just curious, Pilgrim referred to John's views as "unique," and I was wondering if that's true (I know he probably didn't mean "totally" unique or eccentric). Is there no one else who shares MacArthur's non-progressive but "lite" dispensationalism? I'm curious because I'd like to go a little bit deeper than the tantalizing hints MacArthur has thrown out over the years. I would imagine it's the closest I could ever come to dispensationalism myself.


(Fred) John's view are not "unique" in the sense they are all his own; they are unique to dispensationalism in the classic sense of the word. I guess you could say John's views tilt more toward progressive dispensational thought, though I imagine he is as uncomfortable with labelling himself a "progressive dispensationalist" as he is with being consider an historic dispensationalist. John is probably the highest profiled Christian who articulates this brand of dispensationalism - at least that I can think of off the top of my head. However, there are many progressive oriented folks who have written wide on the subject. You could probably check their work to get a fuller theological perspective.


Quote
P.S. I know Grace is a huge church and this is probably a stupid question for that reason, but do you know Chris Riser? He completed his Divinity and Biblical Counseling degree last year at The Master's Seminary. While at Grace he was the Sunday Evening Children’s Ministries Director, Children’s Preschool and Elementary School Sunday School Director, Home Group Bible Study Shepherd, and Short Term Ministries Team Leader.

(Fred) I know who he is, but I am not a close associate or anything.

Fred


"Ah, sitting - the great leveler of men. From the mightest of pharaohs to the lowest of peasants, who doesn't enjoy a good sit?" M. Burns
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 277
doulos Offline OP
Enthusiast
OP Offline
Enthusiast
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 277
This about sums it up from fredman's link:

Quote
"That the Bible taught a unique place for Israel and that the Church could not fulfill God's promises to Israel, therefore, there is a still a future and a kingdom involving the salvation and the restoration and the reign of the nation Israel (historical Jews)."

Dispensationalism at that level, (if we just take that much of it, and that's all I want to take of it, that's where I am on that)

If thats all he wants of it he's not much of a dispensationalist. Super-ultra-lite-dispy.

Thanks all. And yeah--get that commentary. Its about all of his I've got but its great.


Josh
"...the word of God is not bound."--2 Timothy 2:9
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 969
Old Hand
Offline
Old Hand
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 969
Quote
Reformed is also the name of a family of denominations, and can be used to designate specifically Presbyterian theology. I use it more broadly to identify the common doctrine of the Magisterial Reformers Luther, Calvin, Zwingli, Knox, and the Puritans and Particular Baptists.)

Realms of Faith

Well I think that's a rather broad brush stroke he's painting with but if that is what he is calling "Reformed" then I suppose MacArthur can be a "Reformed dispensational evangelical"


Peter

If you believe what you like in the gospels, and reject what you don't like, it is not the gospel you believe, but yourself. Augustine of Hippo
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 710
Addict
Offline
Addict
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 710
All Baptists maintain a distinction between Israel and the Church therefore they are all dispensational.

Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 969
Old Hand
Offline
Old Hand
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 969
Quote
All Baptists maintain a distinction between Israel and the Church therefore they are all dispensational.

Excuse me? Beg your pardon? Surely you are jesting? Allow me to quote from Charles H. Spurgeon and Eschatology: Did He Have a Discernible Millennial Position?

Quote
Ryrie, representing the "classic" position, points this out by presenting what he called the sine qua non of dispensationalism. Those points are: (1) maintenance of a clear distinction between Israel and the Church, (2) a normal or literal hermeneutic, (3) the underlying purpose of God in human history, namely, His glory.308 He sums it up by stating:

The essence of dispensationalism, then, is the distinction of Israel and the Church. This grows out of the dispensationalists consistent employment of normal or plain interpretation, and it reflects an understanding of the basic purpose of God in all His dealings with mankind as that of glorifying Himself thought salvation and other purposes as well.


The issues of a "normal hermeneutic" and the "purpose of God in human history" are beyond the scope of this thesis; but the key issue of the distinction of Israel and the Church is not, and it is on this issue that Spurgeon distances himself from Dispensational Premillennialism.
Spurgeon rejected any notion which separated the people of God into separate camps, as taught by Darby and dispensational teaching. In a clear reference to the teaching of Dispensationalists on this point, he clearly rejected this notion in a sermon when he said:

Distinctions have been drawn by certain exceedingly wise men (measured by their own estimate of themselves), between the people of God who lived before the coming of Christ, and those who lived afterwards. We have even heard it asserted that those who lived before the coming of Christ do not belong to the church of God! We never know what we shall hear next, and perhaps it is a mercy that these absurdities are revealed at one time, in order that we may be able to endure their stupidity without dying of amazement. Why, every child of God in every place stands on the same footing; the Lord has not some children best beloved, some second-rate offspring, and others whom he hardly cares about. These who saw Christ's day before it came, had a great difference as to what they knew, and perhaps in the same measure a difference as to what they enjoyed while on earth meditating upon Christ; but they were all washed in the same blood, all redeemed with the same ransom price, and made members of the same body. Israel in the covenant of grace is not natural Israel, but all believers in all ages. Before the first advent, all the types and shadows all pointed one way —they pointed to Christ, and to him all the saints looked with hope. Those who lived before Christ were not saved with a different salvation to that which shall come to us. They exercised faith as we must; that faith struggled as ours struggles, and that faith obtained its reward as ours shall [emphasis ours].


That Spurgeon sees the Church and Israel united "spiritually", there can be no mistake.

A better and more accurate statement would be some Baptists maintain a distinction between Israel and the Church and those that do are Dispensational according to the classic definition of the word.

I, as a Reformed Baptist, and a post-millenialist, do not maintain a distinction between Israel and the Church. Neither did Spurgeon who was a Historic Pre-millenialist.


Peter

If you believe what you like in the gospels, and reject what you don't like, it is not the gospel you believe, but yourself. Augustine of Hippo
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,528
Likes: 13
Tom Offline
Needs to get a Life
Offline
Needs to get a Life
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 4,528
Likes: 13
Boanerges

Thank you, you beat me to the punch. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/bif.gif" alt="" />

Reformed Baptists do not hold a distinction between Israel and the Church.

Tom

Page 1 of 2 1 2

Link Copied to Clipboard
Who's Online Now
0 members (), 78 guests, and 19 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
PaulWatkins, His Unworthy Son, Nahum, TheSojourner, Larry
974 Registered Users
ShoutChat
Comment Guidelines: Do post respectful and insightful comments. Don't flame, hate, spam.
April
S M T W T F S
1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30
Today's Birthdays
There are no members with birthdays on this day.
Popular Topics(Views)
1,511,125 Gospel truth