John MacArthur: POLYTHEIST?

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Sam

"The Bible says that in the beginning there was only God. He has always been. God has no beginning and no ending. There were no sun, no stars, no planets, no Earth --and no people.There was just God But He was not alone, because God is really three persons --God the Father, Jesus the Son, and the Holy Spirit. All three together are God."
I Believe in Jesus
Leading Your Child to Christ
by John MacArthur copyright 1999

The way that Dr. MacArthur says that --that God was "not alone, because God is really three persons" sounds almost tri-theistic, doesn't it?

I didn't notice this post earlier. It is very polytheistic.

I really enjoy JM's bible teaching, it is some of the finest I've heard. What I think is that many trinitarians simply accept the trinity as orthodoxy becuase its what they've been fed all their lives, but in reality it just doesn't make any sense. But they have been preconditioned against any other view so that even when exposed to another view such as oneness, they are automatically on the defensive. I think that is whats stifling fellowship more than anything is that some folks are judging other folks in areas where they themselves admit to have absolutely no idea how their trnity doctrine makes sense. (see other thread here:http://apostolicfriendsforum.com/showthread.php?t=31809)

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

I didn't notice this post earlier. It is very polytheistic.

I really enjoy JM's bible teaching, it is some of the finest I've heard. What I think is that many trinitarians simply accept the trinity as orthodoxy becuase its what they've been fed all their lives, but in reality it just doesn't make any sense. But they have been preconditioned against any other view so that even when exposed to another view such as oneness, they are automatically on the defensive. I think that is whats stifling fellowship more than anything is that some folks are judging other folks in areas where they themselves admit to have absolutely no idea how their trnity doctrine makes sense. (see other thread here:http://apostolicfriendsforum.com/showthread.php?t=31809)

This is not a personal attack.


If the Godhead is so easily defined and explained by you, what or who does that make you?

Where is the mystery?


It's not a biblical requirement for salvation to understand Oneness.

It is a biblical requirement to recognize Jesus Christ as the SON of the Living GOD.

His identity as the SON is the ROCK that His CHURCH is built upon.

[staysharp]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

I was listening to a John MacArthur audio earlier today and he made a statement to the effect that:

"The coucnil of the Trinity decided who would be redeemed before the creation of the world."

I like alot of MacArthur's stuff, though there are some areas of disagreement. And I personally don't think that trinitarians are going to hell simply because their trinitarians, anymore than oneness are going to hell because their oneness.

Those things said, when I often hear trinitarians adamently deny they worship "3 gods" and sling mud on oneness people by saying we are sladering them, offering strawman arguments, and the such like. They normally ATTEMPT to choose their words carefully so as not to use the words "seperate" and "beings" and the such like when debating/discussing with a oneness person, BUT when the arena is not a godhead debate they make statements such as this, which to my mind are completely irrational and foolish...IF you want to claim to be strictly monotheistic.

How can a trinitarina TRULY say the believe "Hear, O Israel, the LORD our God is one LORD" and at the same refer to the "one God" as a COUNCIL who decided TOGETHER who would be the elect (saved) before the creation?

PS-how does that work, before creation, mankind has not been created yet, does the "holy trinity" draw straws, a names out of hat, what? On what basis is one choosen to inherit eternal life, and the other eternal damnation?

Here's what I think of that doctrine

John is a died and true reformed hyper Calvanist. His theology is mixed up IMO and he does not understand God's love. Trinitarians do not believe in 3 gods, however John is a legalist at heart which far surpasses any damage trinitarianism would ever do.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by staysharp

John is a died and true reformed hyper Calvanist. His theology is mixed up IMO and he does not understand God's love. Trinitarians do not believe in 3 gods, however John is a legalist at heart which far surpasses any damage trinitarianism would ever do.

MacArthur is a legalist?

I think you are out of your mind.

Then again, some would say Paul Washer is a legalist too.


Neither one of these guys are legalistic in the sermons I have heard them preach.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

MacArthur is a legalist?

I think you are out of your mind.

Then again, some would say Paul Washer is a legalist too.


Neither one of these guys are legalistic in the sermons I have heard them preach.

No no. Mac is a hyper Calvanist...no wait...he's a legalist...no wait....oh wait...he's a trinitarian...no he must not be a Trinitarian because John is a legalistic hyper Calvanist?????

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

No no. Mac is a hyper Calvanist...no wait...he's a legalist...no wait....oh wait...he's a trinitarian...no he must not be a Trinitarian because John is a legalistic hyper Calvanist?????

[staysharp]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

MacArthur is a legalist?

I think you are out of your mind.

Then again, some would say Paul Washer is a legalist too.


Neither one of these guys are legalistic in the sermons I have heard them preach.

Not interested in getting into a debate, but suffice to say this; the denial of free will is legalism.

