John Macarthur: Pentecostals Are Lost!

[Abiding Now]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Martin and at one point Macarthur both denied the Son Eternally existed as the Son but instead Eternally existed as the Logos who became the Son.

In WMs debate with Sabin he made this same argument and tried to "railroad" the other Trinitarian debater to agree, but he did not actually agree.

Wouldn't this be the basic trinity concept?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Abiding Now

Wouldn't this be the basic trinity concept?

The Basic historical Trinity teaches an Eternally existing Son.

However I believe if you read Tertullian's "Against Praxeas", He has an Eternally existing Logos which existed Internally to the Father like our thoughts exist internally to us and we converse with. This Logos became externalized as the Son, a Hypostasis distinct from the Father.

Im not sure when though, either before Creation or at the beginning of Creation perhaps.

Others have seen an Eternal Logos becoming the Son too, but again they are considered heretical on that issue

The irony, again, is Walter Martin attacked ALL these different groups as Heretics for rejecting the Trinity

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by Charnock

The Oneness Pentecostal gospel begins and ends with Acts 2:38. To them, all other scripture is of secondary importance.

Faith is an afterthought.
Grace is mocked.

This is a vicious lie. Please stop lying against the whole movement.

We preach more than Acts 2:38, as a matter of fact I preach so little Acts 2:38 some thought I did not believe in it.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by FlamingZword

This is a vicious lie. Please stop lying against the whole movement.

We preach more than Acts 2:38, as a matter of fact I preach so little Acts 2:38 some thought I did not believe in it.

Exactly. His words sound more like the bitter rantings of someone who was hurt than someone who is enlightened.

Sure some nearsighted Apostolics might feel that way just as some Evangelicals might only see Jn 3:16 but to paint the entire movement in that way reveals a certain bias

[FlamingZword]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Exactly. His words sound more like the bitter rantings of someone who was hurt than someone who is enlightened.

Sure some nearsighted Apostolics might feel that way just as some Evangelicals might only see Jn 3:16 but to paint the entire movement in that way reveals a certain bias

Yep, I do believe in Acts 2:38, but sometimes I have preached for weeks without ever mentioning it.

To me the Bible has other 31,102 verses to preach from, so I have plenty to speak about, I am not a single doctrine teacher.

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Abiding Now

JM and his irk are enemies of the Gospel, he hasn't even obeyed the Gospel, much less preach/teach the Gospel, why should anything he says concern a Pentecostal?

Php 3:17 Brethren, be followers together of me, and mark them which walk so as ye have us for an ensample.
Php 3:18 (For many walk, of whom I have told you often, and now tell you even weeping, that they are the enemies of the cross of Christ:
Php 3:19 Whose end is destruction, whose God is their belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things.)

Other than that, he's probably a nice guy.

Wow talk about the pot calling the kettle black. OPs moan and groan to the moon when someone "judges" them, but don't give a second thought to "returning the favor".

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Abiding Now

Real simple. Preachers that do not preach the Gospel and cause people to believe a lie are "enemies of the cross".

MacArthur doesn't preach the gospel? Have you ever read his books Faith Works The Gospel according to the Apostles, The Gospel according to Jesus, or Hard to Believe. Pretty straight forward stuff in there about the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Or do you judge that if someone doesn't say the word tongues they don't preach the gospel? Based on 1 Corn 15:1-4 I'd say MacArthur very much preaches the gospel.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by FlamingZword

Yep, I do believe in Acts 2:38, but sometimes I have preached for weeks without ever mentioning it.

To me the Bible has other 31,102 verses to preach from, so I have plenty to speak about, I am not a single doctrine teacher.

You sound like the vast majority of the pastors I've met in the UPCI.

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

MacArthur doesn't preach the gospel? Have you ever read his books Faith Works The Gospel according to the Apostles, The Gospel according to Jesus, or Hard to Believe. Pretty straight forward stuff in there about the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Or do you judge that if someone doesn't say the word tongues they don't preach the gospel? Based on 1 Corn 15:1-4 I'd say MacArthur very much preaches the gospel.

No way. To them the preaching of the gospel MUST INCLUDE the doctrine of eternal security. They call this "salvation by Christ alone". I was told a few days ago when I accepted Christ in 1974 I accepted a false gospel BECAUSE I did not accept OSAS.

They certainly teach license to sin.

[Abiding Now]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

Wow talk about the pot calling the kettle black. OPs moan and groan to the moon when someone "judges" them, but don't give a second thought to "returning the favor".

Annnnnnnnd YOU do the very thing to me, that you accuse me of doing.