"For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled." (Luke 21:22)
He is working through his critique of MacArthur in five parts.
Part 1: MacArthur’s Major Thesis
Part 2: MacArthur’s Historical Position
Part 3: MacArthur’s Interesting Objection
Part 4: MacArthur’s Jewish Evangelism
Part 5: MacArthur’s Deep Burden
That should read "accurately depicted the position". Sorry.
"For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled." (Luke 21:22)
Now I am not upset about MacArthur’s remark that Calvin would have been a Premillennialist in our day. As outrageous as this statement may be, I suppose he may have said it in jest. It certainly is completely incapable of historical demonstration. My purpose, however, is simply to note what MacArthur straightforwardly admits here. Calvin and with him most Calvinists historically until today have not been Premillennial.Of course, much more could be said along this line. MacArthur admits elsewhere that Augustine was not in favor of his eschatology, but was in MacArthur’s view a proponent (horrors!) of replacement theology: “[Ronald] Diprose lays much of that at the feet of replacement theology that rises out of Augustine and the few before him.” Augustine is commonly understood and acknowledged to be the one who by abandoning Premillennialism and defending an Amillennial interpretation of Revelation 20 set the Church on an Amillennial course for a thousand years. (The key passage is found in the City of God Book 20, chapters 6-10.)
What has MacArthur calmly admitted here? He has admitted that the major historical defenders of his understanding of sovereign grace and election have consistently rejected his eschatology. MacArthur thinks that Calvinistic views of election ought to lead—must logically and clearly lead—to Premillennial views of eschatology. Yet, and in stunning contrast, church history shows just the opposite connection. The major proponents of sovereign election have been also the major advocates of Amillennialism. Augustine almost single-handedly opposed the insidious and centuries-long drift of the early church into Pelagianism. The view of sovereign election held by MacArthur is commonly known by the very name of Calvin. Calvin’s theological descendants have been its major and sometimes lonely defenders in the modern era. The very modern age that marked the rise of Premillennialism also marked the fall of Calvinism. Yet, in spite of all this, MacArthur tells us that Calvinism in a clear and logical way leads to Premillennialism.
Sam Waldron
JM says that after the Gentiles have come in, then Christ returns to build his tabernacle. However, this is not what the scripture says. It says after Christ has visited the Gentiles and taken out of them a people for His name, then He will return and build the tabernacle.
However, when we examine Acts 15, we see that what Peter and James are talking about is the conversion of Cornelius and his household in Acts 10, and their baptism by the Holy Spirit. That is Christ visiting the Gentiles, confirmed by James in verse 14..
Further, we have verse 12, where Barnabus and Paul relate the miracles and wonders God did by them among the Gentiles. God takes a nation out of a nation by signs and wonders. Deut 4:34, and God uses the Apostles, doesn't have to do it personally.
James affirms that Peter's conversion of Cornelius and his house is that event, the visitation, and the prophecy is fulfilled.. The building of the tabernacle is the Great Commission, the coming in of the Gentiles.
I contend on this important fact, JM gets it wrong. Your opinions?
I don’t see where he even deals with Jesus being the Seed, and that the imoportance of Abraham is that he believed God. He just seems to leave out alot.
BTW...as I post this I'm listen to Grace To You online. LOL