The doctrines of total depravity, irresistible grace and predestination deny one has any part in their salvific process, but rather God's justice rules, rather than his love. God to them is not "all" loving, but only to those whom he chooses to love. The scripture they use is "Jacob have I loved, Esau have I hated"...which if u study this objectively, God's talking about the nation of Edomites which did much harm to Israel and also that word hate means "love less" in the Hebrew idiom.

God is not so sovereign that he violates his own nature. He is all loving. He died for all...

When defining the gospel, John believes in limited atonement. That Christ's death was not for "all" but only the elect. This doctrine denies grace for all, but rather only to the elect and since no one knows who they are, we are to preach the gospel and the elect will respond. Spurgeon said that if the elect had a big "E" on their backs, we would know who they are and wouldn't need to preach.

He also believes in the perseverance of the saints which does not truly guarantee salvation until death and then one cannot be sure you are part of the elect. Many puritan calvanists died fearful of their salvation not knowing if they were part of the elect.
If one studies the roots of calvanism, you will understand my statement concerning legalism. Love and relationship are non-existent. Fear is the root.

Furthermore, Calvan himself did not espouse some of the modern hyper doctrines which are re surging in today's modern reformed churches. I consider myself reformed, but not so much I deny men must repent and believe to be saved.

[Jermyn Davidson]

Originally Posted by staysharp

Not interested in getting into a debate, but suffice to say this; the denial of free will is legalism.

The doctrines of total depravity, irresistible grace and predestination deny one has any part in their salvific process, but rather God's justice rules, rather than his love. God to them is not "all" loving, but only to those whom he chooses to love. The scripture they use is "Jacob have I loved, Esau have I hated"...which if u study this objectively, God's talking about the nation of Edomites which did much harm to Israel and also that word hate means "love less" in the Hebrew idiom.

God is not so sovereign that he violates his own nature. He is all loving. He died for all...

When defining the gospel, John believes in limited atonement. That Christ's death was not for "all" but only the elect. This doctrine denies grace for all, but rather only to the elect and since no one knows who they are, we are to preach the gospel and the elect will respond. Spurgeon said that if the elect had a big "E" on their backs, we would know who they are and wouldn't need to preach.

He also believes in the perseverance of the saints which does not truly guarantee salvation until death and then one cannot be sure you are part of the elect. Many puritan calvanists died fearful of their salvation not knowing if they were part of the elect.
If one studies the roots of calvanism, you will understand my statement concerning legalism. Love and relationship are non-existent. Fear is the root.

Furthermore, Calvan himself did not espouse some of the modern hyper doctrines which are re surging in today's modern reformed churches. I consider myself reformed, but not so much I deny men must repent and believe to be saved.

Staysharp,

I understand your point of view now.

How do you interpret the scriptures that point to GOD hardening Pharoah's heart?

How do you interpret the scriptures that clearly state that GOD knows who are His?

How do you interpret the scripture that no one can come unto the Father unless the Spirit draws them?

If we are a chosen generation and a royal priesthood, who chose us and who has annointed us? Was there a time that GOD did not know that we would be chosen and anointed?


From what I have heard from MacArthur, there is not any fear mongering in his sermons. There are clear declarations to depart form sin. He presents scriptural concepts for living in a way that is applicable today.


John MacArthur is no more POLYTHEISTIC than we are UNITARIAN.

[Praxeas]

HIJACK ALERT!!!!!

[staysharp]

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson

Staysharp,

I understand your point of view now.

How do you interpret the scriptures that point to GOD hardening Pharoah's heart?

How do you interpret the scriptures that clearly state that GOD knows who are His?

How do you interpret the scripture that no one can come unto the Father unless the Spirit draws them?

If we are a chosen generation and a royal priesthood, who chose us and who has annointed us? Was there a time that GOD did not know that we would be chosen and anointed?


From what I have heard from MacArthur, there is not any fear mongering in his sermons. There are clear declarations to depart form sin. He presents scriptural concepts for living in a way that is applicable today.


John MacArthur is no more POLYTHEISTIC than we are UNITARIAN.

the scripture tells us why; Romans 9:7 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

No doubt; God uses who he chooses and with regard to His call to satisfy His divine purpose, yes he calls whom he chooses. No debate there. The problem is salvation, not one of a specific task for a specific reason.

Jesus said..."if I be lifted up I will draw all men unto me"...Calvary is the voice of God calling every human being back to God.

The generation of the Apostles was chosen for the specific task of delivering the message of Christ and saving the Jewish people before the destruction of Jerusalem. This generation shall not pass away...etc. Save yourself from this untoward generation...this was Peter's plea to those who murdered Christ.

Understand I am not saying McArthur isn't a man of God, etc. I am saying some of the doctrines he espouses IMO are unbiblical and damaging to love.

Truth is you can preach all you want to about sin, but until someone falls in love with Christ and his body, the selfishness will continue. The antidote for sin is God's love exampled by Christ. God's Agape love places others above yourself...loving God and others more than you love yourself; the first and greatest of all commands...one will rarely sin against others when he places them first; by loving them according to God's definition of love...1 Cor 13.

Evil is simply the absence of God's love.