Thanks for the great teaching! The whole of the OT points to Christ. The eternal purpose of the Triune God was Christ reconciling all things to Himself. Paul in Ephesians 1 and 3 and in Colossians 1 speaks of the mystery that was actually held back and hidden from the previous generations. He then speaks in Ephesians 2 of reconciliation and the abolishing of the law in the body of Christ and the fact that Gentiles are no longer strangers and aliens but are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets and both Jew and Gentile are being built into a holy temple and a dwelling of God in the Spirit. I struggle to see the two paths of redemption in the dispensational position? Also, why would God reinstitute temple sacrifices (even ceremonially) when the substance belongs belongs to Christ? (Col. 2:17). My inclination is that this is a 180 year old false teaching that I myself grew up in. Darby, Scofield and Moody I reckon, will have a lot to answer for. Theology is important and impacts our lives, but I realize this issue is open to debate so I respect JMac's position. However, MacArthur seems incapable of giving the same forbearance to those who hold differing views and he treats them with a dismissive and contemptuous attitude. This I would contend is not Christ like. Compare him with his good friend RC Sproul and the latter's humility on the issue. JMac's lack of charity towards dissenting views is his one of his great flaws. But, we all have them and I still love and appreciate his ministry.
Thank you - that was excellent, and presented with fairness and graciousness. The way I see it is this: If we believe that the NT is inspired, which of course we do, then we must also believe that the NT's interpretation of the OT is inspired. Therefore interpreting the OT on its own terms, without regard to the NT's interpretation, can lead us astray, especially when considering redemptive and eschatological themes that span the entire biblical timespan. However, I agree entirely that understanding the OT on its own terms is still important, and that it should add to, rather than compete with, an understanding of the NT's interpretation of the OT. The two are complementary rather than in competition. As you point out, Moses lifting up the serpent in the wilderness is an excellent example of this complementarity - a full exegesis of this OT story gives a richer meaning to John 3:14-16. But it is important to add that the OT study should never be used to circumvent or override the NT's interpretation.
The Old Covenant *The New Covenant* 1. Blood of Animals 1. Blood of Christ 2. Written on Stone 2. Written on Hearts 3. Shadow 3. Substance 4. Glorious 4. More Glorious 5. Had an End 5. Has no End 6. Law of Moses 6. Law of Messiah 7. Law of Works 7. Law of Faith 8. Law of Sin and Death 8. Law of Spirit of Life 9. Many Sacrifices 9. One Sacrifice 10. Powerless to Save 10. Power to Save 11. Annual Atonement 11. Eternal Atonement 12. Earthly Tabernacle 12. Heavenly Tabernacle 13. Ministry of Death 13. Ministry of Life 14. Outer Form - Flesh 14. Inner Reality - Spirit 15. Ministry of 15. Ministry of Condemnation Reconciliation 16. Priesthood of Aaron 16. Priesthood of Melchizedek 17. Obsolete 17. Eternal 18. Earthly Jerusalem 18. Heavenly Jerusalem
One of the features overlooked by the adherents of dispensationalism is its claim that certain prophetic events are yet to be fulfilled in the future which implies that Jesus cannot return at this very moment because these so-called events have not yet taken place. A second claim is that God saved man in different ways at different times. This claim by Darby contradicts the statement in Hebrews that says that nothing ever pleased God except faith (Hebrews 11:6).
John MacArthur‘s eschatology ignores the fact that the entire Bible is arranged around the captivity of Babylon. His eschatology totally skipped the Roman captivity and Temple destruction. Then he goes on to ignore the fact that all sacrifice has been fulfilled in Jesus Christ, as he waits for a new temple to be built. He totally misses the point that we are the temple of the Holy Spirit.
Young men,i would bet that you were not even born when Macarthur started teaching,believe what you believe and leave this good man alone,and the funny thing to me is he's still alive(Macarthur),did you call him and ask for a interview/discussion with him?ask him on your show/podcast?young men you have a long long way to go
Wow, so glad all the commenters on here know that John MacArthur is wrong. They should call him up or send an email to let him know he’s wrong. I’m sure he’ll wise up then. Give me a break. His eschatology could be right. These guys could be right. No one knows. That’s why there’s many different views. End time Bible prophecy is not something to be dogmatic about. Just stop.
