Review of John Macarthurs Why Calvinists Should Be Premillenialists

• Forums
• The Scriptures
• Revelation & Eschatology

You lot are using an out of appointment browser. Information technology may not display this or other websites correctly.
Y'all should upgrade or utilise an culling browser.

MacArthur's Millennial Manifesto

• Thread starter PuritanCovenanter
• Commencement date Jun 11, 2008

Status

Non open for further replies.

• #i

Sam Waldron has responded to John MacArthur's proclamation that Every Cocky-Respecting Calvinist is a Premillennialist, which MacArthur fabricated during the terminal years Shepherd's Conference. I talked to Eddie Goodwin today and he said the book should exist in house and ready to send early adjacent week.

RBAP -- Reformed Baptist Academic Printing

List price $12.99.
The page count is 172 pages.
The book is a 6x9 paperback.
Endorsements from James Thousand. Renihan, Kim Riddlebarger & Cornelis Venema
At the 2007 Shepherds' Briefing, Pastor John MacArthur delivered a controversial message entitled, "Why Every Self-Respecting Calvinist is a Premillennialist". In this volume, Dr. Sam Waldron addresses the assertions of MacArthur historically, exegetically and theologically. Although his arguments are rigorous, the unabridged tenor of the volume is level-headed and irenic. This "friendly response" grants modernistic day Amillennialists the opportunity to thoughtfully engage their Dispensational brethren.

Reformed Baptist Bookish Press

Hither is what the web site says.

At the 2007 Shepherds' Briefing, Pastor John MacArthur delivered a controversial message entitled, "Why Every Cocky-Respecting Calvinist is a Premillennialist." In this book, Dr. Sam Waldron addresses the assertions of MacArthur historically, exegetically and theologically. Although his arguments are rigorous, the entire tenor of the book is level-headed and nonviolent. This "friendly response" grants modern day Amillennialists the opportunity to thoughtfully engage their Dispensational brethren. With charity, this book exposes the fallacies--historical, exegetical and theological--inherent in Dr. MacArthur's presentation...Cheers, Dr. Waldron, for showing u.s. how a theological refutation may be done with grace and kindness...James Grand. Renihan, Ph.D. Samuel Waldron's "friendly response" to John MacArthur's "millennial manifesto" will go a long way toward setting the record straight about what Reformed amillennialists actually believe most the church building and Israel...I highly recommend this book to all who are interested in this controversy...Kim Riddlebarger, Ph.D. Samuel Waldron'due south response to John MacArthur'south controversial sermon, "Why Every Self-Respecting Calvinist Is a Premillennialist," is a jewel. In a gentle spirit, and with an awareness of what is at stake, Waldron makes a persuasive case against MacArthur's unlikely merits that true Calvinists must subscribe to the tenets of dispensational premillennialism...Cornelis Venema, Ph.D.

I tin can't look to get my re-create.

• #two

Thanks for the heads up Martin.

• #iii

One of my denominations theological students wrote a paper on this very outcome for his grade this year.

• #4

I ordered mine as before long equally I saw your post, Randy.

• #v

I ordered mine as before long as I saw your post, Randy.

Me likewise !!

• #6

Much of what is in the book is constitute on his weblog. I oasis't read it all, merely from what I have read Dr. Waldron has handled this very responsibly, equally a gentleman. His respect for John MacArthur is evident in his interaction with the field of study. Being premil, I didn't agree with his conclusions. Only I do appreciate his contribution and take learned much from reading his blog entries.

• #7

I read his blog too.

How many hear actually heard or read MacArthur'due south message?

• #8

I read his web log as well.

How many hear actually heard or read MacArthur'southward message?

I listened to the MP3 of it. My oh my. He certainly tweaked the noses of his Amil/Postmil listeners! He chided them for non applying their ain hermeneutic and belief in the DoG consistently. In MacArthur's mind, the election of Israel exemplifies the sovereign grace of God, not dependent upon works. Premil eschatology, opines MacArthur, most faithfully represents the logical extension of the Magisterial Reformer'south theology, despite themselves.

Are you lot certain he was playing with them, you say? Check out this quote.

"Simply bottom line hither, of all people on the planet to be pre-millennialist it should be Calvinists; those who dear sovereign election. Let'southward leave amillennialism for the Arminians. Information technology'southward perfect! [laughter] It's ideal. It's a no-brainer. God elects nobody and preserves nobody. Perfect! Arminians make great amillennialists. Information technology'southward consistent. But non for those who alive and breathe the rarified air of sovereign electing grace. That makes no sense. We tin get out amillennialism to the process theologians . . . or the 'openness' people who think God is becoming what he will be, and he'south getting amend considering as every twenty-four hours goes by he gets more than data. And as he gets more information he'south figuring out whether or not in fact he can keep some of the promises he made without having to adjust all of them based upon lack of information when he originally made them. Let'due south leave amillennialism to the charismatics in the semi-Pelagians and other sorts of become in and out of conservancy willy-nilly; makes sense for their theology . . ."

