MacArthur has published quite a lot regarding his theory that "it wasn't the blood" it was "the death."
So it's not "propaganda" to discuss what JM has put out for public consumption.
I quite agree with this approach. The problem I have with E.L. Bynum's articles in this thread, however, is that Bynumy doesn't even come close to doing this. I went through all the articles you've posted at the top of this thread, and documented all the citations that Bynum gives to back up his charges against MacArthur. What I found was most troubling:
Almost all of the citations given to support the charge that "MacArthur's position on the Blood of Christ is a great heresy" - come from only one actual MacArthur work, an article titled "Not His Bleeding, but His Dying" that is said to have been written in 1976. In four article written by Bynum, only one gives a reference to the work this article was published in - the "Grace To You Family paper". The charge of heresy was first published in the Bob Jones University publication "Faith For the Family", April 1986 edition.
Let me summarize this for emphasis:
the article was written in a 1976 church newsletter. No critique was made or published until ten years later.
One other significant John MacArthur source is named by Bynum, specifically the 1983 edition of MacArthur's Commentary on the Book of Hebrews, which Bynum claims to have purchased in the 1990s (meaning AFAIK it never came up in the 1986 Bob Jones article, despite being published three years earlier). Only three pages are cited from this 400+ page work, all for use of the word "symbol" in connection with the word "blood", but none, in and of themselves, containing any heretical statements. Instead, MacArthur's language is alleged to be like another writer, and that writer's work is castigated.
Once again, let me summarize Bynum's position for clarity:
No complaint is made against MacArthur's 1983 Hebrews Commentary except for three adjoining pages, wherein it is found offensive solely for resembling another writer's work. No actual heresy charge is laid against MacArthur's Hebrews commentary.
The only other MacArthur writings actually cited are three personal letters written in 1986, in response to the Bob Jones University article, to try and correct the misunderstandings made of his 1976 article. Bynum will hear none of it, in part because the 1986 letters disagree with his understanding of the 1976 article, in part because Bynum doesn't agree with MacArthur's definition of various OT types and symbols.
The last charge made against MacArthur is his speaking at or attending multiple leadership conferences, often naming Billy Graham's connection with each as the chief offensive element. These include conferences connected with the Moody Bible Institute, the National Religious Broadcasters association, Wheaton College, and Jerry Falwell's "Super Conference VIII". At no point does Bynum provide details about what MacArthur said or did at any of these - his attendance is all that matters.
So let's bring it back to your statement at the top of this post:
"I believe the more a person knows about what someone teaches and preaches, the safer you are"
John MacArthur has been in a public ministry since at least 1976. That's thirty years of ministry. MacArthur has written at least 75 different publications in those thirty years, and that doesn't count the volumes of content his daily radio program features. Out of all that content, at least a decade's worth prior to 1986, someone waited ten years to claim MacArthur is a heretic, and their best ammo is a couple of sentences out of a ten-year-old, narrowly-circulated magazine?
Did you know that John MacArthur once attended Bob Jones University? Dollars to donuts, MacArthur did something in '85 or '86 - possibly his becoming president of competing Master's College in 1985 - that torqued off Bob Jones University, and someone on the faculty kept one of MacArthur's old church bulletins in a desk drawer "just in case" their old student needed to be taught a lesson.
Thank you.
I don't believe that is the case. It probably had more to do with the advances of the internet.
I do know that the Sword of the Lord newspaper published objections to several of his theories, long before people had the internet and were able to get news out faster.
Did you know that John MacArthur once attended Bob Jones University? Dollars to donuts, MacArthur did something in '85 or '86 - possibly his becoming president of competing Master's College in 1985 - that torqued off Bob Jones University, and someone on the faculty kept one of MacArthur's old church bulletins in a desk drawer "just in case" their old student needed to be taught a lesson.
yes, I knew that, he attended there for two years.
And Master's does not compete with BJU.
BJU is a fundamentalist independent baptist, non calvinistic, conservative in music and dress school on the east coast.
Master's is a more ecumenical school, calvinistic, contemporary dress and music type school.
They certainly would not attract the same crowd.
The MacArthur New Testament Commentary on Hebrews, pg 238
I'm too busy to read much of the article or the replies.
Given that, I think blood represents both life and death in that it is only through the shed blood and death of Christ that his believers can have eternal life.