Regarding Is. 49, the Messiah, who is called Israel, is only called Israel because He represents the nation. Therefore, it still has its Genesis in the nation. He’s not called Gentile, or Assyria or another name. Same thing with Jacob in Genesis 32. He wouldn’t be called Israel without the reference point of the entire nation. So John’s point stands in the face of an overly simplistic critique. And he probably would give a more in depth answer to your point, but that’s not the design of his sermon. The Bible does this a lot, where an individual stands for a greater group of people. It’s called corporate solidarity, but this does not mean that when someone is called ‘Israel,’ we then have to jettison the word of its original, stock definition.
I pray that J Mac listens to this episode as he is so blinded by this view of eschatology that he is leading his church into a very vulnerable position if they don’t get raptured before the tribulation. I love this man’s teaching on so much of scripture, but his defence of dispensationalism and a pre tribulation rapture are misleading his flock in a big way if we live in the final days of the end times!
I hope so too. However, He even claims that a Christian can take the mark of the beast and still be saved. This is so contrary to what scripture actually says
I love JMac; he's my brother. But I hate his hermeneutical eschatology. It is indefensible! Among other things, when JMac asserted that "if you want to get your eschatology right you have to get Isreal right," this denies the centrality of Christ based upon Jesus saying so Himself (Matt.5.17; Luke24.25-27, 44, 45; Jn.5.39). That 2007 conference was a sucker-bunch: disingenuous! I have no interest in going to a Shepherd's Conference. I've been to Ligonier Conferences and Philadelphia Conference on Reformed Theology. I commend you brothers for your charitable yet better take on eschatology. I am Amill also. We don't agree on mass conversion based upon Rom.11. Yet I love you preachers. I am PCA. >+❤
![The Great Tribulation: When, Where, & Why? | Matthew 24:15-21 [Sermon]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/HViy7Wsn4g0/mqdefault.jpg)
You can watch the whole Progressive Covenantalism series in order here:
ua-cam.com/play/PL4nNmjgYbRZ6ji7QJxyxIr90JbCcpK9JR.html
The OT is the declaration of provision of Salvation and future redemptive glory in Christ and the NT is the fulfillment of them in Christ.
Thanks for the great teaching!
The whole of the OT points to Christ. The eternal purpose of the Triune God was Christ reconciling all things to Himself. Paul in Ephesians 1 and 3 and in Colossians 1 speaks of the mystery that was actually held back and hidden from the previous generations. He then speaks in Ephesians 2 of reconciliation and the abolishing of the law in the body of Christ and the fact that Gentiles are no longer strangers and aliens but are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets and both Jew and Gentile are being built into a holy temple and a dwelling of God in the Spirit. I struggle to see the two paths of redemption in the dispensational position? Also, why would God reinstitute temple sacrifices (even ceremonially) when the substance belongs belongs to Christ? (Col. 2:17). My inclination is that this is a 180 year old false teaching that I myself grew up in. Darby, Scofield and Moody I reckon, will have a lot to answer for. Theology is important and impacts our lives, but I realize this issue is open to debate so I respect JMac's position. However, MacArthur seems incapable of giving the same forbearance to those who hold differing views and he treats them with a dismissive and contemptuous attitude. This I would contend is not Christ like. Compare him with his good friend RC Sproul and the latter's humility on the issue. JMac's lack of charity towards dissenting views is his one of his great flaws. But, we all have them and I still love and appreciate his ministry.
Thank you - that was excellent, and presented with fairness and graciousness. The way I see it is this: If we believe that the NT is inspired, which of course we do, then we must also believe that the NT's interpretation of the OT is inspired. Therefore interpreting the OT on its own terms, without regard to the NT's interpretation, can lead us astray, especially when considering redemptive and eschatological themes that span the entire biblical timespan. However, I agree entirely that understanding the OT on its own terms is still important, and that it should add to, rather than compete with, an understanding of the NT's interpretation of the OT. The two are complementary rather than in competition. As you point out, Moses lifting up the serpent in the wilderness is an excellent example of this complementarity - a full exegesis of this OT story gives a richer meaning to John 3:14-16. But it is important to add that the OT study should never be used to circumvent or override the NT's interpretation.