Cheque out Kim Riddlebarger's answer to MacArthur: Riddleblog - A Reply to John MacArthur

• #9

..."Why Every Self-Respecting Calvinist is a Premillennialist"... This "friendly response" grants modern day Amillennialists the opportunity to thoughtfully engage their Dispensational brethren.

Why does virtually everyone automatically acquaintance premillennialism with dispensationalism? The onetime was around long before the latter showed upward. Sigh...

• #10

I read his web log too.

How many hear actually heard or read MacArthur's message?

I listened to the MP3 of information technology. My oh my. He certainly tweaked the noses of his Amil/Postmil listeners! He chided them for not applying their own hermeneutic and conventionalities in the Dog consistently. In MacArthur'south heed, the ballot of Israel exemplifies the sovereign grace of God, not dependent upon works. Premil eschatology, opines MacArthur, about faithfully represents the logical extension of the Magisterial Reformer's theology, despite themselves.

Are you sure he was playing with them, yous say? Check out this quote.

"But bottom line here, of all people on the planet to be pre-millennialist it should be Calvinists; those who dear sovereign election. Let's get out amillennialism for the Arminians. It's perfect! [laughter] It'southward ideal. It'south a no-brainer. God elects nobody and preserves nobody. Perfect! Arminians brand great amillennialists. Information technology's consequent. But non for those who live and breathe the rarified air of sovereign electing grace. That makes no sense. We can leave amillennialism to the process theologians . . . or the 'openness' people who recall God is becoming what he will exist, and he's getting better considering as every day goes by he gets more than information. And as he gets more than information he's figuring out whether or non in fact he can keep some of the promises he made without having to accommodate all of them based upon lack of information when he originally fabricated them. Let's leave amillennialism to the charismatics in the semi-Pelagians and other sorts of go in and out of salvation willy-nilly; makes sense for their theology . . ."

Bank check out Kim Riddlebarger'due south answer to MacArthur: Riddleblog - A Reply to John MacArthur

Wow

• #12

Thanks, Dennis. Yeah, I've seen Riddlebarger's response as well. I call up reading that MacArthur said that if Calvin were alive today, he would be premil. I detect that very, very difficult to eat.

• #13

MacArthur was pretty outrageous. Several of my Amil friends got pretty exercised at him.

The man could opine that 2 + two = 5 in a convincing and completely authoritative vox.

• #16

I've never understood why people got all excited over this. He'southward pre-mil (Dispensational), so why wouldn't he opine that his system is the most consistant expression of Calvinism? I retrieve his comments were airheaded and wrong, but it's John MacArthur, right? Since when was he the spokeperson for Reformed theology such that we (the Reformed) should become all upset about what he says? This is not to say that a response is non warranted, merely to be upset over his comments? Are we that thin-skinned?

• #eighteen

I've never understood why people got all excited over this. He's pre-mil (Dispensational), so why wouldn't he opine that his system is the well-nigh consistant expression of Calvinism? I think his comments were silly and wrong, only information technology's John MacArthur, right? Since when was he the spokeperson for Reformed theology such that we (the Reformed) should become all upset about what he says? This is non to say that a response is non warranted, but to be upset over his comments? Are we that thin-skinned?

I agree, we should non go upset about his comments. He is immune to make them, I think they are wrong, but I am not losing whatever sleep over them.

• #nineteen

..."Why Every Self-Respecting Calvinist is a Premillennialist"... This "friendly response" grants modern twenty-four hours Amillennialists the opportunity to thoughtfully engage their Dispensational brethren.

Why does almost everyone automatically associate premillennialism with dispensationalism? The former was around long before the latter showed upwards. Sigh...

Yes, I was getting confused. I didn't think Johnny Mac was arguing for dispensationalism, only Premillinialism.

• #20

I've never understood why people got all excited over this. He's pre-mil (Dispensational), so why wouldn't he opine that his organization is the about consistant expression of Calvinism? I call up his comments were silly and incorrect, but information technology'southward John MacArthur, right? Since when was he the spokeperson for Reformed theology such that we (the Reformed) should get all upset about what he says? This is not to say that a response is not warranted, only to be upset over his comments? Are we that sparse-skinned?

I agree, we should not get upset near his comments. He is allowed to make them, I think they are wrong, merely I am not losing any sleep over them.

Who cares what he says nigh millennial positions? That'south like arguing virtually who has the ameliorate color shirt in my volume.

• #21

I've never understood why people got all excited over this. He'due south pre-mil (Dispensational), then why wouldn't he opine that his system is the virtually consistant expression of Calvinism? I think his comments were silly and wrong, but it's John MacArthur, right? Since when was he the spokeperson for Reformed theology such that we (the Reformed) should get all upset virtually what he says? This is not to say that a response is non warranted, but to be upset over his comments? Are we that thin-skinned?

I agree, we should not get upset almost his comments. He is immune to make them, I retrieve they are incorrect, but I am non losing whatsoever sleep over them.

Who cares what he says about millennial positions? That's like arguing almost who has the better color shirt in my book.

I similar the discussion; I retrieve it's definitely worth having, but if a Dispensational premil comes out and defends the Dispensational premil position, we shouldn't be surprised. I attended his church building for a few months (for as long as I could take it, but I was trying to meet girls and information technology's a big church) and heard him on consecutive Sundays preach on unlimited atonement and and then limited atonement, that is, arguing for each position. The impression that those I spoke with almost this was that JM believed both positions at the aforementioned fourth dimension. I've just never been convinced that he'due south a great theologian. I never really cared for his preaching either. Distressing,

• #22

...merely I Was Trying To Meet Girls And Information technology's A Big Church...

Lol!

• #24

I retrieve people got upset non because he holds to pretribulationism, which was certainly no secret, simply because his championship was something like "Why every self-respecting Calvinist should exist premillennial" and the message was delivered at a pastors conference that had a lot of amils present. But I don't remember he was claiming to speak for Calvinism and has certainly never claimed to be Reformed in the confessional sense. I never heard MacArthur's message and haven't seen a transcript, just implicit in the title is the idea that becoming Reformed in soteriology doesn't necessitate abandoning premillenialism in favor of amillenialism as many Calvinistic Baptists have washed.

• #25

I think it is funny. Go JohN! I am not premil but I promise he gives anybody a run for thier coin.

• #26

John Mac is progressive in his dispensationalism. If 1 is dispensational it takes a road off the path from Covenant Theology which is the Reformed Position. Celebrated Premil tin can too hold to Covenant Theology. But John Mac'south position apropos Israel and the Church is dispensational and not Celebrated Premil which can hold that State of israel and the Church are the aforementioned.

By taking on John Mac'due south dispensational position one has to abandon Covenant Theology. And that is not Reformed nor actually Calvinistic in its soteriology. Later on all Christ fulfilled the CofW to redeem those condemned by it.

And so you aren't Premil Jacob? I idea you had recently went Premil this final year.

• #27

I went premil as a reaction of some amillennialists' hyper-spiritualizing OT passages that emphasize the goodness of the created lodge. I then re-read some stuff on partial preterism and am more of a fractional preterist than anything else.

• #28

I am amil and partial preterist.

• #29

I listened to the MP3 a couple of times. Ironically, it was one of several things that were instrumental in causing me to re-evaluate my dispensational hermeneutic. I thought some of the arguments confronting amil. were simply straw-man arguments. One affair that especially stood out to me, though, was that he fabricated a statement to the effect of, "If we are going to change our hermeneutic, I think we demand a word from the Lord." [I'm sure I didn't quote that exactly.] That statement really helped to solidify a trouble that had been in the dorsum of my mind for a while. I would have asked him, "Where did you lot get the hermeneutic y'all are applying in the first place - the i that you lot would have to take a word from God in order to modify?" As I thought through my own hermeneutical presuppositions, which I learned from a dispensational perspective, information technology seemed to me that there are presuppositions that are rooted more than in the enlightenment rationalism than in Scripture. If I actually demand a discussion from the Lord on hermeneutics (and I think I do), so surely I should be looking for information technology in God'due south Give-and-take and non bringing my hermeneutics to God'due south Word. Hence, information technology seems more sensible to me, and more than in line with the whole reformation doctrine of sola scriptura, that the New Testament interprets the Quondam and likewise gives the design by which I should endeavor and interpret the Old Testament as a whole.
Anyway, that was a long way of saying that MacArthur'south talk, rather than affirming my dispensational views actually had the contrary effect.

Status

Not open up for further replies.

Similar threads

• Forums
• The Scriptures
• Revelation & Eschatology

cabanmotip1948.blogspot.com

Source: https://www.puritanboard.com/threads/macarthurs-millennial-manifesto.33967/

Share this post