The Old Covenant *The New Covenant*
1. Blood of Animals 1. Blood of Christ
2. Written on Stone 2. Written on Hearts
3. Shadow 3. Substance
4. Glorious 4. More Glorious
5. Had an End 5. Has no End
6. Law of Moses 6. Law of Messiah
7. Law of Works 7. Law of Faith
8. Law of Sin and Death 8. Law of Spirit of Life
9. Many Sacrifices 9. One Sacrifice
10. Powerless to Save 10. Power to Save
11. Annual Atonement 11. Eternal Atonement
12. Earthly Tabernacle 12. Heavenly Tabernacle
13. Ministry of Death 13. Ministry of Life
14. Outer Form - Flesh 14. Inner Reality - Spirit
15. Ministry of 15. Ministry of
Condemnation Reconciliation
16. Priesthood of Aaron 16. Priesthood of Melchizedek
17. Obsolete 17. Eternal
18. Earthly Jerusalem 18. Heavenly Jerusalem
One of the features overlooked by the adherents of dispensationalism is its claim that certain prophetic events are yet to be fulfilled in the future which implies that Jesus cannot return at this very moment because these so-called events have not yet taken place. A second claim is that God saved man in different ways at different times. This claim by Darby contradicts the statement in Hebrews that says that nothing ever pleased God except faith (Hebrews 11:6).
Both points fall into the category of “system” that MacArthur did not believe.
As I recall, he did receive a lot of pushback from those reformed and one Lutheran (!) amil people in the audience.
John MacArthur‘s eschatology ignores the fact that the entire Bible is arranged around the captivity of Babylon. His eschatology totally skipped the Roman captivity and Temple destruction. Then he goes on to ignore the fact that all sacrifice has been fulfilled in Jesus Christ, as he waits for a new temple to be built. He totally misses the point that we are the temple of the Holy Spirit.
And who is to say that Israel can’t once again be punished by its defeat?
Young men,i would bet that you were not even born when Macarthur started teaching,believe what you believe and leave this good man alone,and the funny thing to me is he's still alive(Macarthur),did you call him and ask for a interview/discussion with him?ask him on your show/podcast?young men you have a long long way to go
We landed on the moon ?
Helpful. Thanks for sharing.
Wow, so glad all the commenters on here know that John MacArthur is wrong. They should call him up or send an email to let him know he’s wrong. I’m sure he’ll wise up then. Give me a break. His eschatology could be right. These guys could be right. No one knows. That’s why there’s many different views. End time Bible prophecy is not something to be dogmatic about. Just stop.
I wish SS could last for three hours. This was so good! Thank you!
I dont highly and respect anyone. I treat people with kindness but jm is a human likw us
Regarding Is. 49, the Messiah, who is called Israel, is only called Israel because He represents the nation. Therefore, it still has its Genesis in the nation. He’s not called Gentile, or Assyria or another name. Same thing with Jacob in Genesis 32. He wouldn’t be called Israel without the reference point of the entire nation. So John’s point stands in the face of an overly simplistic critique. And he probably would give a more in depth answer to your point, but that’s not the design of his sermon. The Bible does this a lot, where an individual stands for a greater group of people. It’s called corporate solidarity, but this does not mean that when someone is called ‘Israel,’ we then have to jettison the word of its original, stock definition.
Too many commercials way too many commercials!
I pray that J Mac listens to this episode as he is so blinded by this view of eschatology that he is leading his church into a very vulnerable position if they don’t get raptured before the tribulation. I love this man’s teaching on so much of scripture, but his defence of dispensationalism and a pre tribulation rapture are misleading his flock in a big way if we live in the final days of the end times!
I hope so too. However, He even claims that a Christian can take the mark of the beast and still be saved. This is so contrary to what scripture actually says
I love JMac; he's my brother. But I hate his hermeneutical eschatology. It is indefensible! Among other things, when JMac asserted that "if you want to get your eschatology right you have to get Isreal right," this denies the centrality of Christ based upon Jesus saying so Himself (Matt.5.17; Luke24.25-27, 44, 45; Jn.5.39). That 2007 conference was a sucker-bunch: disingenuous! I have no interest in going to a Shepherd's Conference. I've been to Ligonier Conferences and Philadelphia Conference on Reformed Theology. I commend you brothers for your charitable yet better take on eschatology. I am Amill also. We don't agree on mass conversion based upon Rom.11. Yet I love you preachers. I am PCA. >+❤